Vren55's Controversial thoughts Blog #2 Abortion Laws · 1:16am Mar 25th, 2016
I suppose this will be a regular thing for all of my followers, but if you are new here, this is what I do. I broach a topic, lay out my version, my opinions and thoughts on the matter and encourage feedback and a discussion to go on for which everybody can express his or her opinions in a nice environment. This blog post, unlike my previous one on pornography is going to a little more balanced because in this case my stance on laws banning or allowing abortions are..... undecided. I can't pick a side, whether it'd be legalizing abortion or banning abortion.
It shouldn't be a surprise that I'm religious (roman-Catholic) and so my viewpoint on abortion is that it is wrong, that it is equivalent to murder. Not saying that the mother is evil, but that the act itself is. While I've been told the fetus is nothing but a gathering of cells (particularly at conception) MY OPINION (ONLY MY OPINION AND SOME OTHERS) is that upon successful conception a soul is created and therefore killing it on purpose (i'm not talking about miscarriages here, which are more common than one may think) is murder.
Here's the problem, I'm really on the fence when it comes to abortion laws.
For example, I think what John Oliver describes here is terrible and I agree with him... for the most part. I mean the part about where loopholes are being made to prevent something that the people have legalized.
The thing is, I believe as a liberal western thinker, that people have the right to decide what they believe in, therefore if people do not think abortion is murder, and vote that abortion clinics are legal then one cannot obstruct abortion clinics from being built, or put ridiculous restrictions that prevent people from getting abortion.
I mean, I’d get annoyed if a person is getting an abortion because they for some reason didn’t use contraception when they knew about it, but that’s their right to do so. Obstructing that right to choose their system of morality is tantamount to a violation of human rights.
Which is why I have a major beef with pro-life people who argue that abortion should be made illegal when a lot of people disagree. They're forcing people who don't believe in what they believe in to adhere to their belief system. That's cultural imperialism. I also especially dislike it when they post pictures of foetuses getting cut apart because that’s abortion in the extreme cases and rarely happens as most doctors with common sense prefer to induce abortions, aka let it slide out rather than cutting it up and that can only be done early in the pregnancy.
And heck, even Catholicism should understand in theory that not everybody believes in the same scripture or system of morality, see Second Letter to the Romans, verses 12-16:
12 Some people do not know God’s law when they sin. They will not be judged by the law when they die. Others do know God’s law when they sin. They will be judged by the law. 13 Hearing the law does not make a person right with God. People are considered to be right with God only when they obey the law. 14 Gentiles do not have the law. Sometimes they just naturally do what the law requires. They are a law for themselves. This is true even though they don’t have the law.15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts. The way their minds judge them proves this fact. Sometimes their thoughts find them guilty. At other times their thoughts find them not guilty.16 This will happen on the day God appoints Jesus Christ to judge people’s secret thoughts. That’s part of my good news.
Essentially, Paul is explaining that if one does not know god, aka, does not believe in him because they do not know him, or do not know that the loves them, and therefore does not believe in god, then they cannot be held guilty as long as they obey the law.
This is when it gets complicated though. Catholicism and pro-lifers believe that abortion is murdering a child and I agree with that as well. And we all know murder is a crime and should be prevented no matter what the perpetrator thinks.
Problem, a lot of people, those who support pro-life, do not believe that abortion is murder and therefore they do not think it is a crime and that the mother has the right to choose what to do with her baby.
And here’s the problem. If we all believe that people are free to choose what to believe in, then abortion should be legal, but the thing is, because we don't allow murder, we also must agree that there are certain limitations to the line of thought that everybody has a right to do what they believe in. According to liberal thought, people in states are free to do what is right as defined by the law (see Locke, one of the primary liberal thinkers). Murder shouldn’t be tolerated even if it is in another country or perpetrated by someone who does not see it as murder. If we went by the logic that killing certain peoples are totally fine… well we could end up with something like the Holocaust because the Nazis didn’t view the jews as people, therefore they didn't see it as murder….But at the same time, there is no unanimous agreement that abortion is murder or isn’t murder.
