Woo, a real argument with premises and conclusion. A tight argument I stumbled over on the Killing the Afterlife blog. (http://killtheafterlife.blogspot.com) A neat thread to look at if ya have the time.
1) A person owns themselves
2) Self ownership implies the right to free will
3) In having free will, you cannot have a duty to perform any affirmative actions.
Conclusion– You have no duty to provide another with the means to live.
Therefore it is permissible to remove anything classified as a separate entity from your body.
As my partner edified for me in talking about abortion on a feckless youtube thread. Do not even go down the ‘personhood’ road. It starts and ends with a persons right to their own body. I think this particular argument does a nice job of augmenting that sentiment.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
202 comments
June 17, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Christine
Pro-lifers are the ones who want to force the birth of these babies. And whether you believe it or not HAVING AN ABORTION IS ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY. Maturity that says how am I going to provide for this baby? Can I give a baby up for adoption? Can I have an abortion? Those are all questions that every pregnant women asks themselves. I am sorry that your upbringing/beliefs do not look @ reality. God will provide. Great thought.. but I am sure if God could there would be no starving children in the world. .. or is God just not seeing those babies.
Saying “You cannot have an abortion it is murder and is wrong” but not having a plan on what to do with these babies is irresponsible. If you pro-lifers are so hell bent on abortions being illegal and wrong… like I said who do you think is going to take care of these babies! It would be taxpayers. You have an innocent view of the world and life. Abortion is not killing a baby it is terminating a pregancy. That again is a matter of belief and or opinion. I feel sorry for you friend Meg; if she had to listen to your crap about her having sex before marriage! The last thing any pregnant teenager needs is a judging freind. If she is still happy with her decision the more power to her. I will not let you pro-lifers think for one minute that the answer is to stop abortions. The answer is for you pro-lifers is to worry about your own fertility not any one elses. I feel for Katie and your dumb comments you have typed. Katie had a choice! It does not match yours! So what get over it!!! Have you adopted any of the unwanted children in your area yet. Oh I forgot we are going to have to find the parents that made the baby and force them the raise the children… and exactly how are you going to make that happen. Tell you what once you have lived another 30 years… we can have this discussion again.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Christine
You are an idiot! Go to work in you perfect little I know all world! And for what you said to Katie I hope that someday you have a daughter that chooses to abort….
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Intransigentia
The bit you missed is that pro-choice does support people who “choose life” /for their own pregnancy/. Having kids is just fine – in fact we’ll go extinct if nobody does, so I’m glad some people do. Also none of my business.
The thing about being “pro-life” is, it seems to come with the stance that every woman must carry every pregnancy to term regardless of what she wants/needs/believes.
“Having and stating an opinion is not judging others, it’s having an opinion and knowing what you believe.”
True, until you start using words like “murder”, “poor decision-making”, and applying them to other people. Of course you have the right to have your opinion and to express it. What you don’t have is a right to not be contradicted.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Katie
Christine, I guess she left because she knows she lost the battle. Sorry she couldn’t turn me into a womanizing terrorist!
I am very happy with my decision and I am glad there are people like yourself, my boyfriend, and the people at the clinic who really care. Thank you so much for the support!!! While her comments did hurt, I know the wrong in her argument because she simply does not know my situation (even though she accuses you of being prejudice on her, she is the hypocrite with that, as all pro-lifers are, sticking their noses in everyone else’s business when it’s not their right).
Christine, just out of curiosity, how old are you? Do you have any kids? Sorry if I missed this, I may have forgotten. I am a 21-year old college student. :)
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Beth
I just found this blog and read it and ALL of the comments here (very long read). I feel compelled to leave my story and my thoughts on this topic.
I got pregnant when I was 16 years old. I was, of course, terrified. I didn’t want to have a baby or stop playing volleyball or have my parents find out. So, I had an abortion. I had it for selfish reasons (it was all about me). I told myself that it would just make the problem go away, no one would find out, my parents wouldn’t be furious at me (I was also raised no sex before marriage and now I know why that’s so important) and that since the baby was only a couple of months old, “it” wasn’t even a real baby yet. I didn’t tell my boyfriend (the baby’s father) until I was 19 years old. We were talking about getting engaged. I really had this guilt about it so I told him. I can’t begin to describe to you how awful and painful that moment was, especially now, looking back at it. He cried and cried. Kept yelling that I’d killed his baby and that he could never trust me. He broke up with me. I was beyond sad but I was more angry than anything. Angry that he didn’t support my decision to do “what I wanted to do with MY body.”
A couple of years after we broke up, I really started doing some research on abortions and what I had done and what I was supporting. I was pro-choice. What I found destroyed me and I realized that he was right: I’d killed our baby. I’d killed our child for my own SELFISH reasons. I’d killed HIS child without him even knowing that he had a baby. If I knew where he was today, I can’t describe how I’d BEG for his forgiveness. I’m so sorry.
I’ve found that the reason I supported abortions and was pro-choice is because I didn’t want people to tell me that something that I wanted to do or something that I did was wrong and the beliefs of being pro-choice take ALL responsibility from you. It almost makes you like a victim in the situation that YOU caused. That’s why people are pro-choice, because they don’t like or want responsibility.
