Abortion questions...?

I don't think that's reasonable. What's next? The physics of the burning bush!? God is silent on those matters, but his book does say we have a soul. Really, we're talking about religious speculations here, not a conclusion based on factual information. I don't disagree that we'll find some inconsistencies. 'Cause god's book doesn't say they do. Non sequitor. The soul could be nonexistent before the union of the two haploids, or it could exist as a whole but not be subscribed to the individual yet.

We can't create such a lab. If and when we can, then we can revisit the question.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

All of that should be included, but all studies have shown that abstinence only education increases the rate of teen pregnancy. If you don't teach them how to avoid if they are going to have sex (because no matter how hard prudes and holier-than-thous scream ABSTINENCE, some kids aren't going to listen), then teen pregnancies will continue to be a problem.Let me ask you this; which is worse, educating kids about avoiding pregnancy or more abortions, because that is your choice. If you truly are concerned about lowering the abortion rate, the single most effective thing you can do is educate. Why do you hate education?

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

​

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

​

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

​

...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

No. My position is that the point at which a fetus becomes a separate entity from its host is an arbitrary one. You have decided arbitrarily that an egg cell doesn't have a soul but a clump of 100 cells does. Based on that arbitrary decision or one similar to it, anti-abortion advocates are willing to call a woman a murderer.Edited by ringo, : Message was too pointy - changed one "point" to "position".

---

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

Well you were sort of accusing me of lying on this point, just so you remember ... You have this very twisted view of christians, and apply it to me constantly.I don't want to argue on semantics. But if being anti-abortion means someone who is against abortion, pro-abortion is nothing more then someone who is for abortion. I ascribe no pejorative connotations to the word. I can use pro-choice if it shocks you less.As for more information, I'll try to find the news article, but it'll be in french. But after the article, a political party wanted the government to impse a pro-choice certification, that would mean that you cannot counsel a pregnant woman if the organism isn't pro-choice.

Your assuming something is human simply because socially we say it is or not. If in the future, a 20 weeks old foetus can survive outside the womb, it will be considered a human, but at the same time right now it isn't ?

I'd like a link to those studies.But in any case, I'm not advocating some dumb ''abstinence only'' type education. I think that when a healthy view of relationships, sexuality, human psychology, marriage, fidelity, etc. is given to a children-teenager, then abstinence becomes a logical conclusion based on a solid foundation. I think of all worldviews, christianity provides the best foundation for this.

Ramen.It's far from clear from what you said, so I'll just ask; do you favor educating children about safe sex?

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

​

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

​

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

​

...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

Of course. If it is in French then it is very likely not about the US, which happens to be the laws we are discussing.Pro-choice and pro-abortion are not synonymous and yes, using them as though they were is very dishonest.Remember, I am a Christian, so it not that I have a twisted view of "Christians" but rather find many positions held by Christians to be abhorrent and immoral as well as simply based on ignorance and the misrepresentations by much of the US Christian Clergy.I have no idea about you, I can only address the content of your posts.I don't know of anyone that is for abortion. Abortions are not generally taken lightly. BUT stop and think. Even when it was illegal to perform abortions, abortions happened. If you make them illegal, they will continue to happen. The only difference is that the will not happen under trained care in sanitary conditions.Remember, it was Christians, particularly the Southern Baptists, that were at the forefront of legalizing abortion in the US. It was a moral decision.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

But I haven't truly arbitrarily chosen where I put the line. I have exposed my reasoning on this.You have based your reasoning on our current technological development. And yet I would never judge a woman in such a harsh way, because she is also a victim of the abortion issue. She is the victim of a society who has lied to her, victim of the man amongst us who think with their dick and not their head.

So when we socially decided black people weren't humans, they weren't ? And when we decided they were humans, they suddenly became humans ?I have much difficulty of this view that reality conforms to the definition we make. Pro-abortion means you are for abortion to be legal. Nothing more then that. It doesn't mean someone absolutely wants to kill the most foetuses it can ... Which tells us that the issue of abortion isn't about the legality of it. It is about how we, as a society view it.I am advocating that we should encourage a solid moral foundations, which I think is christianity, in which the illegal aspect of abortion would be a natural outflow, as would the joyful aspect of giving life, even if not in the best circumstances.

But guess what, when talking about a society reality does conform to the definitions the society makes. Perhaps to you but not to the rest of the world. I'm sorry but that comes across as word salad.Again, I am a Christian, the legalization of abortion in the US was driven by Christians.I do not see any indication that Christianity is any more moral a foundation then many other options including atheism.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

We're talking about souls here and you've admitted that you don't have the answers. How has society lied to her? I looks to me like society is at least willing to let her make her own choices. If a man has victimized her, the anti-abortion advocates want to victimize her again by forcing her to carry through the pregnancy.Edited by ringo, : pelling.

---

"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"

You'd be shocked to find out that in the US it is not. Source

quote:

---

Although published surveys report 68% to 75% of adults have supported distributing condoms in schools (Fanburg, Kaplan, & Naylor, 1995), more than half of students in the United States are being taught abstinence-only curricula.

​

Twenty-one of the fifty states have school districts which provide condom availability programs.

​

This debate includes many parents taking on the school system to get rid of condom availability in their children’s schools, citing such reasons as their fundamental right to remain free from governmental interference with their child rearing, their rights to familial privacy, parental liberty, and religious freedom.

---

More than half teach abstinance only, only 21 states have condoms in the schools for availability, and the on going debate in those schools from the parents is to get rid of them. So no, there is no real focus on condoms. You are trying to subdue natural, biological effects of puberty...that is to be laughed at. But that doesn't help us here in the US. And I'm sure Canada would hate if we sent them all of our single moms. Yeah, but you could care less about the child once it is born. It's ok to admit that, I openly admit it too. I don't care about other people's children to the point of wanting to involve myself in their lives to help them, no one does.Like with Haiti. Sure, I sent money after the earthquake, we all did. But no one ever gave a shit about Haiti a week before the earthquake, when they REALLY needed the money to build a normal society that wouldn't fall apart during a quake.How much did you send to Haiti before the earthquake? Zero. Sure, we can all get on our self-righteous high horse and show concern for Haiti after the quake, when it was trendy to do so. But if someone came to me/you/anyone 5 years ago asking for money to build an infrastructure in Haiti, we would have told them to fuck off. As we do for every other country.Some honesty, at least, and consistency, please, because we are all, for the most part, centered around our own lives. We are only concerned superficially.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

If it happened today, right in front of you, would you assume supernatural forces, or would you do science to try and figure it out? I'm just tryin' to do some sciencin' here, dude. These are claimed as fact, by those who believe it. So some proof might be nice, they would vote against it for christ sake. Cool, I agree. Or there could be no soul at all; we just don't know. There is no evidence in either case and that was the point I was trying to make.More to the point though, it is evidencially not murder or immoral to destroy a daploid cell any more than it would be murder or immoral to destroy a haploid cell when you masterbate, or pull out, or have a wet dream. Which, as you see, many here claimed the former is murder and immoral but not the latter, when they are literally the same thing.- Oni