Essentially my reason for why I can’t pick a side in the abortion law debate, even if I am pro-life, is that I can’t figure out how to justify me asserting a moral system over someone else’s moral system, especially if there is no unanimous agreement that abortion is wrong or right.
I want to stop people from killing their babies, but that’s only how I see it. I am fully aware people don’t see it the same way as I do and I can’t force them to see it unless I convert them all to Catholicism, but that’s not going to happen anytime soon.
Moreover, there are reasons why legalising abortion is a bad thing and why legalising abortion is a good thing, at least in my mind and from what I know. This makes the debate difficult because no matter which side I pick, someone is getting harmed and so there's a lot of moral factors in play. From my catholic standpoint, abortion is murder, and obviously I don’t feel comfortable supporting the legalisation of abortion as it’d be legalising murder.
Legalising abortion also enables for gender discrimination as certain cultures prefer boys over girls and will abort or force the mother to abort the baby if it is a girl (this is why certain hospitals do not allow people to know the gender of their child past a certain date). Legalising abortion means encourages irresponsible people who don’t bother using contraception to have more irresponsible sex, and that’s a problem when certain countries spend taxpayer dollars to cover the healthcare costs incurred by abortions.
At the same time, despite my stance that abortion is a sin, I am very sympathetic to those who have a very good reason to get an abortion. For example, let’s say a girl or woman is raped and has an unwanted baby from her rapist. Sometimes girls are raped when they are atrociously young, in their pre-teens. In these cases, not only does a birth endanger the baby, it endangers the mother’s life. Abortion SHOULD be an option if the mother wishes to take it in this case as in this scenario, abortion protects the mother's life.
And even if the woman is old enough, rape is terrible and having an unwanted child by your rapist is something so horrifying I cannot comprehend and as showing mercy is part of my moral code, I can't just go up to someone who was raped and say, "You have to have the child." I mean I could totally say "I believe you should have the child." But to force a raped mother to have the child by voting for a law banning abortion? I don't feel comfortable with that.
Now, the counterargument is that the child is innocent and I agree with that, but here’s the problem. Not aborting a baby can have a lot of consequences that I feel, should be the choice of the mother for whether she wishes to face them, instead of mine.
I had a long long chat with a sociologist friend (he’s going to Harvard for Law so he knows what he’s talking about), and I realized that there is NOT enough support in USA anyway, for women who are going through their pregnancies single. Heck, pregnancy is difficult when the woman is married or has a partner. Pregnancy is a time when a woman’s hormones go crazy. It’s an incredibly stressful time for a woman and the hormones emitted in pregnancy put a lot of mental and emotional stress for women. A woman is also very vulnerable in pregnancy due to having to carry a 5-8 pound baby in her stomach. They need a LOT of emotional and physical support, from their family, from their spouse or partner, from their friends.
The problem is, a young girl who gets pregnant, whether from rape or by consensual intercourse, has limited options if they are not married or in a stable relationship. Their parents, depending on beliefs, might ostracize them, their finances might not be straight because they are a student, their relatives might ostracize them, and they might just be too damn young to be a mother because they don’t know how to raise a child. Heck, I’m even aware that certain churches or religious organizations might ostracize a woman simply because they got pregnant before marriage, regardless of consent or not. This is even worse if the woman is pregnant out of rape because they’d literally be reminded every day for nine months, and during the INCREDIBLY painful process that is childbirth, that their child was not theirs by choice and society is likely to shun them in spite of their terrible experience! In light of all that, just how can I vote for banning abortion and force a woman to keep her child, especially if she was raped, did not believe in god, and especially given the slim prospect of her getting any form of support required for her to get through the difficult time that is pregnancy?
Okay, then let’s say a woman gives birth, regardless of all the pain she suffers during pregnancy and keeps the child. She becomes therefore, a single mother and that is not an easy task, especially given the prospect as I mentioned earlier, that their church, community or family may not support them. Raising a child is bloody difficult. So difficult that even if the woman raises the child successfully, that child will have significant economic, social, maybe even intellectual disadvantages because their mother would not have been able to devote nearly as much time to the child as a married or partnered couple who likely are not ostracized.