I am now 38 years old, now a christian, and I’ve been married to my wonderful husband (not the boy from high school) for 12 years now. After a couple of years of marriage, I really wanted to be a mom and he wanted to be a dad. We were ready to be parents and… we couldn’t get pregnant. We’ve gone to doctors, specialists, anyone you can think of. The problem isn’t with my husband, it’s with me. I can’t have children now. I, the woman who got pregnant at 16, can’t have children. Doctors can’t explain why I can’t conceive because they can’t find anything wrong with me. But we’ve tried EVERYTHING and we kept trying until I was 35. Now, I’ve accepted it. I personally think that since I didn’t respect the life that God gave me to cherish and take care of when I was 16, He closed that door for me and I’m heartbroken about it. I wonder what my beautiful baby could have grown up to be if I’d not been so scared and selfish.
As a side note, I’ve read through all of the comments left by everyone and I’m very touched by the 25 year old lady. You seem to have things together and a level head on your shoulders. God bless you for your beliefs and lifestyle. I wish that I had been like you when I was younger and I wish that I had had a friend like you when I was in high school. Don’t let Katie and Christine gang up on you and talk down to you. YOU have things figured out, not them.
I thank God for forgiving me for my mistake. I praise Him for who He is and I praise Him, even if I never do have my own sweet baby. Wait, I do have one, waiting for me in Heaven.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Neil
Adoption is not an ideal situation, but it is far preferable to killing an innocent human being. Certain things just can’t be undone.
You think the people at the clinic really cared for you? My guess is that they just wanted your $$. Do they follow up with you to see how you are doing? Do they offer post-abortion trauma counseling to the many women who regret their abortions?
Try going to a Crisis Pregnancy Center like CareNet next time. They really do care about you and offer many services, all for free.
Re. us having to take the baby: Ah, the Pro-lifers don’t care about kids after they are born canard. That inevitably creeps into these discussions.
If the government was going to kill all homeless people, would it be hypocritical of you to object without having to take them all into your house? Do I have to be willing to marry my neighbor’s wife before calling the police on her abusive husband? And so on.
Yet pro-lifers do much for the mothers and their children — with their own time and money. See the first link above.
Virtually all the arguments (economic, autonomy, etc.) for abortion support infanticide as well.
I’m not sure where you live, but I don’t know of any place where the man can say that. They are on the hook for 18 years (as they should be). Though with your reasoning of costs being a reason to kill, why not let the dad kill the baby outside the womb?
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Neil
Beth, thanks for having the courage to share your story. You will probably save many people a tremendous amount of grief by doing so. Blessings to you and your family.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Katie
God I am so sick of being called a baby killer.
Shut up.
Don’t want an abortion, then don’t get one.
Otherwise, keep your mouth shut.
My decision was right. Beth, the only reason Christina and I “ganged up” on that lady was that she was trying to judge me without knowing me, calling me a killer, and saying that I had no right to do what I did. That’s wrong. So you can say she’s got “it together” all you want, but that’s a total and complete lie.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Neil
Katie, this isn’t about demonizing you. It is about the scientific fact of what abortions do. No need to play the martyr role. Christians would like nothing more than for you to repent, believe and have eternal life. That hardly qualifies as us being out to get you.
That sound bite was applied to slavery as well. “Don’t like slavery? Don’t own slaves.” As always, it ignore that another human being is involved in the equation.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Katie
A lot of the people in the clinic were actually volunteers, so they don’t see a dime, but they do it anyway. Throws that argument right out the window.
As far as slavery is concerned, don’t compare a fetus to a slave. Slaves were complex, older, living human beings with the ability to suffer. Unborn fetuses up to about the fifth month cannot feel any pain. I had my abortion at 5 weeks. Therefore, you cannot compare me to a slave owner because the fetus did not suffer under my hands the way slaves suffered under their slave owners.
I have a source that will back me up about how fetuses cannot feel pain, so try me…
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Neil
Re. pain: That argument is completely meaningless. It implies that if you kill someone painlessly that it makes the act moral.
The fetus in question is a human fetus, aka a human being.
My point about slavery is that your argument ignores the other human being in the equation. The “don’t want one / don’t have one” argument sounds ridiculous when applied to slavery because it obviously ignores the slave. And the argument is ridiculous when applied to abortion because it ignores a living human being.
The complexity and age of a human being are irrelevant to her worth. Is it a lesser crime to kill a toddler than a teen?
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 5:30 pm
The Arbourist
3) In having free will, you cannot have a duty to perform any affirmative actions.”
Conclusion– You have no duty to provide another with the means to live.
Neil: “That supports murder outside the womb as well”
No Neil, it does not. I am not obliged to run into a burning building to save some, that is an action I have to undertake. Please look up the meaning of affirmative action in the context it was used. It certainly, does not support murder outside the womb.
“denial and get therapy for it someday”
A religious person giving others lessons on denial, oh the sweet irony. The sky fairy and his minions have nothing to do with this debate.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 5:55 pm
The Arbourist
The Arbourist said: “The embryo has a lesser moral status than a fully developed human being.”
Neil said: “The human embryo is a human being with intrinsic worth. The level of development of a human being does not impact her value. Your claim would make it a lesser crime to kill a toddler than an adolescent, etc.”
