It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The hypocrisy of the pro-life argument

page: 7
42
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 01:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: SubTruth

That's assuming that it is murder, but you would first have to show how something without a functioning brain/heart has consciousness/is alive.





I am personally struggling with the argument of when life begins........I will say that a viable fetus being aborted in my mind is murder. I also think a viable fetus has constitutional rights and above all else the basic right of life.


The when life begins argument is good one no doubt.........Flag for you.




posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 01:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: SubTruth

That's assuming that it is murder, but you would first have to show how something without a functioning brain/heart has consciousness/is alive.


Define functioning brain, define consciousness, define alive? One could argue that 3 months in the womb is as much as part the human growth cycle as 3 months out of the womb would be. You could argue that the 3 months out of the womb is more progressively mature, but then you could say the same thing for a 5 year old compared to a 3 month old.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: SubTruth

I am personally struggling with the argument of when life begins........I will say that a viable fetus being aborted in my mind is murder. I also think a viable fetus has constitutional rights and above all else the basic right of life.


How about the fundamental flaw that abortion clinics are in it for profit and they push abortions since many are paid for by the state. It also questions the whole morality issue that a State would rather pay for an abortion then a lifetime of services....

I think over all, all religion aside, they way we view abortions lower our value of human life in general, and that could seep into other areas of morality issues such as how do we care for the elderly once they are no long useful or capable.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 01:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: SubTruth

I am personally struggling with the argument of when life begins........I will say that a viable fetus being aborted in my mind is murder. I also think a viable fetus has constitutional rights and above all else the basic right of life.


How about the fundamental flaw that abortion clinics are in it for profit and they push abortions since many are paid for by the state. It also questions the whole morality issue that a State would rather pay for an abortion then a lifetime of services....

I think over all, all religion aside, they way we view abortions lower our value of human life in general, and that could seep into other areas of morality issues such as how do we care for the elderly once they are no long useful or capable.






Yep you are right on the money poster.....Bravo. Nazi Germany and Hitler used arguments and tactics like this also. They did it for the greater good......Blah.....Blah.....Blah.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero



Define functioning brain, define consciousness, define alive?


A person whose heart and brain stop functioning is considered dead, so we can use that to determine whether a person is alive or not.



I think over all, all religion aside, they way we view abortions lower our value of human life in general, and that could seep into other areas of morality issues such as how do we care for the elderly once they are no long useful or capable.


That didn't stop people from devaluing homosexuals for not being "useful". Abortion wouldn't be the cause of devaluing human life. It's already happening, even by some who do not support abortion.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 02:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: Xtrozero



Define functioning brain, define consciousness, define alive?


A person whose heart and brain stop functioning is considered dead, so we can use that to determine whether a person is alive or not.

No, actually it's when there is no brain activity and it won't come back. By that standard every baby is alive.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 02:32 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


No, actually it's when there is no brain activity and it won't come back. By that standard every baby is alive.


An egg does not have a functioning brain. Neither does an embryo with an undeveloped brain.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   
First I think sex education is great. I think I very small minority of people support abstinence only.

Second I don't think that there should be optional abortion. I do think that there should be some type of solution for rape, and other circumstances where the mother/child is in danger.

Third, please don't bring up the orphan stats, it's just a pathetic way of justifying abortion. Orphans grow up to be successful everyday and yea it isn't the greatest situation, but it's at least a chance, right?



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: SubTruth

Reductio Ad Hitlerum - Fallacy Files

Tell me, are you in favor of abortion for any reason at any time?

That is a one-word-answer question.
edit on 6Thu, 16 Jul 2015 06:27:22 -050015p062015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: avgguy
First I think sex education is great. I think I very small minority of people support abstinence only.

Second I don't think that there should be optional abortion. I do think that there should be some type of solution for rape, and other circumstances where the mother/child is in danger.

Third, please don't bring up the orphan stats, it's just a pathetic way of justifying abortion. Orphans grow up to be successful everyday and yea it isn't the greatest situation, but it's at least a chance, right?



1. Sadly, I think you're mistaken. Put your waders on and move into a few of these discussions. Not more than ten posts in, one of the zealots will suggest that it is the irresponsibility of the pregnant woman with wonderfully vile comments like "she should have kept her legs together."

2. If there is no "optional abortion" what do you imagine as "some type of solution" then?

3. Why is asking for reasonable plans and compassionate responses to actual human CHILDREN a "pathetic way of justifying abortion" ?

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

It is an established medical fact that women's bodies naturally abort 50% of fertilized eggs. This is KNOWN.

So, in your scenario, if a woman knowingly gets pregnant and the pregnancy falls into that 50% ... is she guilty of ... what, manslaughter at least?

If not, why not?