The option of giving the child up for adoption is also up… but that is no way by any means perfect. We all know how screwed up foster care is and that while there are happy stories, there are also a lot of risks. Children in the system have a higher chance of being abused, sexually or physically and can also be, depending where who and which system, funneled right into a human trafficking ring. I also understand that the mother still has to carry the child to term and give birth to child, while being subjected to the stresses of pregnancy and that’s not fun, especially if the child was a product of rape.
Now, after all of that, I still think abortion is murder… and that the mother should try to raise their child. But at the same time, I don't want to force a mother who doesn’t believe abortion is murder, to go through all of the trials I just explained without an opportunity to choose her and her child’s fate. And yet, I also can’t deny that I don’t want to stop murder from happening.
That is why my stance on the legalization of abortion is undecided. I simply can’t decide. I will say that abortion is a sin and so I'd never vote for legalizing abortion, but that's my opinion. Considering that not-aborting is not without risks and social harm to the mother, considering that women can be raped and this would also ostracize them from society, its not my choice to force a woman to not-abort by voting for banning abortion, especially when this is not a commonly held belief by others.
And that's my opinion on abortion laws... it's the middle of the road stance, but what can I take in consideration of all of these?
Luckily, the way forward is clear though.
We need to do more for mothers who face the prospect of being single mothers and those who have been raped. Women shouldn't have a need to abort their child because they face a plethora of social stigma. Single moms shouldn't be ostracized and disadvantaged because they made one mistake or just by plain chance (condoms don't always work) and will pay for it for the rest of their lives. The CHILDREN of single moms, given up for adoption or raised by their single mothers, shouldn't be disadvantaged because of a single mistake or because of bad luck, hence coercing moms to resort to abortion. Women should be allowed to make a free choice, not imposed to them by society, or by laws drafted to belief systems they do not believe in, to keep their babies or not. They may make, in my opinion, the wrong one, but right now, that choice is certainly not free from sitgma, economic disadvantageous, or ostracization and hence, is not really equal.
Sincerely,
vren55
The saddest part is the fetus never has a say and is not recognized as a human being (state laws will vary in accordance to federal guidelines). I am anti-abortion, but I also feel I do not have the right to tell a woman what to do with herself. The only say I think would be viable would be if I was the father of the child-to-be. It is a very slippery slope.
Before I go on I will go on the record and say that I am Pro-Choice.
Vren from what you have said you are one of the saner Pro-Lifers on the net and on that even Pro-Choicers can count as allies to a point. You made your point in a respectful manner, and acknowledge that people will disagree with you but that is their choice. See, sanity.
And I would say in addition to better help for single parents is better sexual education and access to contraceptives. I may be Pro-Choice but I do agree the number of abortions should go down.
3825375 Its' bloody confusing. A lot of my staunchly catholic friends have told me to vote anti-abortion because we should have the right to express our opinion... fair enough, but even then there are a LOT of consequences for an anti-abortion law... so much that I can't make that decision :P
3825390 Yar. I mean I still see abortion as a sin and a terrible one at that, but I can't make a woman who doesn't believe in god make a decision that she will not see as beneficial to herself, especially if I am not able to support her decision adequately and the means to support her decision aren't available. And yes, prevention through sex education is something I agree on. While I think there should be a certain approach taught, contraception needs to be covered. Abstinence only education only works if you believe in god or have a very strong will because without guiding compass that its just a personal choice that can be overturned and if you're not careful, you can get a girl or get pregnant and even if one does believe in god, people are flawed... they can't be expected to fuck their lives and the lives of their children for eternity because they made a willpower mistake. They need to know the means to prevent that if their willpower gives out and heck Pope Francis has said something on that matter!
Wow. This is a very heavy topic. I am undecided too, a lot of the laws that we are having to vote on are sometimes just wrong to even think about voting for. I hope that you don't have to choose a side in this issue.
You make a good argument there good sir. I also mention you in this thread.