I doubt that you a pro-life. You are anti-abortion and do not really care about life, but rather focus on disenfranchising women rather than preserving life. IF you believe your above quote, then you have a serious problem a (well, another serious problem…the delusional religion thing is high up there)…
Let me put your argument into a reasonable form. (Calling people murderers and other such pleasantries is not particularly reasonable, especially when it is your opinion.
—–
Embryos are human beings.
All human beings have equal moral status.
Therefore, embryos have full moral status.
This has been your stance pretty much all along, rhetoric and ad hominem aside. It is time for a little science and fact that require a little more diligence that looking up a website.
The majority of embryos die within a few weeks of conception. See studies by Hertig (1967) and French and Bierman (1962).
The results of these studies graphically represented below.
(see the graphs @ https://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/graphs-for-reference-sake/)
During the early stage, 8-10 days only 50% of embryos survive. Those that successfully implant, the risk of death becomes much less significant. These numbers show that spontaneous abortion is an everyday phenomenon. A mother of three children could be expected to have also five spontaneous abortions. The embryo’s survival to term is the exception rather than the norm. This next graph shows the effects of spontaneous abortion on human lifespan.
Graph of mortality in the United States from conception through to death.
(see the graphs @ https://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/graphs-for-reference-sake/)
In the first few months, more than 60% of the entire population dies due to the effects of spontaneous abortion (approximately 220 million per year).
IF you accept the first claim:
Embryos are human beings.
All human beings have equal moral status.
Therefore, embryos have full moral status
THEN: Each of these deaths must have just as much weight as an adult human (which you so frequently harp on about). Spontaneous abortion is by FAR the greatest killer of them all.
Some conclusions drawn from that data: Spontaneous abortion kills more than 200 million each year, it accounts for ¾ of all deaths per year, reduces life expectancy in the developed world to mere 29 years, kills only the very young and innocent: those who are powerless to save themselves.
IF you contend that an embryo has full moral status as a human being, then you must agree that spontaneous abortion is clearly the greatest problem facing humanity.
Cancer in all forms kills 7.6 million people per year, while spontaneous abortion kills 30 times this number. Finding a means to save even 5% of embryos from spontaneous abortion would save more lives that a cure for cancer. To remain consistent in your views you must accept the following:
The embryo has the same moral status as a adult human life.
Medical studies show that more than 60% of all people are killed by spontaneous abortion (a biological fact).
Therefore, spontaneous abortion is one of the most serious problems facing humanity, and we must do our utmost to investigate ways of preventing this death – even if this is to the detriment of other pressing issues. (See the current pro-life loonery)
The only way to avoid this conclusion is to abandon the conclusion that full moral status does not begin at conception.
So really, if you are so concerned about life, what the heck are you doing trying to fix the relatively minuscule amount of human choice aborted fetuses? I am guessing that really…you are just about disenfranchising women, for your false god, and most likely inconsistent, incoherent beliefs.
Please note: The article in full can be found in The Scourge: Moral Implications of Natural Embryo Loss by Toby Ord. The American Journal of Bioethics, 8(7): 12-19, 2008. I have taken excerpts, quotes and text from the article and used them in my post.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Neil
Good luck telling that to CPS when you don’t feed your kids.
Deliberately crushing and dismembering an innocent human being is a “little” bit different than not rushing into a burning building.
I didn’t bring religion up. I can annihilate all of your pro-abortion arguments without the Bible. But I’m not sure where your “denial” dig comes in. Christianity is based on facts and logic.
People who are proud of their abortions are in denial. Consider works like MacBeth, Crime & Punishment and the Telltale Heart. You can rationalize away evil deeds all you like, but they are still there. It may be next week, it may be ten years from now, but you can only fool yourself for so long.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 6:00 pm
The Arbourist
Problem.
Slaves do not live inside your womb, stealing your food. So, dispense with this particular pro-life trope as it is a red herring and not relevant to the issue at hand.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Neil
Gee, how did the unborn get in your womb again? Aliens? Government-forced in vitro fertilization?
The slave argument is not a red herring. Read carefully:
Pro-abortionists use the “Don’t want an abortion, then don’t get one” sound bite as a red herring. It is designed to imply that you shouldn’t force your morals on someone else.
So just plug in any other sample and see how it works.
How about something benign, like beverages?
“Don’t want a cup of coffee, then don’t get one.”
No problem there.
How about slavery, which some considered to be a moral enterprise and defended is thusly:
“Don’t want slavery, then don’t get one.”
Hmmm . . . that’s a bit different. Why? Because another human being is involved, that being the slave.
How about this one:
“Don’t want infanticide, then don’t commit one.”
That doesn’t sound good either.
So perhaps you’ll see that you are the owner of the red herring, and substituting virtually any moral situation in your sound bite exposes it for its emptiness.
“Don’t want an abortion, then don’t get one” commits the same fallacy of begging the question that most all pro-abortion arguments do: It ignores the human being in question.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 8:29 pm
The Arbourist
The fetus is a human being but has less moral worth than a human being. Or…it has the same moral worth and you’re wasting your time not preventing the millions of spontaneous abortions that COULD be prevented.
