Abortion

[Teddy]

What are the views of people here on abortion? I've recently been reading about babies that have survived abortion attempts and go on to live lives. I found it upsetting to read about this.

[Aetherous]

My view is that a human life begins when the sperm enters the egg, at conception.

Some people think that the soul enters at conception due to a microscopic image of it apparently generating a flash of light...but there isn't actually a flash of light that occurs visibly, as you can see in the hyperlinked article. Other people might think the soul enters at the first breath when born, due to the notions of the breath being related to God's spirit...I don't think that, and think that our notion of a soul exists in the baby in the womb. Perhaps such a thing as the soul, if you even believe in it, isn't visible due to being of the spiritual rather than the material, and thus we can never be sure at what time it enters a body...and maybe souls don't "enter" bodies or individual lives, but are an intrinsic connection at all times with the body/life.

I recall that ancient Greek philosophers would equate the soul with life itself...so really, any person who has a heartbeat or is alive otherwise has a soul...more of less, whether anyone knows it or not. They also say souls are immortal, so they survive the death of the physical body, and existed prior to it. Finally, there are more perceptive mothers who attest that they're aware of their future babies, as well as their personalities, long before they're born...I might recall even hearing about a mother who knew the child (mentally or supercognitively) prior to conception (we could think of it like the spirit of the child had chosen the mother and the family to join prior to the act). So perhaps it could be said that the baby's soul is there even prior to conception, and during the love making, and the conception is simply the opportunity to become human, and embodied. If we believe in this soul business at all.

Aside from souls. At something like 6 weeks after conception, an individual heartbeat can be detected...which is definitely the sign of an individual human life. It's not a useless appendage which the mother grew, but is a little human in development (obviously).

 

Legally speaking, in the US, the standard was set that they think "fetal viability" is when it's a separate human life, worthy of the right to life. This is unscientific to say the least. Prior to viability, it's just that this unique human is dependent on something aside from itself (its mother) to continue living...that doesn't mean it's not a human. If we put an adult on life support, are they no longer human and worthy of living? The obvious answer is no - they're still a person. So, the law is currently dead wrong on this matter, and as such, ethically we are a nation that murders innocent humans for convenience, and arbitrarily decides on who is a person and who isn't.

Especially when a fetus resembles a developed human being while still being prior to viability, I think it's undeniable to consider it as a unique human life. Only the most depraved of people would agree to kill such a harmless thing for any reason.

 

Many people are that depraved.

Lately, some on the left have gone so far as to suggest that it's okay for a baby to be born, and then the doctors to talk with the mother and decide on whether the baby should continue living or not. See here. Currently that's the more extreme stance, whereas the more "moderate" leftist stance is that late term abortions are okay, as 2020 candidate Beto O'Rourke has clarified as his position. In a decade or two from now, I predict that the left will be arguing that newborns and even toddlers aren't really persons and that they should be allowed to legally kill them...and half of the country will unthinkingly jump on that bandwagon, just as they'll jump on the Virginia governor's bandwagon soon enough. Maybe they'll make the argument that because they're incapable of speaking fluent English, their brains are so undeveloped as to not be human.

Better to stick with science, and understand when a human life starts. And better to be ethical, and not depraved.

[lifeforce]

I've always been a staunch pro-life anti-abortionist. As someone who has suffered the trauma of my wife having a miscarriage, and having to carry the dead fetus to the hospital, it only strengthened that stance. It is a harrowing experience I would never wish on anyone.

[liminal_luke]

When faced with a choice of horrors, it´s usually best to choose the least horrific -- and sometimes that´s abortion.  Or at least there are people who have thought so in the past and will think so in the future, and far be it from me to judge them.

[Aetherous]

22 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

it´s usually best to choose the least horrific -- and sometimes that´s abortion

 

Could you be specific about what would be more horrific, which would make one choose this horror?

[liminal_luke]

12 hours ago, Aetherous said:

 

Could you be specific about what would be more horrific, which would make one choose this horror?