My personal view on abortion is that it should be readily available to anyone who wants one - for any reason, at the very least during the first trimester - for all sorts of reasons, which include:
- A embryo isn't a person. It's entirely human, and it's most certainly alive, but it isn't a person. There's no nervous system, and without that there's no sense, no thought, no being.
- Personal autonomy: A woman's body is her own to rule. Forcing someone to carry a pregnancy to term against their consent, with all of its inherent costs, hardships, and risks to health and life, is to me immoral.
- People are going to have sex, no matter how much they're scolded or slut-shamed or castigated. Sometimes, this is going to result in an unwanted pregnancy. Forbidding abortion will do nothing to prevent this, and simply serves to add more hardship to peoples' lives.
- Two-thirds of all fertilized zygotes ('successful conceptions') fail to implant in the uterine wall, and are simply flushed from the body to perish. Nobody cares about these. The simplest of abortions (the 'morning after pill') do precisely this.
In an ideal world, we would never need abortion. Sadly, we don't live in an ideal world. We can't force people to be ideal. All we can do is reduce harm, as best we can.
I would strongly prefer to sidestep the issue by making contraception far less stigmatized, far more readily available, and culturally, ideally presented as 'Unless you are actively trying to have a child, be doing this'. Like, there are simple implants one can get that solve the issue for years, and are cheap. If the most ardent pro-lifers were truly about Life above all-else, then one wonders why they are not pushing this harder.
Which is why I also think much of the movement isn't truly about promoting life - because if that was their paramount virtue, well, why do they not pursue this?
At the same time, I also believe in bodily autonomy, and therefore that the process should be legal and up to the mother (Within a certain framework; I tend to take 'viability outside the womb' as a reasonable threshold).
And, well, 3825479 this addresses a heap of it as well. If the moment of conception involves ensoulment, then the afterlife is filled up largely of those who never made it. Which I mean, is possible, but, y'know.
Then again, my personal religious beliefs are 'I don't know', which means I ground my morality solely from philosophy and science, rather than feeling there is any greater power demanding I live by a certain code.
3825479 Fair enough, I mean, I disagree with you in that I think an embryo is a person and even if there are natural miscarriages, that doens't mean we should force it. My main caveat with the whole anti-abortion legislation that an anti-abortion law forces people who don't believe in a certain morality into a position where there are some rather harmful risks which I can't overlook, but at the same time, i can't overlook that allowing such a thing as abhorrent to my sense of morality... which leads me to say that it really should be the mother's choice, because while i think abortion is terrible, the other option which is to force people to lead a certain life goes against scripture I quoted earlier.
Basically, my position is similar to that expressed by this quote. "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Eveylyn Beatrice Hall
I think abortion is wrong and will do my utmost to convince people that it is wrong, I will tell people that god wants you to keep the baby, that life is precious and that abortion is murder, but I cannot force people to choose a choice, that has severe risks, if they don't believe in it.
3825460 3825375 3825390 3825522 3825479 Thanks for the response guys, and responding to Morning Sun's question about pro-lifers...
In my opinion, more... extreme Pro lifers... well those that are Catholic or Christian, I think are missing the point when they argue against abortion and contraception.
According to what I know of scripture God made us to spread the word of god, and yes, defend it, but in order for someone to believe in god, in fact, the ONLY way for someone to believe in god is by revealing the sacrifice of Jesus, the sacrifice that he made for every human being, me, you, your father, mother, no matter whether they knew him or not. Only by his word can one believe in God.
By extension, only when you believe in Jesus, can you possibly understand his scripture, his word, and go by his laws. Laws aren't what make the church, the love between the believer and the father is. Therefore, people won't understand why abortion or contraception is wrong if they don't have the morality, or acknowledge God as existent.
The Pope himself has indicated that the church has gotten too obsessed about abortion, gays and birth control. His words indicate a fundamental flaw in catholicism that I have observed... People get obsessed over doctrine, the rules, the ethics, but forget that the love of god is the key to Catholicism, not the regulation of abortion. The church ain't just a set or rules or a morality system!