Murderer.
You assign it moral status, you have a big job ahead of you, just to remain consistent.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 8:40 pm
The Arbourist
“Christianity is based on facts and logic. ”
Seriously?
Well then by the logic of christianity slavery should be okay. Stoning your daughter for not being a virgin, good to go.
OH…and a great one… PI = 3.
Christianity and the words ‘fact’ and ‘logic’ do not belong in the same sentence. Ever.
Embrace your delusion, but please, leave the magic at home. You will get nothing but scorn and ridicule here.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 8:46 pm
The Arbourist
“I can annihilate all of your pro-abortion arguments without the Bible.”
Actually all you’ve done here is distort rational arguments of others and then claim your version of the truth is sacrosanct. Which of course it is not.
The absolutism of your position does not particularly surprise me, as those mired in religion tend not to really appreciate telling and then proving they are wrong.
So please, before any more trolling, answer the spontaneous abortion argument. And try and answer the argument, for once. The dogma is becoming tiresome.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Mystro
“Good luck telling that to CPS when you don’t feed your kids.”
Wow, you’re ability to ignore most of what’s said and focusing on only what you can twist is astounding. And your idea of a valid analogy needs a ton of work.
There is actually nothing demanding that parents feed their children. If a parent does not want to or cannot provide for the child, adoption is always an option. What IS a problem are parents that KEEP their kids AND don’t feed them. That is deliberately imprisoning a person and starving them. But that is nothing like our scenario. With the live child there are options. With the blastocyst there aren’t. The amount of practical options currently available definitely does not affect women’s rights of self ownership.
And as to your “Gee, how did the unborn get in your womb again? Aliens? Government-forced in vitro fertilization?” comment, I AGAIN reference you to the argument in my first posting, which you continually ignore. As a reminder, I pointed out that you agreed that one is not morally obligated to help another even if the other’s life depends on the aid (brother-kidney analogy) BUT says you (and you’ve said it repeatedly) the difference in this situation is the reason that A needs the aid of B is because B is a woman and B had sex. Taking away rights of people based on their gender and on the other rights they have exercised is as ludicrous as it is immoral.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Mystro
And just because I’m tired of you ignoring my actual arguments (or maybe you just have a tough time registering things that threaten your patriarchal and misogynistic perspective) I’ll attach my last response to this post as well. Ah-hem
Wow, you’re ability to ignore most of what’s said and focusing on only what you can twist is astounding. And your idea of a valid analogy needs a ton of work.
There is actually nothing demanding that parents feed their children. If a parent does not want to or cannot provide for the child, adoption is always an option. What IS a problem are parents that KEEP their kids AND don’t feed them. That is deliberately imprisoning a person and starving them. But that is nothing like our scenario. With the live child there are options. With the blastocyst there aren’t. The amount of practical options currently available definitely does not affect women’s rights of self ownership.
And as to your “Gee, how did the unborn get in your womb again? Aliens? Government-forced in vitro fertilization?” comment, I AGAIN reference you to the argument in my first posting, which you continually ignore. As a reminder, I pointed out that you agreed that one is not morally obligated to help another even if the other’s life depends on the aid (brother-kidney analogy) BUT says you (and you’ve said it repeatedly) the difference in this situation is the reason that A needs the aid of B is because B is a woman and B had sex. Taking away rights of people based on their gender and on the other rights they have exercised is as ludicrous as it is immoral.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 9:13 pm
DaleB
Woh. lotta comments here. basically, everybodys comment here is stupid and wrong but neil’s, beth’s, and the 25 chick. abortion is wrong. i’m not a christian but i got respect for those who are. that’s how they choose to live and i say props to them, they really do seem to be good people, people who care and are trying. but me not even being a christian, i know abortion is not right. you’re killing babies, not right. my mom had me when she was 16 and i’m glad she didn’t kill me just cause she didn’t want me and wasn’t planning on having me. i’ll tell you this, she sacrificed and learned how to be a mom and i love her more than anybody in this world. as somebody who’s just reading all of these comments, the points and comments from the ones that are for abortion sound so dumb, for real.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Mystro
I was not being condescending or insulting. I was being absolutely honest when I said I find the teachings in the Bible to be absolutely horrific. Promoting slavery and stoning women because they are victims of rape are examples that just start to cover the gross immorality found within the Bible.
And my point, that calling upon a personal mythology to strengthen an argument is rationally useless, is valid. Because any one can call up any of an infinite possible mythologies to back up their claim, and it would be just as valid as when you did it.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 10:42 pm
theobromophile
This pro-lifer would like to offer a different distinction. The problem is not that the woman had sex (if men could get pregnant, I would still be pro-life); it’s that she deliberately created a situation in which a being would be dependent upon her for its very life. Legally and morally, you are required to provide care if you create situation of dependency (or removal of other avenues of care).
Then again, I’m a feminist lawyer, so what the hell do I know….
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 10:49 pm
theobromophile
Christine, that is so blind and foolish. Do you turn a blind eye to women who are raped, so long as it is not happening to you? Do you ignore the suffering that happens abroad because we don’t have enough resources to let everyone live like Americans?
