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.

 

My complicated stance on abortion - Not a black/white issue

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by WWu777
 


you say its not a black white issue but you are only in favor of abortion as the best thing not necessarily the right thing, so I'd say you are making it black and white. You say maybe abortion is wrong, but then you follow this up with "so what?" so that belies your support of a non black/white mentality. Try to make an argument in favor of life, then you will sound more non-biased.


You are talking riddles that make no sense. But if you are pro life, then what about this:

What about all the insects you've killed? And all the animals you've eaten? Do you condone that too? Are all the people who kill cows and chickens murderers too? What about all the bacteria in your body that your immune system kills? Is that morally wrong too? What about all the semen that comes out after masturbation and dies? What about all the fertilized eggs that come out during menstruation and die? Is all that morally wrong too? Are you a mass murderer when you go through menstruation? Where's the consistency here?




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by QUANTUMGR4V17Y
 


A star for you. I know well your plight. I had helped my nephew fight for custody of his two children because the mother was unstable. Now they are healthy, happy, have great grades, play sports and music. We as family, gave him much support in his decision but sadly that is not always the case.
I have been pregnant 3 times in my lifetime and was told from the very first that I would never carry to term. I had two miscarriages and one still born. But I don't scorn abortion in the slightest. What I despise is the treatment of childern who are here and being mistreated because someone didn't want them. I've even heard one of my sisters say to her son "I wish you were an abortion." He's grown now and still has anger issues towards his mother for the verbal abuse he received as a child. Her only defense is "at least I didn't have an abortion, you are here aren't you?"
My mom use to say/quote: The road to hell is paved with good intentions. How many children are on that road today? As for the video of Carl - making light of an issue to shed light on the problem has its problems. When do we actually take this seriously in all of its ramifications? How many of us truly have our heads up our collective rears because we cannot see the big picture?
I will never have an abortion, but I will never judge anyone who does because it is not my place. But seriously, I honestly am of the opinion that once you strip away the right to be able to have choices on medical procedures we all will be the true victim if RvW is over turned, because it won't just stop at abortion. They will use it to keep the poor from having effective cancer treatments, which is actually happening now. The insurance companies will have the last say on whether you live or die, not you. Besides, it's not the law that causes abortions, it is the lack of information, desires of others over common sense and maturity that makes this situation possible. Change these, and abortions will go down. Law enforcement won't stop this problem, education will.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia

Originally posted by WWu777

Originally posted by dezracer
just answer this one question

when is alright to kill a baby?


Science says that a fetus is not a sentient being. It has no mind, feelings or consciousness.


The question was, when is it alright to kill a baby, you respond with "science says a fetus has no feelings..."

You dont say it but you imply it: science says we can kill anything that has no sentience. Where in "science" does it say this? it doesnt, which is why you only implied it and did not say it outright. A fetus becomes sentient when it becomes a child, so what is science's statement on that? Nothing, since science can not moralize. And I dont even buy this statement about a fetus not having sentience, it has a heartbeat very young, so unless you abort within days of becoming pregnant I think you are using science to make yourself feel better about the abortion, but first off it is not true, secondly you are using science to moralize which is impossible.


I'm saying that science doesn't count a fetus as a human or living being. Don't you get that? Stop playing riddles. You are obviously biased.

I am not in favor of abortion. I am not in favor of unwanted pregnancies either. It's a lose lose situation.

If all life is sacred, then what about the plant life that you eat? What about all the bacteria that your immune system kills everyday? Is that morally wrong too? Isn't your body a murderer too?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777

I wonder if those people are actors. But it's a Christian propaganda video right, with the typical circular Christian logic?