So for me, a Catholic pro-lifer... I wouldn't prevent abortion through lawmaking... as I said before, that's wrong. My approach as a Catholic pro-lifer would be to spreading the word of god and the faith to others, so that they will by extension, come to believe by their own choice, that abortion is evil. Not to say that I won't argue abortion is wrong, but I'd rather try to convert the person over first, make them understand that this certain belief system is right, in order to convince them to make a decision.
I mean, if people don't agree, then they don't... the Catholic faith, and the rules that entails are by defintion, something that one has to choose to believe in. One has to acknowledge god exists and that they are god and, that's why there are sacraments (rituals) such as Baptism and Confirmation, which is the believer's formal announcement of his faith in god.
This is also why I think it's insane to try to force people who don't believe abortion is wrong to not abort through the legal system... they don't believe in god, so they'll find another way, and that's an even WORSE alternative as illegal abortions endanger the mother's reproductive capability and the mother's life. Basically, I'm for converting the person so that she makes the right choice, though that choice is always ultimately up to that person.
3825542
Btw, I am Muslim here. So Isa (Jesus) sacrifice is non-existant to us as he is not dead.
Still you made a good point.
3825528 Abortion is... certainly less-than-ideal, and reducing the need for it is, I think, all to the good. Sadly, as you've pointed out, many who oppose abortion also strongly oppose anything that actually shows success in reducing abortion rates (education, contraception, etc)... which really calls their motives into question.
As for personhood, I'm very much a... materialist? Not sure if that's the correct term.
"I" am sourced in the functioning of neurochemistry, the mechanisms of thought; without those, my body may be alive, but it wouldn't be a person (not that I'm biochauvinist: if you're a robot that can think, I'll call you a person). I imagine we'll have to agree to disagree on this part. 
Again, thanks for bringing these up for discussion!
3825522 Oh yeah and as for contraception... my thought process is quite clear. TRY NOT to use it, but if you're going to do it and you know your wife/girlfriend is fertile at this period (family planning actually works... my mom and dad only ended up with me and my sibling), USE CONTRACEPTION! Seriously, the pope's made it clear that morality and common sense shouldn't have to be separated. I mean, it's not right to use contraception (according to my belief it trivializes the act of sex which is a act for reproduction and pleasure into an act of purely pleasure), but if you're can't stop yourself, USE IT so you don't screw your girlfriend over or any children you have!
Most of this thought comes down to ethics.. I think, I am not very political on my own. My parents are liberal, and while I don't have an opinion easily or form an opinion that hasn't been beaten (metaphorically) into me, I do have some things. While abortion is a very iffy topic, I believe that if a person has sex without thinking of the consequences and then decides that they aren't good parents, I believe that they should have thought of that before the act. Pro-life is good and bad, but my argument is I tend to agree with you (minus the religion... people like Donald Trump and extremists are the main reason I don't believe in a god. It just sounds corny that people are being nut cases about their religion. I get this is extremist at worst, but it scared me away.. Blame horror movies like The Mist (fuck Ms. Carmady... hopefully none of you are like that) and people who commit a crime based on Jesus telling them too... I find that scary so I ignore it)
Long confusing story short, I tend to agree, but if someone has a well thought out, non crazy rant or various reasons about it, I tend to agree extremely easily. I believe in responsible gun control, gay rights, and that is about it. I am not gay myself but love is love and shouldn't be so fucking stupid in argument. I mean seriously, regardless of your sexual preferences, beliefs, religion or sanity or what the fuck ever, love is love. It's the same thing. Just a person happens to like the same gender.
Sorry... I just roll my eyes at the non answers of shitheads on the news. Also, sorry again for changing the subject based on an abortion rant....
3825578
I mean, I was raised Catholic, before I went away from anything doctrinal. Were I to describe myself now, it is 'I feel the universe comes from somewhere and that somewhere/something whatever it may be is Good, but also set the wheels in motion and now lets it run'.