Are you so unaware of history that you do not know how domestic violence laws came into being? People once justified that by saying that everyone should mind their own business, that what goes on in a marriage is private, that you should only be concerned with your own family. It took people who cared about the harm that was inflicted upon other human beings to change that.
Slavery, misogyny, disenfranchisement, monarchies – all those things got changed because people cared about the weaker members of our society. The “mind your own business” or the “who are you to care about them” arguments always remind me of a sick caricature of conservatives, who are supposed to be cold and heartless. Liberals – those who, IN THEORY, usually champion the underdog and fight for a just society, are the ones whose position on unborn children (the most vulnerable members of our society) is that they are parasites. You people usually condemn the “what about the men” or “what about the corporations” arguments, but, when it comes to suctioning the brains out of a viable unborn baby, you cheer.
Sick.
Abortion is the last great civil rights battle.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 10:56 pm
theobromophile
Another train wreck to deal with.
Christine, if abortion is legal, the government can mandate it. If it is illegal, the government cannot force you to have one. This is such a “duh” thing that it cracks me up to see “smart” women make the argument.
You cannot name a single activity that is both illegal and that the government can coerce you to do. (Trust me.)
The obvious error with your “reasoning” aside, here is where it fails: you fail to understand that a pro-life legal system is… pro-life. (Another “duh”!) A legal system that no more allows you to murder your foetus than to murder a 5-year-old is not one that doesn’t let parents make parenting decisions; it’s one that doesn’t allow people to kill their kids.
Let’s try on a few analogies. Forbidding child molestation will mean that the government could require children to be molested. Forbidding beating your child could mean that the government would take over corporal punishment. Forbidding rape would mean that we could make women work as prostitutes, even if they didn’t want to.
I would laugh, but it’s too painfully stupid to contemplate.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 11:06 pm
theobromophile
Christine,
Before you continue bleating about paying for babies (with the assumption that a just society kills people that cost too much), you should consider a few things:
1. About half of the cost of health care in this nation goes to the elderly in their last year of life. We have a health care crisis. Let’s apply your logic and ask how we can justify the laws that mandate that we pay for the elderly to live.
2. The sexual revolution is the problem, not a pro-life world. Even when abortion was illegal, less than 10% of babies were born out of wedlock. Now that abortion on demand is a sacred cow, that rate is up to 40%. The costs of unwed motherhood – food stamps, incarceration for children when they turn out to be messed up, Section 8 housing – are astronomical. Give me a pro-life world and I can run it more cheaply than you could run a post-sexual revolution, pro-abortion world.
3. 49% of women who have first-time abortions will have another. They want to get pregnant again to have a baby to make up for the one they lost. Allowing women to have abortions doesn’t mean that they go back to their lives and live them well; it means that they go back with even more problems.
LikeLike
June 17, 2009 at 11:25 pm
theobromophile
To quote a headline from The Onion: World Mortality Holding Steady at 100%.
Despite the fact that everyone dies, it’s illegal to deliberately kill.
I addressed your fallacy in more detail here.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 5:59 am
Neil
I see that your copy of the Big Book O’ Atheist Sound Bites arrived. Gee, we’ve never encountered those before. As usual, I can argue the atheist position better than most atheists, even though I know it is thoroughly false.
If you want to at least characterize the views of your opposition accurately, you should do a little homeowork. These atheist / Christian debates would be a good place to start — http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/debates-and-lectures/ . Or you can just repeat your bad reasoning, misunderstandings and straw men. Your call.
When materialists are so in love with abortion that they can’t concede that a new human life begins at conception, why bother with them? They are anti-religion and anti-science.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 6:12 am
Neil
The one thing I don’t like about WordPress’ reply feature is that new comments aren’t easy to see. I hope people search for “Theobromophile” and check out all her outstanding comments here. The only problem is that as an atheist, a female and a feminist she disarms the pro-abortionists of some of their favorite fallacies (e.g., my alleged “patriarchal and misogynistic perspective,” not to mention my alleged insatiable desire to force my religious views on others).
Ah, the irony of self-refuting moral relativism. Yeah, as if you aren’t absolutely sure of your position. I know you are just as firm in your position as I am in mine, but I don’t try to say that you are wrong just because you think you are right. You are just use the cheap postmodern tolerance trick to avoid the real arguments.
You haven’t demonstrated anywhere that I’m wrong and your transparent anti-religious bigotry doesn’t help your case.
Re. spontaneous abortion: What argument? Do I really have to explain to you that there is a difference between (1) and (2) below? (To state the obvious, this logic applies whether the human being is in the womb or outside it.)
(1) A human being dies of natural causes.
(2) A human being has her skull crushed and limbs ripped off by another human being (In case it wasn’t clear, this was done against her will).
You don’t need a Bible to see the difference.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 6:16 am
Christine
Wow it has has been a busy time on here since I was last on here. So I will give you each a response if needed.
First off Beth you need help. God is not punishing you. You are in need of some serious counseling!!! Your ingnorance about believing that God shut the door on you having babies is really sad. I would venture to say that the self blaming and guilt are serious signs of depression. Or maybe Bi-polar disorder. (often in bi-polar the God/ religion thing is out of context) If you believe what you did was wrong that is fine but you have to let it go and forgive yourself and heal. I do not think this web site will help you in any way. I was not gangin up on 25 year old mother; My point is all about the right to make choices. Yes you choose to have sex before marriage, and to abort that baby. Let it go forgive yourself and stop allowing the pro life pro choice debate take the heat for your decisions.