Did you know that Christian pro-lifers lie when they say that abortion is dangerous? It's far safer than childbirth, which kills far more women than abortions do.


edit on 26-1-2012 by WWu777 because: (no reason given)


Actually no sorry, if you actually watched it you wouldn't be guessing such non-sense. Instead of trying to debunk it, watch it :S and then do what you want with the information... I mean like... aren't you searching for a logical reason of why is abortion wrong :S It seems your just more interested and focused in arguing over the internet :S
edit on 26-1-2012 by Brenidi14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by WWu777
 


You are talking riddles that make no sense. But if you are pro life, then what about this:

What about all the insects you've killed? And all the animals you've eaten? Do you condone that too? Are all the people who kill cows and chickens murderers too? What about all the bacteria in your body that your immune system kills? Is that morally wrong too? What about all the semen that comes out after masturbation and dies? What about all the fertilized eggs that come out during menstruation and die? Is all that morally wrong too? Are you a mass murderer when you go through menstruation? Where's the consistency here?



I can say the same of you: you are talking in riddles, you claim your abortion stance is not black and white yet you are only in favor of abortion, you even ridicule the notion of abortion being immoral by saying so what?

I kill spiders in my home, I dont go around killing spiders outside. I have even been known to transplant insects outside rather than kill them, but I find it offensive to kill an insect I see outside.

I was vegetarian for a while but eat meat on social occasions when it is convenient, and I think that is the issue: convenience. I can squash a bug without any christian (or buddhist) hearing about it, I can not in the same way abort a baby so easily. The fact that I need to go to a hospital makes it a more complicated issue, laws come into play, peoples feelings, etc. No one mourns for the spiders i kill in my home. well, besides you
I think that argument also takes care of the semen comment.

I never said abortion was immoral per se, I merely have issue with you saying your pro abortion stance is anything but black and white. I agree with you that pregnancy is hard, but in that case sex should be avoided. If a womans labour could kill her, then abortion would be reasonable. So I am not anti abortion to the max but lean in that direction.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brenidi14

Originally posted by WWu777

I wonder if those people are actors. But it's a Christian propaganda video right, with the typical circular Christian logic?

Did you know that Christian pro-lifers lie when they say that abortion is dangerous? It's far safer than childbirth, which kills far more women than abortions do.


edit on 26-1-2012 by WWu777 because: (no reason given)


Actually no sorry, if you actually watched it you wouldn't be guessing such non-sense. Instead of trying to debunk it, watch it :S and then do what you want with the information... I mean like... aren't you searching for a logical reason of why is abortion wrong :S It seems your just more interested and focused in arguing over the internet :S
edit on 26-1-2012 by Brenidi14 because: (no reason given)


Ok, but even if the video convinces me that abortion is wrong, that doesn't mean that going through with an unwanted pregnancy is the "best thing" for everyone involved. Reread the reasons above on why the "best thing" and the "right thing" are not always the same thing.

Let me ask you: How would you like to be put into a 20 year unpaid job that you couldn't get out of if you started it? How would you like to lose all your freedom for 20 years and beyond? What would you do in that situation? Would you panic at all? What if you were a freedom junkie that placed freedom as the highest value?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by DaWhiz
 


Exactly. If we give our freedom of choice up in this, who's to say what will follow. I already can't make decisions for my child, because he has to have vaccinations, otherwise I get threatened by Child Protection Services. At what point do people start realizing that; if it isn't you, it isn't your business, nor your right, to force someone to partake in something that they do or do not want to do. Regardless of yours or their beliefs.

The way it stands right now is perfectly fine by me. Choice. People can voice their opinions either way, but forcing someone into your belief's, especially when you don't know anything about that person or their situation, is flat out wrong.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


Three times you accused me of talking in riddles so I will state this very clearly:

a fetus becomes a sentient being in time, so when does science say a fetus gains sentience? What day or week after conception?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia

Originally posted by WWu777

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by WWu777
 


You are talking riddles that make no sense. But if you are pro life, then what about this:

What about all the insects you've killed? And all the animals you've eaten? Do you condone that too? Are all the people who kill cows and chickens murderers too? What about all the bacteria in your body that your immune system kills? Is that morally wrong too? What about all the semen that comes out after masturbation and dies? What about all the fertilized eggs that come out during menstruation and die? Is all that morally wrong too? Are you a mass murderer when you go through menstruation? Where's the consistency here?



