Lol, just google it.  To be honest, you may have to do a bit of research about it as there is a bit of debate about what exactly these people believed.  But hey, I don't think it would be too difficult to find stuff out.  I mean, you could always work at an abortion clinic.

as far as living cells go, I do feel there is some respect due to them..
It's the same respect one ought to give to plants and animals other than human.
Of course, I don't think many Americans respect anything or anyone but themselves.



I guess I'll get my two cents out.   I think abortion is okay...

There should definitely be respect and deep contemplation concerning the matter, but in the end, it's little more than a group of cells..  I doubt there is some kind of tallied value of 'deed points' lossed in having an abortion, or in all of histories abortions combined. Life of all sorts is starting and ending constantly around you.

As far as I know, nature goes unchanged no matter what devastates it, no matter how many humans are murdered.. and If humans ceased to exist the World would continue..  Because it's not only our domain, nor are we the owners of it.



Human life is almost too abundant right now.  In a civilized and perhaps over populated world, maybe giving birth should be a privilege given by respected authorities.  Having attained higher brain functions and creating advanced technology, the likes of which have possibly never existed in all the universe, we need to keep our species in check, and 'articifically evolve', as we've become too comfortable to do it naturally.  So 'soon' I feel the right of child birth should maybe be removed in favor of a controlled and superior procreational method.

I don't mean to get too scientific (or science fictiony :p), but I think while the individual should be noted, the human race should be preserved, and embracing technology is the way to do it.  Having millions of children growing up in unhealthy, uneducated, and disrespectful homes is not the way to progress the human race.
We've well reached a moment in civilized living where simply finding a mate and bearing a child is no longer so intensely necessary for the survival of the species.

Animals with low survival rates tend to give birth to an amazing number of children (hundreds of millions for some creatures!), and while most of them get eaten, the few surviving will live to breed and continue this necessity in order for the species to thrive.

With humans, we typically only have one child.. And in comfortable living in a society without predators and other threats of survival, it seems possible to me that bearing a single child may even naturally become more difficult, or less possible per individual.

Looking back at the animal giving birth to millions of children, do you see how many are killed or die?..  How few of them even survive to continue extending the life of this species?  In this way, it makes the human life even less valuable, than the life of this struggling creature.


I certainly don't have all the answers, but I definitely know that there needs to be a new attitude and respect for life in general, and imposing ancient religious beliefs is not a good path to take.  Religion needs to end, and in doing so, make way for a common spirituality between individuals that includes no angry or selfish gods.

All hail Molech!

Jarvik7 wrote:

All hail Molech!

If you are wanting a path that worships pleasure, get into Tantric Sex.  I used to live in a Polyamorous Tantric Sex community on Maui back in 2000.   It was a retreat started by Charles Muir who brought Tantric sex to the west back in the 60's.  I got to be interviewed on the TV show Inside Edition when they came to Hawaii and documented it 

igordesu wrote:

@Tobberoth: Well, an unfertilized egg or sperm all by itself really have no potential for becoming a human being.  However, they do when they are together, and for that reason I do not support "killing" these cells.  They have a chance for a future.

No no, you can't do that. If you say 'potential' you can't be selective. Sperm has the potential to bind with an egg, giving it the potential to become a child, which has the potential to become a human being. By that standard then, this same potential human also has the potential to become a criminal, to kill other people. Or has the potential to grow up suffering and commit suicide.

So do you think that people should be put into prison or punished for potential crimes?

You really gotta be consistent here. You can't just say one 'potential' is more worth protecting than another.

Last edited by alyks (2009 January 22, 5:30 pm)

igordesu wrote:

Another interesting point.  The reasons that people have abortions are often selfish.  Example, people think they won't have a baby b/c they are using contraceptions or something, but then they get pregnant.  So, they decide that they want to keep on having sex but not have to deal with a baby, and then they abort it.  This is the same thing that people did thousands of years ago.  In the middle east, people sacrificed their babies to the god, Molech, who was supposedly the god of pleasure.  To me, that sounds like the same thing.

Sweeping judgments and comparing other people's actions to worshiping a false idol and homicide.  So of course according to your religion you're basically damning them.  How very Christ like of you.

Last edited by cracky (2009 January 22, 6:07 pm)

phauna wrote:

igordesu wrote:

Of course, all of that is merely my reasoning from a non-faith perspective.

You must come to terms with the fact that *everything* you say is from a faith perspective.  You are trying to explain your already solidified convictions in a non-religious way to add weight to them.

There is no logical reason to allow a retarded or disabled baby to be born if you know beforehand that it will suffer.  There is no scientific reason to think that a few cells dividing in your body are equivalent to a baby.  Lots of foetuses self-abort anyway, naturally, what say you to that?

You might notice that most people on this thread disagree with you and are faithless.  They are basing their convictions on their knowledge and logic, before deciding what to think.  They are not deciding their stance first and retroactively trying to come up with excuses for it.

Nobody, anywhere is faithless.  People on this thread (a majority whom I assume are maybe atheist or...otherwise) take just as much on faith as I do.  I have faith that a supreme being or God created the universe and instituted an absolute ethical code.  However, I cannot prove it.  But it is the same way with atheists.  Their reasoning comes from their belief that there is no God, even though that can prove no such thing.

Now, I guess after thinking this issue over, there really is no logical reason to condemn abortion w/o faith in some "God" (I use the term "God" loosely...).  *If* I was an atheist, I would be an avid supporter of abortion (then again, I think we hashed out the supposed "ethics w/o God" issue quite enough earlier in this thread).  However, I have a question (and this really, seriously is an honest question, not a rhetorical one).  Let's say there's a woman pregnant with a baby.  She's not planning on having an abortion and is really looking forward to having baby and the whole family thing.  If I went and killed the unborn baby (somehow), but did not kill her, by your logic you could not call me a murder.  Correct? 