 

I suppose I could speculate.  I´ve never gotten a woman pregnant nor been pregnant myself so I´m not sure how much my speculation would be worth.  Several men here have related their personal stories of grief around abortion and I in no way want to discount those experiences.  Nor do I want to discount the fact that for many women (perhaps most?) abortion is likewise a wrenching decision.

 

Still, I continue to think that women who want to have abortions should have the legal right to do so.  The OP wondered what opinions people on the board had and I presented mine.  Perhaps I should of instead linked to the recent conversation we´ve had about that topic?  

 

I´ve said my piece and I think I´ll stop here.  Those who wish more details on my view are welcome to plug the word abortion into the search button and my posts on the topic are sure to pop right up.  This is such an emotional topic for many.  I´m not sure I´d be doing anyone, least of all myself, any favors if I was to continue to participate in an argumentative back-and-forth.  

Edited March 21, 2019 by liminal_luke

[Aetherous]

30 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

I suppose I could speculate.

 

You already did, and I'm calling you out on that.

 

There's nothing more horrific which would make someone choose abortion as a "least horrific" option.

[liminal_luke]

On second thought...

Edited March 21, 2019 by liminal_luke

[ilumairen]

8 hours ago, Aetherous said:

There's nothing more horrific which would make someone choose abortion as a "least horrific" option.

 

I knew a woman who was raped, became pregnant, and chose to have her son. He was in his late teens when I met her. When he was old enough in her opinion she told him how he was conceived. He grew up to be respectful of women in a way his father was not. And this was how she chose to make a change in the world. 

 

She would have agreed with you. 

[Pilgrim]

Quite a few of us went through this topic a month or so ago, I for one do not care to revisit it as all the talking about it here did nothing to change the ways of the world and it is a pointless exercise. If the OP wants to read others views then they can get an eyeful starting around this page linked below. 

 

 

[Aetherous]

24 minutes ago, Pilgrim said:

all the talking about it here did nothing to change the ways of the world and it is a pointless exercise

Respect to whatever you decide to do, in regard to participating in this thread or not...
 

There's something to be said about planting seeds in people's minds (through discussion, as challenging as it might be to "discuss" in the midst of two sides digging in their heels, with no apparent open mindedness)...and if others eventually end up seeing that those seeds are true through their own reasoning and experience, they'll end up nourishing those seeds on their own (having their own ideas and beliefs about things) and their lives will end up changing entirely as a result. They can go from apathetic about the murder of innocent beings, to someone who strives to protect every life. But this process must be natural, and it normally takes years for a seed (an idea we've heard about somewhere) to develop into anything...so contrary to this discussion being pointless, it can be fruitful if you look at from the perspective of years or decades rather than whether we can instantly convince someone else of anything.

Or we can remain silent as approximately half of our population thinks murdering innocent humans is a choice they can make in life. But I tend to think that's more of a pointless exercise (the milquetoast silencing of the truth), compared to sharing ideas which might eventually help people find a better way of thinking and being.

One life changed can potentially create a domino effect in the world, or that person may end up being incredibly influential for many others. Thinking that we're individually incapable of making a positive dent in the world just prevents us from ever doing so.

[Pilgrim]

23 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

Respect to whatever you decide to do, in regard to participating in this thread or not...
 

There's something to be said about planting seeds in people's minds (through discussion, as challenging as it might be to "discuss" in the midst of two sides digging in their heels, with no apparent open mindedness)...and if others eventually end up seeing that those seeds are true through their own reasoning and experience, they'll end up nourishing those seeds on their own (having their own ideas and beliefs about things) and their lives will end up changing entirely as a result. They can go from apathetic about the murder of innocent beings, to someone who strives to protect every life. But this process must be natural, and it normally takes years for a seed (an idea we've heard about somewhere) to develop into anything...so contrary to this discussion being pointless, it can be fruitful if you look at from the perspective of years or decades rather than whether we can instantly convince someone else of anything.