With that said, the Catholic hangup on sex is silly. Catholicism accepts evolution. Like, flat out, said it's true. And life, well - life that wants to procreate tends to be more successful than life that doesn't. Our sex drives are all about that 'Make more babies' urge. The whole process is a big soup of neurochemicals and hormones that together produce a heckuva lotta pleasure, and well - tying said pleasure up in sin & morality is just silly to me.
It's essentially like criminalizing liking sugar. We're bred to like sugar because for most of our history it was an easy, easy source of calories. And then, suddenly, oops, candy bars are bad unless eaten under very specific circumstances.
And unlike other things generally categorized as sinful, sex and orgasms don't hurt anybody in and of themselves. Yes, the potential exists, in that a relationship could go bad, but if that's the case you could make the same argument about any facet of a relationship or friendship.
Understanding of morality evolves. And, well, the Church has been fairly in the wrong many, many times in its history. The hangup on sex is just the latest example, and unfortunately perhaps the most damaging. I've lived the guilt trip in the past being ashamed of myself because of thinking how my body worked was somehow 'bad'. Which to me, now, feels silly.
By all means, forge a relationship with one's interpretation of the Divine, but it strikes me as somewhat absurd said Divine would instill us with something incredibly alluring and wonderful, and then make it a constant case of the Forbidden Apple, which is what doctrine effectively has it at right now.
first off, congrats on being religious and still expressing your opinion in a sane and rational way. A lot of people don't. As for abortion laws, I'm firmly on the pro-choice side. In my opinion, no religion should have a say in any kind of medical issues. Religions don't do medical research, they don't know all the facts, therefore they have no right to impose medical decisions that could cost someone a life. Medicine is the realm of science. I have absolutely no issue with people practicing whatever religion they'd like, that's their right. But they need to keep to themselves, to a a degree. No religious based laws, is what I'm saying. Not everyone believes what you do, and so not everyone should have to follow rules based on what you believe in. Not to mention, assuming this is talking about the US, your country is secular, its constitution is secular, and therefore its laws should be secular. If you guys start making laws based on religion, people who don't believe what you believe are going to suffer. As for "a human being begins at conception," I can't really argue with you on that if you believe in a soul, and I'm sure nothing I say will ever convince you that a soul does not exist. So I'll just leave that alone and stick to arguing the morals of it.
3825528 Do you really call people murderers for aborting their unborn offspring?
3825676 As I believe that unborn offspring are offspring and thus exist, then how can I not believe that people who abort are not murderers without going against what I believe in? That would be hypocritical. I mean, I won't call them to their face unless they ask me to give an honest opinion, but that's my stance.
Edit: If it's a miscarriage, of course that's not abortion! That's miscarriage.
Here's the thing though, all people sin, me, normal people and murderers alike. There is salvation in God, at least that's why i believe as god is loving and will forgive all crimes as long as one seeks it from him sincerely (as proven by the death and resurrection of Jesus). You may disagree with my stance as you wish (it seems you are), but I never said once in this post that people have to abide by what I think.
Perhaps one day, history will judge either of these sides, these systems of belief, as right or wrong. They did so with the Nazis, the Imperialists, the misogynists and the racists. Maybe I'll end up on the wrong side, but if I live according to what I believe, while not trying to force people to carry out my belief by persecuting those who do go for abortion when they don't believe it is wrong, can you say that I am wrong for holding my own thoughts, which I think I have the right to?
As a roman catholic and open thinker I viewed the history and facts of environments which were under the tennants of pro life laws, what the practical application is compared to the words, rhetoric and idealism.
And it was horrifying to see the amount of suffering and death it caused when applied, especially since it seems to go hand in hand with contraception restrictions. All of it swept under the rug and ignored. The practical applications just didn't justify it to me. Women must retain the power to plan their families.
It started to look less like saving potential babies and more like punishing and/or executing generations of women and destroying families. That it brings damage to scores more adult and child lives. Not to mention it doesn't stop abortions at all, just makes it unsafe and gets in the way of a lot of healthcare procedures for women to their detriment and/or death.