I can say the same of you: you are talking in riddles, you claim your abortion stance is not black and white yet you are only in favor of abortion, you even ridicule the notion of abortion being immoral by saying so what?

I kill spiders in my home, I dont go around killing spiders outside. I have even been known to transplant insects outside rather than kill them, but I find it offensive to kill an insect I see outside.

I was vegetarian for a while but eat meat on social occasions when it is convenient, and I think that is the issue: convenience. I can squash a bug without any christian (or buddhist) hearing about it, I can not in the same way abort a baby so easily. The fact that I need to go to a hospital makes it a more complicated issue, laws come into play, peoples feelings, etc. No one mourns for the spiders i kill in my home. well, besides you
I think that argument also takes care of the semen comment.

I never said abortion was immoral per se, I merely have issue with you saying your pro abortion stance is anything but black and white. I agree with you that pregnancy is hard, but in that case sex should be avoided. If a womans labour could kill her, then abortion would be reasonable. So I am not anti abortion to the max but lean in that direction.



You do not need to go to the hospital to have an abortion. You can take a series of pills, such as RU486, early on, to have the abortion safely, without any surgical procedures.

You can't just say "sex should be avoided". We are hard wired to want and need sex. Emotions and desires overrule logic usually. Many men are horny all the time and obsessed with sex. It's not that easy to just avoid sex. Humans do not live by logic. They live by emotion. You can't change that with such simple statements like "avoid sex".

I told you, this is a lose lose situation. An unwanted pregnancy results in nothing good either way. You either 1 - Lose 20 years of freedom and commit to an unpaid job that you can't quit, or 2 - end the life of a fetus/embryo. Neither are good. You will experience unhappiness in either scenario. But sometimes, it's more rational to choose number 2 if you know you absolutely cannot cope with number 1.

It's terrible, but true. This has nothing to do with right or wrong, but with consequences. How many times do I have to explain that?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777

Ok, but even if the video convinces me that abortion is wrong, that doesn't mean that going through with an unwanted pregnancy is the "best thing" for everyone involved. Reread the reasons above on why the "best thing" and the "right thing" are not always the same thing.

Let me ask you: How would you like to be put into a 20 year unpaid job that you couldn't get out of if you started it? How would you like to lose all your freedom for 20 years and beyond? What would you do in that situation? Would you panic at all? What if you were a freedom junkie that placed freedom as the highest value?



Are you saying a baby is like an unpaid job? Are you saying that a woman who has a child looses her freedom for 20 years and beyond?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by WWu777
 


Three times you accused me of talking in riddles so I will state this very clearly:

a fetus becomes a sentient being in time, so when does science say a fetus gains sentience? What day or week after conception?


Science says a fetus has consciousness in the 5th or 6th month I think. Look it up.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brenidi14

Originally posted by WWu777

Ok, but even if the video convinces me that abortion is wrong, that doesn't mean that going through with an unwanted pregnancy is the "best thing" for everyone involved. Reread the reasons above on why the "best thing" and the "right thing" are not always the same thing.

Let me ask you: How would you like to be put into a 20 year unpaid job that you couldn't get out of if you started it? How would you like to lose all your freedom for 20 years and beyond? What would you do in that situation? Would you panic at all? What if you were a freedom junkie that placed freedom as the highest value?



Are you saying a baby is like an unpaid job? Are you saying that a woman who has a child looses her freedom for 20 years and beyond?


Yes. Exactly. There is no question about it. In practical terms, that's what it is, no matter how you try to dress it up.