Or we can remain silent as approximately half of our population thinks murdering innocent humans is a choice they can make in life. But I tend to think that's more of a pointless exercise (the milquetoast silencing of the truth), compared to sharing ideas which might eventually help people find a better way of thinking and being.

One life changed can potentially create a domino effect in the world, or that person may end up being incredibly influential for many others. Thinking that we're individually incapable of making a positive dent in the world just prevents us from ever doing so.

I agree with you.

 

I should have phrased that a little differently instead of saying "  all the talking about it here did nothing to change the ways of the world and it is a pointless exercise"

 

I should have specified that for me it is a pointless exercise. My Thoughts and feelings on the topic have already been well explored in the past with you and others and my conclusions will not change.

 

Unless something changed and these laws have been changed then I stand by my statement and I seriously doubt there will be a significant domino effect of any kind from discussions held here as most people from the previous discussion showed they are unwilling to take a different stance and that also includes me.

 

I am all for a Domino effect in favor of my correct point of view on this topic.

 

[ralis]

For those who are against female reproductive rights why not fund sex education in schools, free birth control with annual examinations for health. Then there will be no more whining!

 

My guess is that some of you are under a religious imposition that forbids birth control, most likely Catholicism.

[Aetherous]

1 hour ago, ralis said:

female reproductive rights

 

No one has the right to take another person's life. This issue isn't about women, but is about soon to be babies. Your terminology is intentionally manipulative and misleading.

 

1 hour ago, ralis said:

why not fund sex education in schools, free birth control with annual examinations for health. Then there will be no more whining!

 

Why DON'T liberals change the conversation to this, instead of continually fighting for the ability to abort? Let's also throw in making it easier for couples to adopt children.

 

1 hour ago, ralis said:

My guess is that some of you are under a religious imposition that forbids birth control, most likely Catholicism.

 

I'm certainly not.

[lifeforce]

10 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

I'm certainly not.

 

Me neither. The point was about termination of life, NOT the manner in which that life was conceived.

[liminal_luke]

5 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

I knew a woman who was raped, became pregnant, and chose to have her son. He was in his late teens when I met her. When he was old enough in her opinion she told him how he was conceived. He grew up to be respectful of women in a way his father was not. And this was how she chose to make a change in the world. 

 

She would have agreed with you. 

 

This is a beautiful story and what makes it beautiful, in my opinion, is the woman´s life-affirming choice.  But what if instead of choosing to have her son the woman was forced to give birth?  That would be a very different story.  

 

For me, being pro-choice is not about being pro-abortion.  It´s about respecting other people.  It´s about not assuming that everybody else ought to live by my values.  It´s about giving people the freedom to make their own decisions about their own lives.

[Aetherous]

5 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

This is a beautiful story and what makes it beautiful, in my opinion, is the woman´s life-affirming choice.

 

Making a choice isn't the part that made the story beautiful, Luke. Not in the least.

 

5 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

But what if instead of choosing to have her son the woman was forced to give birth?

 

"Forced to give birth" is a very weird way to put it...when the alternative to giving birth (which takes about 9 months and is inconvenient for the individual only) is murdering another human being (which lasts forever, and is infringing on someone's else's right to life).

I'm often "forced to" be around certain people that I dislike...that doesn't give me the right to murder them in order to not feel "forced". That's not my "choice" to make.

Parents are "forced to" support their children until 18, or even further...again, they can't murder their kids as a convenient alternative.

No one thinks of this as the government "forcing them" to raise their own kids.

 

Basically, your way of looking at it assumes that abortion was an option in the first place. It's not, ethically speaking. There is getting pregnant and giving birth, and then there is not getting pregnant. Just like, I can choose to go to the store, or not...and choosing to go to the store doesn't include murdering people there who annoy me so that I have a better shopping experience. That's something I could do, but ethically, it's not up for grabs: to do such a thing is absolutely unethical.

Of course, people can choose to abort...the current US law unfortunately allows it, and even if it didn't, people could still choose it...just like they can choose to murder someone, or anything else with severe consequences.

