I know of no one who "calls" their conscience "God." But in my opinion God speaks to us through the Holy Spirit and conscience is but one way one can realize closeness with God.
Yes murder the word is used in the commandments. Kill is a bad translation. My point was the killing is not always murder. A doctor doing an abortion is not murdering anyone in this country if all the laws are followed. We can ask about the morality of it but again that is open for discussion for virtually everyone depending on the situation.
Certainly if the baby is viable ex-o-womb, it is murder. No question. Any other stance is pure rationalization, no matter what Roe V Wade claims.
ex-o-womb? What do you mean specifically? ARe you for abortion before viability? And when is viability?
You are dancing around this issue. It is not up to you whether anyone would do it or not. It is illegal...so of course not as many will seek one out. But shouldnt it be legal? You would never want to deny a woman the rights to her body would you? yes or no Its a private decision....so why should you care? - - - Updated - - - Just your way of running...and avoiding getting nailed on this question.
Do you not know what a red herring is? It's a diversionary tactic that debaters will use when they know they cannot refute the on-topic argument presented before them. So they divert attention away from the actual topic, in this case, abortion, to another topic, such as slavery. Two totally unrelated topics but one the person knows they can easily refute. It can also be something like building a straw man argument. "Well I can't logically knock down this argument, so I will build up this other argument and knock that one down instead!" Every time a pro-lifer brings up slavery in the abortion debate it is because they simply cannot refute the actual subject at hand and must instead divert attention away from it to something they can refute. This tactic is not only very sneaky and misleading but it is extremely dishonest. One moment you are going "Pro-choicers are bad, bad people! They support abortion!" Then they give very logical reasons for why they support it. Not knowing how to refute their logical arguments they present something they can refute and switch gears, "Well pro-choicers are still bad, bad people! They support slavery!" If you do not see the dishonesty and lack of integrity in doing this then I don't know what else to tell you but carry on with your red herrings and straw men.
Ex-o meaning outside the womb. There can be no question that aborting a baby capable of living outside the mother (even if it means incubating for a period), is flat out murder. I'm not for abortion at all, but arguments can be made when the baby is too small to survive outside the mother, not that I agree with that. If thinking people cannot even agree on the first part, there is no moral ground at all in the world.
That's right, hence, pro-choice. For the only women who would want a late term abortion (because of complications), it is legal. No. Exactly.
The fact of the matter is neither pro-life or pro-abortion can be "proved" to be right or wrong. It is all a matter of belief. As yet, I have not said which side I choose and when I do choose to post it I will in no uncertain terms. BTW, I do note we have the same rudeness on this thread that permeates some of the other threads. Have a ball, when one throws out a rude or insulting remark only he who makes such a remark is diminished.
Every point after conception is completely arbitrary. Which is why even pro-abortion people can't agree on when "personhood" begins. Because it's all whimsical. You know what you're doing when you have an abortion. Everybody does. They just don't care because the culture we live in has become one that devalues human life. Of course abortion is murder.
Apparently I answered a post with a bit more sarcasm than I intended or was allowed. Sorry about that. Beyond that, everything I said relating to the substance of the issue is my opinion.
The point of conception is completely arbitrary. Who decided on conception as the correct point? The religious-political patriarchy, coincidentally, the same ones who have historically opposed birth control and equal rights for women. Imagine that.
I didn't even realize that you said anything similar to flamebait. I just thought you were a fence sitter from what you first told me. I didn't see your response to my post though. >__>
With that comment I disagree. People who are pro-life see the fertilized egg which if not interrupted will mature to birth and beyond. If fact one of the most logical points is conception, and the next most logical is when viable. Beyond that everything is arbitrary and like I said, some people decide what they want, then create a belief system which supports what they want, like eating in a cafeteria. - - - Updated - - - I didn't either but my post was deleted so it must have offended someone. No, I am not on the fence. I have simply chosen not to specify which I believe until it makes sense to divulge.
But that isn't true. 60 to 80% of fertilized eggs never reach implantatation. They are flushed away by the woman's menstrual flow. Even after implantation, there is still a 25% chance of miscarriage. There is also a chance that one fertilized egg can split into two up to 13 days after fertilization. So how can one say it's a person at fertilization when it could turn out to be two or more? No, ALL points are arbitrary, and as I just explained, conception is not a logical point either. That's why the question still remains after thousands of years of debate.
Nature works in strange ways, and if a natural end to pregnancy comes early it has nothing to do with an arbitrary determinant. You believe the way you do because you want to believe that it is not an innocent human life. It is you making an arbitrary decision rather than letting nature take its course. You CHOOSE to believe it is arbitrary.
You believe the way you do because you want to believe it is an innocent human life. You CHOOSE to believe it isn't arbitrary.
I have yet to tell you what I choose, I have only given you alternative explanations. But you said it! It is human, it is life and it is innocent. Now for the rest of the story; it is obvious you don't care about innocent human life. I guess it is just like asking the gal if she will sleep with you for $1 million. If she says yes all you have to do is dicker for a reasonable price.
And....you CHOOSE not to. Nature is by definition a series of arbitrary events. An acorn may never become an oak depending on arbitrary rainfall, Squirrel activity, soil conditions, or if some kid picks it up and adds it to his rock collection.
You might think you haven't, but you did, right from the start. I don't think I said it was innocent. I think it is ridiculous to say that developing tissue is "innocent." It is innocent in the same way a sperm is innocent. It is "innocent" human life like a sperm is innocent human life. Do we value every sperm?
They simply are. A human being who understands that abortion is murder, evidently far more morally evolved than those who jump through hoops to demand rights to "choice", while giving not one f*cking care for the truly innocent. That's who I am, and I'm a better person than you will ever be.