Worst of all, once you start you can't quit. Most things in life can be undone. But a child cannot be undone. That's why the consequences are beyond your imagination.


edit on 26-1-2012 by WWu777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by WWu777

Yes. Exactly. There is no question about it. In practical terms, that's what it is, no matter how you try to dress it up.

Worst of all, once you start you can't quit. Most things in life can be undone. But a child cannot be undone. That's why the consequences are beyond your imagination.


edit on 26-1-2012 by WWu777 because: (no reason given)


lol I'm sorry but I don't know in what world you live, but here in planet earth a child receives aid from the government, his father (orders by law from the Federals) and the local community, even a lot of churches and different organizations offer different type of aid and donations.

A mother who is raising her child also receives help from her family and friends, not to mention again, many different type of organizations.

Plan Wic or known also as WIC program is another government institution that provides free food and payments for the newborn.

Woman have been given birth ever since the beginning of society, when there was no government help or organizations that covered the child necessities.

Now, a lazy excuse to not raise a child and call it an unpaid job is other thing...



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Alright I just wrote a whole essay on this topic. Here it is. I hope you find it interesting and gives you something to think about.

Why Abortion Is Not A Simple Matter of Right or Wrong Ethics

To those who believe that "Abortion is wrong, it is murder" let me try to open your mind to a larger perspective. I am not going to present any standard pro-choice arguments here about a woman's right to choose and do what they want with their own body, etc. I am not going to tell you that you are wrong either, but show you that this is not a simple black and white issue of ethics, by giving you a lot more to consider. To really understand this issue, you have to understand the consequences, outcomes and effects involved from a larger picture perspective. Also, when you realize that your "moral logic" is inconsistent and largely subjective, relative and situational, you will realize that this is a complex gray area issue, not a black and white one.

So for a few minutes, please turn off your moral righteousness and ethical prejudices, and try to look at this issue sympathetically and rationally, from a larger perspective, as I lay out the decision tree and consequences below.

Let me first say that an unwanted pregnancy is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. It's a decision between two negative choices. It's one of the most terrible situations in life that one can possible face, and it's better never to have to face it.

No one is really "pro-abortion". Abortion is a horrible and gruesome thing, but so is going through with an unwanted pregnancy. Both are terrible. The only real questions at stake for those involved here are: Which of the two negative choices is more tolerable for me? Which can I live with better? Which will have a lesser damaging effect on my life? Which is in my best interest?

You see, those involved in an unwanted pregnancy faces only two real choices:

1. Do something that most people feel is "wrong" by getting an abortion, feel guilty and sad about it for a few weeks, and then resume your normal life again afterward.
2. Go through with an unwanted pregnancy because others say "abortion is wrong". Then be forced to commit to a 20+ year unpaid job that you can't get out of, which will imprison you and takes away your freedom. And during the process, be leeched and drained of your time, energy, resources and emotions - essentially suffering 20+ years of regret and imprisonment.


A person faced with the dire decision above will NOT be concerned with "Which is the right morally correct choice?" They would be asking these key important questions:

Which of the two negative choices can I live with better? Which is more tolerable? Which would damage my life less? Which is better for my self-interest and goals?

And so would you! Anyone can preach morals, but when you are faced with those two dire choices, you will be thinking about the consequences to yourself, not the morals. Now if you KNOW that you absolutely CANNOT tolerate #2, then you might go with #1, regardless of the "morality" of it or condemnation from others (whose freedom is not at stake). So for you, #1 might be the more rational/logical choice. It's not a right or wrong issue. It's just a choice you have to make.

Now, one might realize that #1 is far more tolerable and manageable than #2. So by choosing #1, they would be making a rational/logical choice for themselves - not a moral one. Suppose you were a poor mom in a third world country who already had kids and you accidentally got pregnant again, and you knew that you could NOT afford to support another kid cause, and neither would you have the energy for it. Well in that case, choosing #1 might be a more rational choice for you that is best for all involved.