 

On the aspect of someone being raped and then having to go through 9 months of being reminded of that, among other things...abortion is still far more horrible than that, for quite a few reasons. I also think much less harm is done in the case of a morning after pill than abortion, even if human life begins at conception...and perhaps such a thing could be reserved only for those circumstances? I don't know the solution to every tricky situation.

Here's something I do know...liberals keep trying to gain more ground in murdering children, by insisting on late term abortions, beyond viability, and even killing newborns. If someone was raped and got pregnant, there is a lot of time prior to all of this bullshit, where they could've had an abortion...why late term? Why try to get mothers choosing to kill their newborns like the Virginia governor? It's unnecessary in this absolute worst case rape-scenario, and is simply disgusting.

 

5 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

For me, being pro-choice is not about being pro-abortion.  It´s about respecting other people.

 

But the aborted one is a human being, and a person. Its life is taken for someone else's convenience, at a time when it doesn't have a voice to speak up for itself. Why do you not respect that person? I think it all boils down to some like yourself refusing to admit that the unborn are actually human beings in development.

I challenge you, Luke, to truly think about when a human life becomes a person, and if you're truly able to tell how that happens based on your definition, or if you're just guessing. Also, question if your view is established on scientific grounds, or if it attempts to ignore that.

 

5 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

It´s about not assuming that everybody else ought to live by my values.  It´s about giving people the freedom to make their own decisions about their own lives.

 

We don't have the "freedom" to take another person's life (even if the US law right now says that we do). That's not freedom at all...that's the opposite of freedom for that person, who lost their freedom to live. And murder isn't a "freedom", it's a crime (although current US law turns a blind eye to abortion being murder).

The same thing could happen to you, as happened to them, where for some reason it's thought that you don't really qualify as human or worthy of life (in fact, it does in other countries).

Also, there are countries in which abortion is currently illegal...and therefore people don't have the "freedom" to kill innocent humans in those places. The ones who want to don't think of abortion as a "freedom", as you're privileged to do, but instead think of it as something criminal...which it actually is.

Also, "freedom to make their own decisions about their own lives"...abortion is making a decision about someone else's life much more than it is about making a decision for one's own life. If it was about one's own life, then no one would care; at least I wouldn't. I often hear the nonsense, "men shouldn't tell women what to do with their vaginas, only women can" (despite the fact that MANY women are pro-life)...but this issue has nothing to do with a vagina. I don't care what women do with their uteri.

The point is that there's a separate human life involved, so it's not whatsoever a "decision about their own lives".

[Spotless]

I am going to put forth the following as simply a concept and not an opinion of mine or belief of mine or not:

 

Some would argue that the soul of a person is indestructible and that a few weeks or months of being attached to a life cycle and then having it unattached in no way kills the soul or necessarily affects it in a negative way.

 

Some would say that participating in such a scenario would be pre-planned to begin with - in the sense that the spirit chooses the parents and is fully engaged in the general prospects and would certainly be aware of such a possible immediate scenario such as a termination.

 

Some would say that a soul is barely even involved with the general interweaving in the human experience during the first several months. And in fact changes can be made regarding the soul to that body for seven years fairly easily.

 

Some would say that this is indeed the woman’s choice to bare.

 

Some speak of murder - but  great many would say that no Being has been killed. Over half of the inhabitants on this planet would say that no Being has been killed - that a possible body for that Being was dis-allowed - butno murder took place because ownership had not transferred from the mother and her body to a birthed child that is separate and autonomous in breath and body.

 

I have no opinion in this but thought these ideas might also be pondered.

I have no intention of defending these ideas so no need to act as if I am in any way invested in this subject. 

 

 

[kondensation]

Those who want to completely ban abortions completely are rarely people who want to take responsibility for the consequences of the ban.

 

I doubt there is anyone who thinks abortions are good even if they support the right of access to abortion. Especially failed ones from doctors whether they are street abortionists in countries where it's illegal and many die during the procedures or in countries where it is done professionally are bad in everyone's eyes.