A young woman is raped repeatedly by her biological father. She becomes pregnant. She is rescued from that horrific situation at age 11. There is about a 50% chance that her pregnancy would result in a child with severe genetic issues, and she has above a 20% chance of serious medical issues should she bring the pregnancy to term, up to and including threats to her life. Every day of the rest of her life, such a child would remind her of what abuse her own father heaped on her.

No justification for abortion here?

Now, IF there is ever any justification for abortion ... please explain to me how THAT fetus in THAT "reasonable situation" is different from any other fetus.

Therein is one of the basic questions of this thread.
edit on 7Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:04:24 -050015p072015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:17:56 -050015p072015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
Check out Ron Paul's stance. He is prolife but understands you can't legislate morality and the morality of society is what changes the amount of abortions. Its not how I feel but is another mouth piece pro lifer who knows laws are not the way to handle the situation.


I've checked out Ron Paul's stance on more than a few things. He's a good guy. It's a shame they ran him out of Washington. I don't know how I feel about his son though. He seems to think like daddy, but then I'm still a bit worried that he also wants to fit in with the other Republicans as well.


I feel abortion is related from the lack social structure and laxk of education caused by the fact the two major parties divide the population so they can't solve their own problems. Then come in trying to play the savior after they created the mess.


That describes the current situation on more than just abortion though.


When was the last time we even discussed poverty in an election year or any other wage gap problem. We have idiots saying we should work longer hours knowing full well there are less jobs available and will continue this way as automation becomes more and more engrained in society to keep the cost of living and inflation in check. So we again push off the problem of what do we do with the population. We are just creating a hunger games situation by not addressing the issues. I think where we agree is bow to lower the rate.


2008, but I get your point. There are real issues going undiscussed that are the underlying problems of many of the other problems that the politicians DO discuss. Believe me I know. Whenever I see the illegal immigration debate come up, I know that the REAL problem is the cartels causing all the violence that the illegals are fleeing. The cartels grew and became powerful as a DIRECT result of the War on Drugs. At this point, they are starting to branch out into other things and have evolved into an even worse threat, all because we never wanted to address the root cause of one of our domestic problems because it would require a REALLY critical look on our drug policies (which is something the government seems adamant against doing).

Though I'm not sure abortion is one of those issues. Women have been getting abortions since forever. It's not like this is some new thing going on. I'm sure women would still be getting abortions regardless if we fixed our core issues in the country or not. It's not like if we were to suddenly fix the wage gap, that we'll magically invent a 100% fool-proof contraceptive or anything. Heck even if we DID invent such a thing, we'd still have to get people to USE it. Which also remains a tough problem.


It may be better to make an op that says "the real way to lower abortions by a pro choice" or something like that to try and make a solution to the problem.


I'll take that into consideration.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: FyreByrd

It used to be extrapolated from numbers of women turning up at hospitals bleeding to death and the dead from back room abortions.


And then what? Multiply that number by a number pulled out of thin air to include those who didn't wind up in the ER or the morgue?

Do you have any sources?



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
originally posted by: Krazysh0t



So all of a sudden abortion became a hot button topic on these forums with a bunch of threads appearing overnight talking about it. I'm really not sure what spurned this sudden interest, though it is likely due to the upcoming election season and politicians starting to take sides on various debate issues.


Also the news broke that Planned Parenthood was selling baby parts. That happened.


This is one of the first posts I saw about this issue.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It came out before that story broke.


1. So we can just pretend like asexuals don't exist now? Geez.


What is your point? Asexuals can't learn about sex?


2. Besides which, this "kids gonna have sex" is a bunch of BS. I went through my teenage and college years without "formal" sexual education and without having sex with anyone. And I know others who did. People aren't animals, we can control ourselves.


Not everyone does. This isn't a fantasy world were just because YOU can do it, that means that everyone should or even WANTS to do that. The fact is that teenagers WILL have sex. It may not have been you, your kids, or anyone you know, but it IS happening. And these kids deserve to have proper education on it.


3. Are all pro-lifers also pro-abstinance-only sex ed? (Personally, I think I'm more disturbed at the idea of a total stranger teaching someone sex-ed than I am at the idea of comprehensive sex ed.)


I have no idea. Probably not, but I can tell you this, MOST pro-choicers are also pro-sex education. Why are you disturbed about a stranger teaching sex ed? Who cares? It's just sex. If you don't like what he is saying, then teach your kid on your own time. Maybe if you didn't spend most of your childhood repressing sex you wouldn't have this weird stigma about it.


Just understand that (from the pro-life view) like saying we should legalize murder to bring the murder rate down. Who knows? It might work. Should we do it?


If it works, you could at LEAST give it a try. Though, I guess that depends on what is more important to you, do you want a safer society or do you want to punish the guilty? Keep in mind, the way reality works, you can't have both. Me, I'd rather we had a safer society than punish the guilty.


Also, remember that correlation does not equal causation. It's possible; no, probable, that there are other factors besides abortion being illegal that are keeping the abortion rate so high in those countries. It's not like making it legal will magically make people stop having children they want to abort. It would probably work best to keep abortions illegal and promote sex ed.