You see, when there are dire consequences at stake, not everyone cares about moral condemnation from others anyway. You can't expect everyone to make simple "morally correct" choices when there are serious, permanent and overwhelming consequences at stake. In reality, when survival, self-preservation and imprisonment comes into play, morals usually take a backseat. This is because our survival instinct is at the root of our behaviors. It is first and foremost in all living beings. Moral ethics, which were developed to allow humans to get along with others, are secondary. So it is irrational and unrealistic to expect that people will place morality and ethics above their survival instinct. You have to understand that.

That's why with the abortion issue, sometimes the survival instinct (or selfish instinct, whatever you want to call it) can kick in and take precedence over the moral issue. The universe does not live by a "moral code". If it did, nature would not set up an animal kingdom of predators and prey, or allow volcanoes, tsunamis and hurricanes to kill people, or allow disease to infect people and animals, etc.

(continued)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Part 2: (they need to loosen up the size limits on each post a bit, they are way too small)

Remember, God and Mother Nature have no morals either - about letting animals, insects and plants die every second, or allowing innocent people to suffer, or allowing good/innocent people to die young and evil people to thrive and prosper either. So there does not seem to be any objective "divine moral code" that governs all of creation. Morality is something that humans create, not some universal divine law that governs the universe.

Sometimes you gotta do what's best for you. As already explained, survival and self-preservation often takes precedent over "morally correct choices". It's not right or wrong; it's just reality. No one likes to admit that publicly, but it's true. There is no perfect world in which the best choices are always the morally correct ones.

I know that doesn't sound good. But you have to be realistic here. No one (at least not most people) can always make the morally correct choice in every decision and action. No one is a saint. But we are all hypocrites in that we hold others to the standards of a saint which we ourselves do not live up to. Everyone (at least most) has skeletons in the closet that would bring moral condemnation from others if exposed out in the open.

As the saying goes: "People do not like to do what's right. They like to TELL others to do what's right."

For example, let's take a hypothetical situation: Suppose Bill Gates accidentally deposited $500,000 into your bank account, and he never noticed it. Now, would you contact him and tell him about it, or keep it and never tell him about it? Would you think: "$500k to him is nothing. It's just pocket change to him. He'll never notice or care that he's missing that amount. I need it A LOT MORE than he does." Of course, publicly you might say that you'd report it because it's the "right and morally correct choice". But in REALITY and PRIVATELY, you KNOW you would probably keep it under the rationale and excuse: "I need this money more than he does. And besides, it was his mistake, not mine." Most people would probably do that, and never tell anyone about it of course. They would never post about it on a forum and try to debate the "morality" of it with others either, because they know that everyone would condemn them. Most of you KNOW that YOU WOULD just keep it, because in this scenario, your "survival instinct" would override your "moral instinct". The benefits and gains would overshadow the "moral ethics" (which bring you nothing), especially if you were badly in need of money. So stop pretending that you are all saints who hold other people to the standard of a saint. You are hypocrites and you know it!

Besides, most of you are also hypocrites for condoning the slaughter of cows, chickens and pigs, (and eating them) while condemning the slaughter of dogs and cats. And you are hypocrites for condoning hunters who shoot ducks and deer. Who are you to decide which life of which species is sacred and valuable, and which isn't? Should an advanced alien race have a right to eat you for food too? Just because you are human doesn't mean that human life is the most sacred thing in the objective universe. A higher more advanced race than you might think otherwise. There's simply no consistency in your thinking and moral standards.

If killing were morally wrong, then those who kill and eat animals would be punished by karma and universal retribution right away, wouldn't they? Yet many meat eaters live long and healthy lives. Why is that? If no "divine punishment" from God or karma comes down on those who kill and eat animals, why would it on those who do abortions?

If killing were ethically wrong and punishable by karma, then is your immune system guilty of killing all the harmful bacteria that it kills everyday? Should karma punish you and your immune system?