[ilumairen]

18 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

This is a beautiful story and what makes it beautiful, in my opinion, is the woman´s life-affirming choice.  But what if instead of choosing to have her son the woman was forced to give birth?  That would be a very different story.  

 

For me, being pro-choice is not about being pro-abortion.  It´s about respecting other people.  It´s about not assuming that everybody else ought to live by my values.  It´s about giving people the freedom to make their own decisions about their own lives.

 

When a woman is far enough along in pregnancy strangers will approach her and touch her belly.. 

 

Have you ever thought about this, and what it indicates?

[Aetherous]

8 hours ago, Spotless said:

Over half of the inhabitants on this planet would say that no Being has been killed - that a possible body for that Being was dis-allowed - butno murder took place because ownership had not transferred from the mother and her body to a birthed child that is separate and autonomous in breath and body.

 

 

I know you were just presenting ideas to ponder, but this one in the bold sounds like an attempt at stating a fact. Did you take a survey of "the inhabitants of the planet"? No. Someone else could just as easily say that 75% of all people in the world believe that a being has been killed...how does anyone know these stats? It might seem likely that your statement is true, to you, if you live in a liberalized area, because you're used to a majority of people having that certain opinion...but there's a whole other world outside of that bubble.

 

Also, "ownership had not transferred from the mother and her body to a birthed child that is separate and autonomous"...well, a child doesn't have to be birthed in order to be autonomous. That's why we speak of "viability" - the point at which the child could survive on its own outside of the womb, prior to birth. There's another aspect to this: who says that a mother "owns" the unborn? She's responsible for it, but it's a unique life (has its own heartbeat, will later develop into a full grown person), and she doesn't OWN it.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Aetherous

[ilumairen]

From Wikipedia:

 

Quote

Scott Lee Peterson[1] (born October 24, 1972) is an American convicted murderer who is currently on death row in San Quentin State Prison. In 2004, he was convicted of the first-degree murder of his pregnant wife, Laci Peterson, and the second-degree murder of their unborn son, Conner, in Modesto, California.

 

[liminal_luke]

30 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

When a woman is far enough along in pregnancy strangers will approach her and touch her belly.. 

 

Have you ever thought about this, and what it indicates?

 

That people can be rude?

 

I see the whole process of baby-making as a kind of external alchemy.  Pregnant women, the as yet unborn, newborns -- all these beings potentially inhabit and draw energy from deeper dimensions of reality than are otherwise commonly accessed.  This is inherently fascinating and draws people´s attention.  That is what I think.

Edited March 22, 2019 by liminal_luke

[ilumairen]

For anyone interested in the state by state legislation on the killing of unborn children through means other than abortion:

 

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

 

[Spotless]

15 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

 

I know you were just presenting ideas to ponder, but this one in the bold sounds like an attempt at stating a fact. Did you take a survey of "the inhabitants of the planet"? No. Someone else could just as easily say that 75% of all people in the world believe that a being has been killed...how does anyone know these stats? It might seem likely that your statement is true, to you, if you live in a liberalized area, because you're used to a majority of people having that certain opinion...but there's a whole other world outside of that bubble.

 

 

 

The above was in reference to:

 

“Some speak of murder - but  a great many would say that no Being has been killed. Over half of the inhabitants on this planet would say that no Being has been killed - that a possible body for that Being was dis-allowed - but no murder took place”

 

Perhaps you Aetherous should examine your bubble instead of projecting it upon others. By far the majority of humans on this planet believe in reincarnation - and MANY studies show that a very very sizable percentage of Christians do as well.

 

Your positioning and insulting reference and lackadaisical  reference is why joining in this conversation was done with great trepidation. Buffoons unable to respect intellectual discourse because of extreme rigidized anchoring in core beliefs.

 

Even a Buffoon can look up such statistics - and even a Buffoon can politely question what one was referencing - but most buffoons do what buffoons do - the play their buffoons.