Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evangelical Switch from Pro-choice to Anti-abortion
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 61 of 441 (837091)
07-26-2018 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Tangle
07-26-2018 8:42 AM


Re: Just a few more facts.
Tangle writes:
Maybe it would help if you clarified something for me. I can't conceive (sorry) of any circumstances where it is not a harm - of whatever level - to have an elective abortion. We are quite obviously destroying a potential life which must be a harm, surely?
I would hazard a guess that the number natural abortions is several orders of magnitude higher than man caused abortions. Numbers range from 25-50% of conceptions ending in natural abortions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Tangle, posted 07-26-2018 8:42 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 07-26-2018 6:23 PM Taq has replied
 Message 96 by Tangle, posted 07-28-2018 2:08 PM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 62 of 441 (837092)
07-26-2018 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
07-19-2018 5:25 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
Faith writes:
Oh come on Taq. The ultrasound shows a living breathing baby, all its parts intact even down to the toes on its feet, its heart beating, even sometimes sucking its thumb, at only twelve weeks in the womb and an inch or two in length. It isn't a shapeless blob, it doesn't look like a fish, it looks like a human baby.
There are also adults who are brain dead, and we take them off of life support because what makes them human is gone. All I am saying is that what makes human's unique isn't sucking a thumb.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 07-19-2018 5:25 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Faith, posted 07-26-2018 6:17 PM Taq has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 63 of 441 (837096)
07-26-2018 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Taq
07-26-2018 5:37 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
Taq writes:
The more human something looks the more value we put on it.
And how much it is wanted. A woman who wants a baby will be devasted about miscarrying while a woman who doesn't want a baby will be more likely to think of it like a gangrenous toe.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Taq, posted 07-26-2018 5:37 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 07-27-2018 12:32 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 64 of 441 (837098)
07-26-2018 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Taq
07-26-2018 5:43 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
There are also adults who are brain dead, and we take them off of life support because what makes them human is gone. All I am saying is that what makes human's unique isn't sucking a thumb.
Oh come ON! Surely you can see what's wrong with your own logic if you'd just stop and think about it for half a second. The brain dead are not coming back, the tiny living human being sucking its thumb is going to grow to be a living baby and adult human being under normal circumstances if we don't kill it.
Far as I know the brain-dead aren't capable of a simple action like sucking their thumbs, but it's a sign that it is a real living human baby that does it at twelve weeks in the womb.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Taq, posted 07-26-2018 5:43 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Taq, posted 07-27-2018 12:26 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 65 of 441 (837099)
07-26-2018 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Taq
07-26-2018 5:39 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
I would hazard a guess that the number natural abortions is several orders of magnitude higher than man caused abortions. Numbers range from 25-50% of conceptions ending in natural abortions.
People die of all kinds of causes all the time, including in the womb, but that is never a reason to intentionally kill a person at any stage of life, including in the womb.
And to answer your other point, no if we aren't aware of it we have no responsibility for it, meaning the fertilized egg that fails to implant, and as Tangle said, we don't treat miscarriages as human beings because they don't have legal standing although parents may have enough feeling about it to do something to commemorate its short life.
The meaningful category here is our KNOWLEDGE that we are dealing with a human life, such as that a recognized pregnancy implies a growing human being; that fact alone is what engages our conscience. All the other questions really don't change this fact. The word "conscience" means "with knowledge."
Oh but now I can anticipate another logical trap: I think we KNOW when we are dealing with a living human being in the womb even when we rationalize it away, as I did when I had an abortion at age twenty. I dreamed about the child I'd aborted, which shows I did know though I didn't want to know.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Taq, posted 07-26-2018 5:39 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Taq, posted 07-27-2018 12:28 PM Faith has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 66 of 441 (837130)
07-27-2018 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Faith
07-26-2018 6:17 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
Faith writes:
The brain dead are not coming back, . . .
That comment supports what I am saying. It is mental capacity that defines humanity, not the arrangement of body parts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Faith, posted 07-26-2018 6:17 PM Faith has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 67 of 441 (837132)
07-27-2018 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Faith
07-26-2018 6:23 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
Faith writes:
People die of all kinds of causes all the time, including in the womb, but that is never a reason to intentionally kill a person at any stage of life, including in the womb.
Do we treat natural abortions the same as we do someone dying of cancer or heart disease? We don't, do we? Why is that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Faith, posted 07-26-2018 6:23 PM Faith has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 68 of 441 (837133)
07-27-2018 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by ringo
07-26-2018 5:56 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
ringo writes:
And how much it is wanted. A woman who wants a baby will be devasted about miscarrying while a woman who doesn't want a baby will be more likely to think of it like a gangrenous toe.
Agreed. There are deep human emotions tied to pregnancy and children which are an inextricable part of any discussion of abortion and abortion rights.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by ringo, posted 07-26-2018 5:56 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 69 of 441 (837140)
07-27-2018 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Tangle
07-26-2018 8:42 AM