Correlation may not equal causation, but we have MORE than enough evidence showing that bans don't result in the rates of occurrence going down. Like I linked in the op, the war on drugs and prohibition are both PRIME candidates to show the same thing. Bans DON'T work. No matter how much you want to BELIEVE they work, they'll just never work. They just create crime.

Well legal abortion clearly DOESN'T make people stop having children they want to abort because it IS legal here and it still happens. That isn't the point. The point is that the rate is lower. Therefore, it is happening less overall. It may not be a complete victory, but this is real life. You should take what you can get.


How is this inconsistent? It's bad that there are a lot of orphans. I think the pro-lifers think it's better to be an orphan than, ya know, dead.


Have you been an orphan? Raised in the state system? How would you know if that life is better than being dead? I'm sure there are more than a few orphans who would disagree with you, but they are probably already dead from committing suicide.

Making abortion illegal, IF people listened to you, would mean we'd just get MORE of these kids in the already overcrowded system. This guarantees an even WORSE quality of life, because it's not like conservatives like paying taxes or anything to fund these social programs...


The pro-lifer's argument is very consistent. Abortion is murder. Let's not make it legal to murder people. How hard is that?


Then maybe you should change your stance, because you are just proposing to create more problems that you will turn around and not want to pay to fix.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Though, at the core, you can't argue around the fact that countries with legal abortion have lower abortion rates.


How does one go about counting the number of illegal abortions performed in their country?


You could read the study and find out.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
The fact that there are children without homes is not relevant.
The fact that some pro-lifers preach abstinence is not relevant.
The fact that some pro-lifers think it's a parent's responsibility to teach kids is not relevant.
NONE of these things is hypocritical. They ARE problems, of course, but they are not the issue.


And that is where you are wrong. Without analyzing the consequences of your actions, how can you ever fix society and make it better for everyone? You want to view abortion through this narrow box of "abortion = murder therefore wrong!" but it isn't so simple. We have the rights of the mother to also think about, plus there is the fact that we can't stop these women from doing it. We have evidence that shows that despite it being illegal in various countries, the abortion rate hasn't gone down. So now we are creating MORE criminals. In this country that already jails more people than the entire world, do we REALLY need a new type of criminal?


The ONLY thing that is truly relevant here is that you are advocating killing an unborn child that, if you did even minutes after it was born, would result in the charge of murder in the first degree, planned with forethought.

You own your womb, but you do NOT own what is in it, and the fact that there IS something in it means you signed that lease.


No, it doesn't. Natural abortions happen all the time.


Killing the tenant is not an option.


Apparently it IS an option, because it happens all the time whether you want it to or not.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well, at least the analogy of "womb as residence" acknowledges the oft-avoided, underlying truth in all "pro life" arguments that women's bodies are ultimately the property of men.

/shrug I guess we should be careful what we ask for.





posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

How can you demand accountability for sex if the person never even properly knows of the consequences of his actions?

How does abstinence only not teach consequences? It does. Whether you agree with the method or not it still teaches consequences.


Then answer for the fact that study after study shows that abstinence only education not only DOESN'T work but actually results in higher rates of teen pregnancy? How is that teaching consequences of your actions?



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: SubTruth
a reply to: Krazysh0t

OP your argument about the poor Orphan children is flawed at it's core. Progressives logic at it's best and rooted in idealism not reality.

It is also kinda evil when you think about.......Basically you are promoting murder as a better solution than poverty. Hitler thought along these lines........The gas chambers were first used on anyone not contributing to society. This is the exact same logic path and it is flawed beyond compare. Society would be better off.......The greater good.......This is all flawed. Fun fact......Hitler loved and took inspiration from the early progressive movement in the US.


Fun Fact: Hitler wasn't a Socialist. Believing that the National Socialist Party was Socialist is like believing that the Democratic Republic of the Congo is either Democratic OR a Republic. So try again. Oh and Godwin's Law. So, actually no, don't try again. You just lost the argument.
edit on 16-7-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
That maybe they do not want tax money to pay for people's poor choices and failures....


I realize this INTIMATELY. That's why I can't understand why you'd want to NOT have abortions. Paying for an abortion is FAR cheaper than subsidizing that child's childhood because the mother kept the child but was unable to afford to live without being on welfare.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well, at least the analogy of "womb as residence" acknowledges the oft-avoided, underlying truth in all "pro life" arguments that women's bodies are ultimately the property of men.

/shrug I guess we should be careful what we ask for.




The hypocrisies that I pointed out in the OP alone tell me more than I'd like about the underlying truths of the pro-life arguments. I wish it could have more people like the one guy I was talking to earlier in the thread, but mostly I just see the same tired repeating of the abortion = murder mantra and a refusal to expand the scope of the argument.



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join