DaleB you are a child of a young mother; you should be thankful your mother had you. That was your mothers choice and we should all respect that. My point here is that your mother had the choice made it and decided to keep you. AGAIN HER DECISION. You should really grow up a bit and live life before you judge Katie. Katie is a very grown up and mature. She made a decision that was best for her life!
Neil…. God … I do not even know what your problem is… Have you ever had sex? Are you some kind of Christian Cult member? You are so off the charts with your comments. I would venture to say you are a crazed Christian that has a comeback for everything. Get a life! Worry about your own uterus. Like I said YOU DO NOT MATTER! YOU DO NOT EVEN HAVE A UTERUS!!
Katie This web page probably will not help you much either. Your decision is your own business and 25 year old, Neil, Beth, Daleb have different views. They are really nobody to you and what they say or think doesnt really matter. To answer your question I am 44 year old divorced mother of 3. I have also had an abortion; (wow and God still gave me children) and I am comfortable with the decisions I have made in my life. I pray that you will not let these people affect you; Beth is mad that she cannot have children, Neil is out there, and 25 year old woman has problems of her own.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 6:22 am
Christine
Neil you are a joke! I think counseling in the physco ward at the nearest hospital is where you should go. You are not a Christian.. you have no clue
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 6:34 am
Neil
Hi Christine,
Thanks for your fact-free personal attack. I’ll take that as a concession speech. I’m not terribly surprised by you and the other pro-abortion commenters here. When their cherished sound bites are exposed as being thoroughly fallacious they tend to get defensive in a hurry and often lash out.
And of course, it is always amusing to have non-Christians tell me that I’m a non-Christian (BTW, I don’t mean “Christian” as in “well behaved,” I mean it in the biblical sense of a sinner who has trusted in his Savior).
I hope you all will note that I haven’t attacked any of you personally or questioned your sanity. I’ve dealt with facts and logic throughout.
This is getting repetitive and unproductive so I’ll take my leave. I hope you all keep open minds and follow the truth where it leads.
Feel free to visit my blog if you like. Opposing viewpoints are welcomed, provided you leave the personal attacks at home.
Peace,
Neil
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 6:40 am
Christine
Oh I forgot the feminist lawyer. She created a situation where a life would be dependent on her so morally and legally she should provide for it since she created it? Are you serious.. are you 98 years old. With your theory incest, rape babies are okay to abort.. because she did not create the situation? Or should some miracle government pay for the baby to be brought into the world anyway? There are some situations where a woman can get pregnant on birth control. IT IS THE WOMANS MORAL AND LEGAL OBLIGATION TO MAKE A DECISION THAT IS BEST FOR HER LIFE! Let me guess you are a trust fund baby. Never had a real problem in your life Am I right?
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 6:45 am
Christine
Are you serious. Your views on abortions are your views and you demean and put down anyone that believes other wise. Christianity like pro choice and pro life has many different levels. I may have pur out a personal attack on you … but you have done nothing but the same. I wish you peace and hope that someday you can move on to a place where you are not the one doing all the judging.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 8:23 am
theobromophile
Wow, Christine, that comment really addressed the merits of the issue, rather than attacking a pro-lifer personally.
/sarcasm
Sorry, but 25-year-old woman made a great point. We make horror movies about mothers (or fathers) who kill, torture, maim, or imprison their children “for their own good.” The logic behind abortion is no different.
Why would you hope that 25-year-old woman would have a daughter who aborts? You’ve actually stooped so low as to hope for an abortion?
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 8:30 am
theobromophile
Sorry, Katie, I’m not a hypocrite.
I’m sorry FOR you that you are, so far, happy with your decision to kill your child so that it would not suffer. (I also hope that you would never do the same thing with a child that is born. If the latter repulses you, consider that it’s not about your child, but about you and your selfishness. Oh, it’s also ALL about your boyfriend’s right to knock you up without having to figure out how to support a family.)
I say “so far” because a lot of women experience regret around their first wanted pregnancy (or when they learn about foetal development). Or the regret comes in more subtle ways – knowing that they wouldn’t want a second abortion (i.e. it’s obviously a LOT different than using a condom), having relationship problems, or being unable to conceive (or carry to term) later.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 8:59 am
Christine
theobormophile. Good luck with the “last great civil rights battle” using your terminology. Civil Rights for who the fetus or the mother? You are trying to take away the civil rights of women? So the fetus rights are more important that the womans? Since you are so smart what is your idea of a plan to care for all these unwanted babies? If you were raped would you want to keep that baby? And exactly gives you the right to decide what medical treatments anyone uses? Abortion is a right. ABORTION IS A CHOICE! You choose for yourself right? When you got pregnant you had choices; I AM STANDING MY GROUND. THIS IS ABOUT MY RIGHT TO CHOOSE. YOU CHOOSE FOR YOU… I CHOOSE FOR ME… ETC……
You are just angry that you are hitting a brick wall by getting it illegalized. I guess if we all had your high horse moral standards we would not be having this discussion.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 8:59 am
theobromophile
Christine,
I am not a trust fund baby; in fact, my parents divorced when I was a child and I spent several years living in my grandparents’ basement. (Women who get pregnant at 19, then marry to start a family, are dirt poor starting out. Then again, I’m obviously glad that they didn’t take the tack of “We’re too young and it’s all about us” route.)