Jasta wrote:

@igordesu: if the mother who was raped can't cope with raising the child, can't give the appropriate love a mother needs to give, then do you think the baby will grow up an be able to function in a normal way? You condemn that child to grow up in a broken, malfunctioning single parent family. I would say you denying abortion in a case like this is selfish.
I support for the most what is being said about overpopulation. Having large families is not wrong per se, but given the limited resources on the planet you could call this selfish as well, more then the raped woman who aborts some cells.
So no, I don't believe forcing people to have babies they don't want, just because god said so, is the way to go.

I have a great Aunt who was raped by a Puertorican man as a teenager.  She considered getting an abortion, but she didn't.  And now, the man has grown up and become a great member of the family.  He is the only one of his brothers w/o blond hair.  He "looks different".  He now has a family, and he is a great contributing member of society (and a Christian).  In fact, it is because of this man that we know more about our family's heritage; ironically, he has done a lot of research about our ancestors and which parts of Europe our family is from.  So, I still stand by what I said.  To kill your unborn baby because of what the baby's father did is stupid.

Also, my mother almost got an abortion.  Yeah, um...I'm glad she didn't.  I wouldn't be here debating with you sillies if she would have (I can tell, some of are thinking "what a relief that would be...").

igordesu wrote:

Now, I guess after thinking this issue over, there really is no logical reason to condemn abortion w/o faith in some "God" (I use the term "God" loosely...).  *If* I was an atheist, I would be an avid supporter of abortion (then again, I think we hashed out the supposed "ethics w/o God" issue quite enough earlier in this thread).  However, I have a question (and this really, seriously is an honest question, not a rhetorical one).

That's crap? Why does God have to tell you that it's wrong to abort a fetus? Listen, your morals do not have to come from something else. Ditch the groupthink and figure this stuff out for yourself.

Let's say there's a woman pregnant with a baby.  She's not planning on having an abortion and is really looking forward to having baby and the whole family thing.  If I went and killed the unborn baby (somehow), but did not kill her, by your logic you could not call me a murder.  Correct?

That would be assault (on the mother) of some kind I'm sure. Any lawyers here?

Last edited by alyks (2009 January 22, 10:17 pm)

What makes it specifically wrong if there is no God?  There are simply no true ethics without (a) God to put them there.  You say "figure it out on your own".  Figure what out?  If there is no God and the universe is all there is, then we're all just part of the universe.  Nothing is right, nothing is wrong, we just are.  There is just existence.  We can do whatever we want.  We can create rules for ourselves to accomplish things (like get along with others for mutual benefits, etc.), but if we break those rules, who's to say we're "a bad person".  My mom?  You're mom?  The rest of the box?

No, it's not murder, and it's only anti-abortion activists who try to promote the idea that it is.
I do respect you in a way, for having enough consistency in your "abortion = murder" belief to stick with it no matter the circumstances of conception.  But please examine your belief that ethics must be derived from God.  I don't mind if you consider your own ethics to be derived from God, but it's not true of everyone, as hard as it may be for you to believe.  There are atheists who are against abortion, and some who are pro-capital punishment (I don't really get how the Bible can be considered unambiguously pro-capital punishment anyway, and neither do a lot of Christians, but whatever).

igordesu wrote:

I didn't ask if it was assault.  I asked if it was "murder".

Obviously it's not murder, but it is an assault upon the woman.  A few cells die, she can try again, presumably.  You are taking something away from the woman, perhaps it's more like the theft of an opportunity.

I suppose you also object to contraception, and perhaps the morning after pill.  I don't know how many condoms I've been wearing that have broken but the number is more than 0, and each time we went and got the morning after pill, just in case.  I now have kids with my wife, but earlier we took the morning after pill, is it okay that we just didn't want kids then?  I've made up for any losses, so to speak.  Do you really think preventing the implantation of an egg into the uterus wall is murder?  What about an IUD, the egg fertilises, but when it gets to the uterus it doesn't implant.  Is that murder, but using a condom is okay because the sperm and ovum haven't met yet?  It's all potential as you say.

As to faith, the context was religious faith.  Believing in something which has evidence which I have not seen first-hand,  but is available to me at any time is not the same as believing in something which has no evidence.  I don't have to actually perform experiments before I'm allowed to believe some scientific law because there are scientists who have already done the work and their conclusions are freely available if I need to see them.  God has no evidence, the bible is fiction, and your religion never changes with increased worldly knowledge or in different situations.

@ phauna (and this really is my last post):

As far as evidence supporting your theories or "faith", I am very, very interested.  You must know some very smart scientists indeed if you think they are able to prove the existence or non-existence of a creator or being outside of this universe.  And for the record, intelligent design is a viable and at least debatable theory in realm of science.

Igordesu, like everything else in life: it depends. Early on in pregnancy, it would be assault on the mother. This happens many times in abuse cases. The assailant is not charged with murder.

Now, here's the exception: How long has the pregnancy been going? If it's in the 2nd or 3rd trimester, you can be charged by the state (in the US at least) with murder. At a certain point, the state begins to assume that that unborn child is meant to live. In fact, the state can dictate that abortion will not occur after a point unless certain conditions are met (usually life of the mother). So, although it's not born and given citizenship status, it's still a human life and subject to protections there in (similar to how a Canadian is not a US Citizen, but you can't go about killing Canadians in New York without getting a murder charge).

See, no reason to bring the Thunder god Thor into this. We all know that without Thor, all of us would just blindly kill anything and everything. No reason to even consider otherwise. Thus, that's proof that Thor exists. Even those that worship false gods still pay homage to Thor by placing metal spikes atop their houses of worship to prevent the rage of Thor upon their false god's domicile.

All hail Thor.