Re: Just a few more facts.
Tangle writes:
Maybe it would help if you clarified something for me. I can't conceive (sorry) of any circumstances where it is not a harm - of whatever level - to have an elective abortion. We are quite obviously destroying a potential life which must be a harm, surely?
I still mostly have questions. Is there a continuum from "not human life" to "potential human life" to "human life"?
Or are they step functions that happen at instants in time? Is a sperm or egg "not human lie" or "potential human life"? Are a sperm and egg about to unite "potential human life", or only after they unite? When does "potential human life" become "human life"? Is harm to "potential human life" the same type of harm as to "human life"? Is "potential human life" the right term, or should it be "unborn human life"?
I understand the flip side of the coin, too. Is it murder to kill a baby about to be born? Few would answer no. Is it murder to kill a baby hours before it is born? Few would still answer no. Is it murder to kill a baby weeks before it is born? The majority would still answer no, but not as large a majority as before. Are those who changed their answer wrong? As you recede along the continuum to earlier and earlier stages of development and more and more people say that it isn't murder, including saying that "murder" and "kill" are no longer the correct terms, what does this say about the appropriateness of attempting to use the single term "harm", since its meaning necessarily changes with context? And should harm include elements outside strict biology, such as what harm is done bringing an unwanted baby into the world?
I don't have answers to these questions, and I don't believe there are unequivocal answers, which is why I don't have answers. My only answer is that abortion is a personal decision.
I know you believe these are the wrong questions, but your line of argument appears to be that if I ask your questions and accept your answers then I'll agree with you, and this is undoubtedly true. The reverse, you accepting my questions and my lack of answers causing you to agree with me, is also true. But why should I accept your questions or you mine without any persuasive element. My lack of answers leaves me unarmed for a persuasive effort.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Tangle, posted 07-26-2018 8:42 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 07-27-2018 2:58 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 72 by Faith, posted 07-27-2018 6:13 PM Percy has replied
 Message 73 by Faith, posted 07-27-2018 8:02 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 97 by Tangle, posted 07-28-2018 2:44 PM Percy has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 70 of 441 (837141)
07-27-2018 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Percy
07-27-2018 2:37 PM


Some thoughts
The best way to prevent abortion is to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Making contraception and good information about contraception available seems to be the most effective way. And that includes sex education in schools.
If you are going to have abortions at all, earlier abortions are better than later abortions. Legal abortion without stigma helps here. As a general rule, the harder it is to obtain an abortion the greater the average delay.
A complete ban on abortion has obvious problems. Are you going to make a woman give birth to her rapist’s child ? Continue with a pregnancy that is likely to kill her ? Carry a foetus with no chance of survival outside the womb ?
Consider the case of Savita Halappanavar. Even though she was miscarrying at 17 weeks the doctors refused to terminate the pregnancy. They also missed the sepsis that killed her - a known risk. Had they terminated the pregnancy she would very likely be alive today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Percy, posted 07-27-2018 2:37 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by PaulK, posted 07-27-2018 4:53 PM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 71 of 441 (837143)
07-27-2018 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by PaulK
07-27-2018 2:58 PM


Ugghh
Here’s another reason why women should not be forced to continue with unwanted pregnancies - in the US. The care in America’s maternity wards is well below what it should be, with a death rate much higher than other developed countries. We don’t know how bad it really is because the figures aren’t available. Which is a bit of a red flag in itself. The reality may even be worse than the estimates.
Ars Technica