Yes, things have improved, but that’s only a pro-life argument: if my parents could make a go of unplanned teenage pregnancy: start by living in a tiny apartment, divorcing shortly afterward, living with their own parents to make ends meet, putting the kids in the local YMCA after school, etc until they have become successful, happy people – well, what does THAT do to the pro-abortion argument?
Now, I’m working at a non-profit and literally spending every cent I have on student loans – even though I worked full-time during my third year to take out less money (and still pulled off a 3.75 GPA for the year – hummm) and went to a relatively inexpensive law school.
I’m approaching 30, not 99. That should be obvious from a perusal of my blog.
Apology, please.
About rape and incest: well, I’ll take either the principle or the pragmatism. In principle, yes, I would love for women who were raped to keep their babies. (Many women actually say that the pregnancy is the one and only thing that kept them from killing themselves, and, when they give birth, they don’t see their rapist’s baby; they see their own baby. But don’t take my word for it; find women who have been there and now devote their lives to speaking about the experience.)
If it were possible to live in a world in which we respected unborn life enough to not kill it, I would be happy. I don’t think that’s possible, though, since rape is a highly emotional topic and has long been used by anti-lifers as a wedge issue.
Pragmatically, a lack of a rape exception is very problematic; that is what lead to the travesty of Roe v. Wade and, if enacted again, would do the same thing. Since rape accounts for less than 1% of all abortions performed (with health/life issues compromising another 6%), I’ll happily take all those exceptions and ban the other 93%. “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good,” would be a reasonable way to put it.
If we were to have a rape exception, there would probably be a lot fewer rapes. Abortion only covers up the crime (and gives no incentive for women to report). Rape is one of the most, if not the most, under-reported crimes out there. If we were to require women seeking a non-medically necessary abortion to report their rapes, then a lot of men might think twice about screwing a drunk girl. A lot of abortions are performed on women who are below the age of consent. Rather than just shredding their baby and sending them home to be raped again, we should help them navigate the system and bring their rapists to justice.
But that actually involves being pro-woman, as opposed to just letting men rape with impunity.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:05 am
Christine
I am laughing at your above comment. You are so painfully stupid it hurts my head. The point to the government making the abortions decision is the basic decision is it legal or illegal not make someone have one. Just so you know there are countries that control populations by controlling the number of children you can have. Have a history lesson… search it on the web.
If anyone it is you who is so painfully stupid!
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:07 am
theobromophile
Christine: could you show us one place that Neil attacked you personally, as opposed to attacking your bad arguments?
I mean, you’ve put out nothing BUT personal (and comically wrong) personal attacks on me, so pardon me if I don’t take your word for it on this one.
What I have seen is that anti-lifers are so used to their own echo chambers that they actually can’t see that personal attacks are not arguments. They have done nothing but hear how pro-lifers are bad, anti-woman, and anti-science, so they think those things are actual arguments, not ad hominem attacks. (That’s why my presence – as a highly educated, young woman with a background in science and without one in religion – makes them so mental.)
(Shrug.) Eventually, people want to know why it’s okay to permanently deprive an unborn child of life simply because a woman hates the biological fact that sex produces babies. I certainly understand why you want to avoid a logical debate of that issue!
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:10 am
Christine
You are so much a hypocrite. Lets hear from you on the GREAT PLAN to save these babies and where they will go. ABORTION IS A LEGAL CHOICE/ and I suggest you get used to it
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:15 am
Christine
Theobromophile if you are so educated and smart. I would think you would have all this solved and planned out. Post your plan… oh I forgot the pro lifers only want to deal with not killing/aborting not the after effects
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:16 am
DaleB
theobromophile’s comments just showed up on mine, i didn’t get to read her’s yesterday. theobromophile, you cool too girl. how come none of you pro-choicers didn’t say anything about what that one girl brought up about that peterson guy? that was an awesome point.
christine, don’t tell me to grow up, you need to shut up. you don’t know what i’ve been through in my life and i promise you, i’ve had to deal with more grown up crap than you or katie so shut up high and mighty one. you just a know it all don’t you. katie ain’t nothing but a kid in college. i’m married, have three kids, and a job and i do my best to take care of all of that so i think i’m pretty grown thank you very much. from reading all this, the christians here seem to be real cool people and i’d want to hang out with all of you guys before any of these baby killers. my mom’s a christian so i got respect for you christians.
and christine, man you’re annoying, don’t talk down to that beth. beth, you’ve been through a lot. you messed up in the past, you know it, you better now, you seem to have a cool husband. i’m sure that guy in high school is hurt but i bet now he realizes that you was young and scared, you were a kid who messed up. we all mess up in different ways when we’re kids. thank you for telling your story but i hate how none of those girls on here let your story get to their heart and let you help them.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:28 am
Christine
Daleb.. you will always be a prolifer.. given your birth circumstances. And if you have 3 children and you are married I would think that you would be a little bit more understanding to the other pro choicers. I was wrong; you choose your stance and I choose mine. THERE IS NO WAY YOU WILL EVER GET THE LAW PASSED TO ILLEGALIZE ABORTIONS. IT IS A RIGHT / CHOICE/ GET USED TO IT! NO MATTER WHERE THE FIGHT I WILL BE THERE FIGHTING FOR WOMENS RIGHTS TO CHOOSE!