If killing was a sin punishable by karma or God, then how come George Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, who started the Iraq War and killed over a million people, have gone unpunished by the universe, and are wealthier than ever? How come the US officials who started the Vietnam War lived long and healthy lives? How come Joseph Stalin, who killed more people than Hitler, lived to a ripe old age? Yet, Robert Kennedy, a man with great compassion for others, gets gunned down and dies young? Where is all the karmic retribution or divine justice in that?

If you are a man, every time you ejaculate, you kill thousands of sperm, even during sex. Does that make you a mass murderer? Should "divine punishment" come upon you for that? If you are a woman, every time you go through menstruation, you kill thousands of fertilized eggs. Does that make you a mass murderer? Should "divine punishment" befall you for that?

(continued)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Part 3:

Where's the consistency?! If the actions above are not punished by some God or karma of "divine moral law", then why would those who do abortions be?

See this clip from a show by the late George Carlin where he makes these same arguments and ridicules the inconsistency of our "moral logic" and "sanctity of life":



So you see, under casual scrutiny, the "moral logic" of most humans falls apart and is shown to be inconsistent, subjective, situational and relative. Human morality is not some "divine law" handed down by God. It is a code of ethics humans created to help ensure the survival and cooperation of our species. The "moral conscience" you have in your subconscious that makes you feel guilty when you do something wrong is not something that God put into you. It's the result of the moral behaviors and beliefs of all your ancestors that have become ingrained into your DNA. It's the same reason why a kitten is born with an expert instinct to catch mice, and a knowing of what it can eat and what it can't. It's the same way animals know that they are supposed to run from predators. God didn't teach them to. It's simply ingrained into their DNA as an instinct from the past behavior of their ancestors.

This is why our survival instinct tends to override our moral instinct. Our need to survive comes first and foremost. It is the root instinct of all life and comes before all other instincts. It also precedes any "moral code" we develop to get along with others. So naturally, when survival and morals come into conflict, we will choose survival. As the saying goes, "One can only have morals if one can afford them."

Finally, don't you don't think forcing a woman to go through an unwanted pregnancy is cruel? Think about that. A man can just run away from an unwanted pregnancy, but a woman is stuck with the child. An unwanted pregnancy forces the parent to endure 20 years of an unpaid job in which she loses all her freedom and becomes enslaved to another. Would you like someone forcing that upon you?

So I hope you see now that this abortion issue is not a simple matter of black and white ethics, but a complex issue that involves a lot more than basic morality. I hope these points help you to see it from a larger perspective, so that you can show some sympathy, understanding and rationality in the matter.

Thank you for reading. You may now switch your "moral righteousness and ethical prejudices" back on (if you really turned it off that is).

Addendum: A Few Subpoints

- Outlawing abortion is a stupid thing. Women who are intent on having abortions will resort to try more dangerous and unsafe underground ways of getting it. If they are going to do it, it should be done safely at least. Nowadays, if they do it early, they only have to take a series of pills such as RU486.

- Science and the Journal of Geriatrics say that a fetus is not a sentient being. It has no mind, thoughts or consciousness. You can look this up.

- Christian pro-lifers lie when they say that abortion is dangerous. In reality, childbirth is far more dangerous and results in far more deaths than abortion does. But of course, they don't want you to know that because it doesn't support their side.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   
For those who think having a child is a blessing, let me give you a dose of reality. I'm sorry but it IS IMPRISONMENT! LITERALLY! When you have a toddler, he COMPLETELY DOMINATES every moment. You have NO privacy at all, no free time, you can't even make love to your partner, because he DOMINATES every minute of your life like a total TYRANT! My son does not even leave his mother alone for even 10 seconds! Even when she goes to the toilet or tries to take a shower, he has to follow her there! He does not even give her even 10 seconds of freedom! How are we supposed to make love? With him watching?!

What do you call that?!

What do you call a total tyrant and narcissist who pulls your attention to him 24/7?!

What else could it be but enslavement and imprisonment?!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join