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 07-27-2018 2:58 PM PaulK has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 72 of 441 (837145)
07-27-2018 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Percy
07-27-2018 2:37 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
I've been looking forward to Tangle's coming back to this thread but since he seems to be occupied elsewhere I'll give my understanding of his position which is similar to mine anyway. He can correct me.
It isn't a potential human life until conception and, if it's healthy and we don't interfere with it, from conception it will continue to grow to become a fullfledged human being, so it is morally wrong to terminate it at any time from conception to birth. Once it's underway and developing it is a potential human life so that if we kill it we know we are killing a potential human being and we know at some level this is wrong.
I would prefer to call it simply a human being at different stages of life because the term "potential" distances us from its inherent humanness. All the concern to label each stage separately is just a way to obscure the fact that it is a human being at some stage or other of life.
Tangle is not arguing specifically against abortion, he's arguing that we shouldn't deceive ourselves that it is not a human life, but should be aware that if we choose abortion we are killing a potential human life, a life that is inexorable and inevitable if we don't kill it. I would argue against abortion myself except where the mother's life is threatened, and as Tangle pointed out, it would still be a "harm" even for that reason.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Percy, posted 07-27-2018 2:37 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Percy, posted 07-28-2018 8:46 AM Faith has replied
 Message 205 by LamarkNewAge, posted 08-05-2018 3:21 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 73 of 441 (837150)
07-27-2018 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Percy
07-27-2018 2:37 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
As for the fact that people respond emotionally to the different stages so that they would call it murder in the later stages but be less inclined to call it murder when it's just starting to grow, with a continuum in between, I think Tangle pointed this out himself. It's a subjective thing: the earlier its development the less emotional we are about it. But that doesn't change the objective fact that once conception has taken place it's in the process of growing and developing until we recognize it as a full term baby in nine months. It looks more and more like a baby as it grows (though surprisingly already fully formed at twelve weeks) so it engages our feelings and our conscience more and more as it grows. But again, objectively, as long as it is growing and developing normally, is following the human pattern laid down by its DNA, there is no reason to regard it as anything but a human life from conception. Unless you think defining it purely subjectively is the right thing to do.
The abortion I had was at less than eight weeks and nevertheless I dreamed about losing an actual child.
I agree with Tangle that despite our ability to rationalize it away more easily the earlier the stage, we must know it's a potential human being and that engages our conscience so that whether we admit it or not we know we are killing a human life.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Percy, posted 07-27-2018 2:37 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 74 of 441 (837162)
07-28-2018 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Faith
07-27-2018 6:13 PM


Re: Just a few more facts.
Faith writes:
It isn't a potential human life until conception...
Why isn't a sperm or an egg potential human life?
...and, if it's healthy and we don't interfere with it, from conception it will continue to grow to become a full fledged human being,...
Yes, that's very likely.
...so it is morally wrong to terminate it at any time from conception to birth.
Why is it morally wrong? Is it equally morally wrong to terminate at any point after conception, or is there a scale of increasing morally wrong from conception to birth?
Once it's underway and developing it is a potential human life so that if we kill it we know we are killing a potential human being and we know at some level this is wrong.
At what level do we know it is wrong, and why? Is "kill" the right term, or is it really just interrupting a process?
I would prefer to call it simply a human being at different stages of life because the term "potential" distances us from its inherent humanness. All the concern to label each stage separately is just a way to obscure the fact that it is a human being at some stage or other of life.
Well, yes, of course, you'd like to adjust your terminology and rhetoric toward maximum emotional impact.
Tangle is not arguing specifically against abortion, he's arguing that we shouldn't deceive ourselves that it is not a human life, but should be aware that if we choose abortion we are killing a potential human life, a life that is inexorable and inevitable if we don't kill it
"Harm" was the term Tangle used, not "kill".
I would argue against abortion myself except where the mother's life is threatened, and as Tangle pointed out, it would still be a "harm" even for that reason.
Given the multiplicity of contexts across which Tangle is applying the word "harm," is that really the right term?
You posted a second reply to my message, Message 73, but it's mostly the same argument, so I won't reply.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Faith, posted 07-27-2018 6:13 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Faith, posted 07-28-2018 10:21 AM Percy has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 75 of 441 (837163)
07-28-2018 8:50 AM


after all the philosophical masturbation gets boring these issues remain
The Roe v. Wade decision came down in 1973.
Before that time abortions happened but were not recorded or reported so there is no way to tell if the numbers were any more or less than post Roe v. Wade.
Abortions were performed by anyone willing to perform an abortion; quite often people with absolutely no medical training.
Abortions were performed in any place where it could be kept relatively secret but usually not in a doctor's office or a hospital.
There was no follow up care or counseling.
Abortions were a cash only transaction and totally off the books.
Is that really where we want to see US society go?
Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Phat, posted 07-28-2018 10:09 AM jar has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024