I really do not care about anyone on here but Katie. Katie my personal email is cmgolden2006@yahoo.com. EVERY ONE ELSE ENJOY THE BATTLE!
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:35 am
The Arbourist
No, Neil.
Just looking at the Bible.
On Slavery – Leviticus 25:44 – 46. Furthermore, on selling your daughter into slavery Exodus 21:7.
Oh, and yes, slaves that should be obedient and serve their masters well – Ephesians 6:5.
Your supposedly moral books words, not mine, and certainly not a strawman argument.
Anti-religion…or rational, as those of us who dwell in the reality based community like to call it.
Anti-Science? – hardly. But feel free to continue to make that mischaracterization.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:47 am
The Arbourist
(1) A human being dies of natural causes.
(2) A human being has her skull crushed and limbs ripped off by another human being (In case it wasn’t clear, this was done against her will).
Wow, an actual argument instead of the usual pap.
So spontaneous abortion is just a natural cause. So is cancer. We should not worry about cancer then either?
If one accepts that has the equivalent moral value at conception as one does as an adult then spontaneous abortion is clearly a greater cause of death and misery (some 200 million a year) than medical abortion (significantly less) and should be the focus of your efforts.
Therefore, spontaneous abortion is one of the most serious problems facing humanity, and we must do our utmost to investigate ways
of preventing this death—even if this is to the detriment of
other pressing issues.
Deny the claim, and then you have to accept that fetus’s do not have the same moral value as an adult human being. Or accept the claim and start taking measures to reducing the 220 million or so deaths which SHOULD be of your concern, IF you are consistent with your beliefs.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 9:49 am
DaleB
christine, didn’t i read somewhere that you are in your 40s and have kids? well i’d think that you would be a little bit more understanding to the pro lifers. you keep just making assumptions about everybody. you tell people how you figured they grew up, why they feel how they do, and you don’t know anyone on here. man, again, you’re annoying. you say you’re for women’s rights, yeah right, what about the little woman in a lady’s belly, huh? who stands up for her? definitely not you. you say its womens rights to choose, i have a say so in my wife’s pregnancies cause i helped make the babies, they’re my kids too. she couldn’t have made them without me.
you all who are pro choice are just selfish. the only reasons that you can give to kill babies is all because of yourself: I don’t have enough money, I’m not married, I’m too young, I don’t want to raise a child unless its completely healthy with no physical problems, I don’t want to be a mom yet, I I I I I. selfish. the christians here are too classy to say this but i’m not: you don’t want to be pregnant, keep your legs together. no sex, no possibilities of babies. and i read what 25 and lawyer girl said about rape stats so rape is no reason to allow baby killing.
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 10:24 am
Christine
Well daleb that is where we disagree and always will. An abortion does not kill a baby; it terminates a pregnancy. Well I think you too should start working on a plan to take care of all these unwanted babies. You guys are Christians my butt! Christianity is something else you are stupid about. And if Daleb would like to continue this my personal email is cmgolden2006@yahoo.com. BRING IT ON! I am annoying because I do not agree with you. I am also Christian… or is that not allowed because I do not have the same beliefs you do. My religion has nothing to do with this debate/ and believe it or not Christians are on both sides PROLIFE AND PROCHOICE!
LikeLike
June 18, 2009 at 10:27 am
Neil
Sorry, one more comment as a courtesy to answer your question.
It is a straw man argument to say we don’t care about spontaneous abortions. My wife had 5 miscarriages so I know a little about the topic. You act like we are opposing research, prenatal care, etc.
In addition, using that “logic” then you would have to rank specific needs according to importance and then never touch the 2nd one until the first was completed. If feeding the poor was your #1 concern, you wouldn’t do one other social good until there were zero poor people. You would not spend a single $ on AIDS until you cured heart disease. And so on. That’s not rational.
I don’t begrudge people who protest capital punishment if they think it is unfairly applied. But using your logic I would tell them that they should never protest the one (1) capital punishment per week in the U.S. even if the person was innocent because there are 20,000 abortions per week that kill human beings that we know are innocent of any capital crimes (other than your bogus misdemeanor of “stealing” food from her mother — your pro-abortion hyperbole knows no bounds!).
My point stands and is unassailable: There is a major difference between someone dying of natural causes and being killed.
P.S. Uh, thanks for the Bible lesson, but I have enough trouble finding Christians who understand how to read the Bible in context without subjecting myself to lessons from pagans.
There’s the the “Pro-lifers don’t care about kids after they are born” canard again — http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/pro-lifers-dont-care-about-kids-after-they-are-born/
Again, could you protest the killing of homeless people without taking them all into your home? Can you protest child abuse without being willing to adopt all children?
Ok, as long as there are no more questions I’ll really be on my way.
LikeLike