In the end I didn't believe the law should choose for people. Religion should provide the support and moral foundations but each person should be left to decide as they know their life situations best.
In short, pro-life sounds nice and neat and moral but the practical applications I've seen, both historical and contemporary, are utterly inhumane and far removed from the negatives of prochoice applications and far out matched by the benefits of pro choice laws and setups to society. Protecting potential life in the end comes at too great a cost of existing lives while still failing to do what it tries to achieve.
3825692 that's not what I asked, dude.
3825710 Fair enough, i just wanted to give a detailed rationale for my answer :P
I view here, that while you have a well argued point. Many folks are going to look at this as a religious argument, though one of moderation. And well, given where you are coming from. It's hard to argue it isn't. And while you don't say to folks that view abortion as something different. You are left handedly casting insult. I did respect your previous argument with the nuance of religion, as it didn't cast assertions, or attack off-handedly those of different belief. It was neutral in its approach.
It would be somewhat okay, if you took a stance. You don't. You instead take a lovely dissertation into implying to those that read this what they are allowing and what they are guilty of for doing by the allowance of abortion, or directly guilty of by doing so. Regardless of the belief that they are guilty of.
I get you wanted to have something of an open discourse here, perhaps. But this come across as anything but. I could say I'm sorry, but I am not. I don't want to say this is an attack, but the more I sit here, and try to compose this in an neutral tone... The more it seems a vocal broadcasting of such.
I'm going to stop before I give in to the urge to lay into religion and culture, and by proxy, you for being the voicebox of this article.
3825747 Wah??? That was certainly not the intention and at least according to those that commented, didn't come across the intention. I respect people's point of view and beliefs, even if I am religious and therefore disagree on whether it is right or wrong, which is why I say I have no right to force people who don't believe abortion is wrong to not abort, but if what I appear to say seems inflammatory, then I greatly thank for your restraint.
3825758 I understand it isn't, you tried for a topic of discussion that even in the best case scenario is a hotly debated topic. And this was a well written approach to this. Your choice of words is very much keeping this to tones of civil discussion. Much like your approach to the previous topic of religion. You put thought and time into this topic.
But where I was approaching from in the viewpoint of this was while you are not taking a side, you are still implying in conjunction to being locked that those that do have this done. They are murdering someone, albeit unintentionally, by proxy, or how one wishes to showcase. It is repeated, and I think, where the words before come from. I wouldn't have minded if it was said and done. You said your viewpoint, and everyone is entitled to that. (Even though I view some folks need a bit of a taser to get them to stop. Not you, or usually anyone on this site.)
That is where the crux of the issue is really. I understand your viewpoint, and you are not one to want conflict at all. Something I am honestly grateful for. It is a truly refreshing change of pace to see someone of religion that isn't. (Rarer than finding a $20 on the ground of a walmart parking lot.) I know I am rehashing stances and my own words here. Trying to explain, but well, have you ever talked to someone that didn't want to say something directly, but would not mind speaking in a removed tense to disassociate themselves from backlash that might be levied?
I know you didn't intend that, and I'm certainly not trying to get you to change the article. It is your view, and it is eloquently argued. Passionately too you can say, as it correlates to your beliefs. Just the why of it can be interpreted as a secondhand attack without being directly associated with the article. The whole, you are guilty of letting murder happen by either being ignorant of the law, or knowing and abetting this to occur. (Roughly, anyhow. I know I didn't say this exactly right.)
I have seen this stance of implications used to indirectly attack folks, many times. That is why I had to curb my tongue a lot more and why I ended it as I did. I hope this clarifies.
3825720 I meant, 'do you tell people that they're murdering children if they abort?' Because it sounds like you literally tell them that to their face. That's fucked up if that's the case.
Man, talk about picking the hot topics. Since 3825479 has already put into detail my own views on this, I'll just add one extra thing. What I'm about to say is a bit controversial and may very well piss you off, but it's just what I think.
Now say either of the parents are drug addicts, alcoholics, are abusive, don't have support, basically if the kids home life is going to be complete shit, maybe it just be better to save the kid the suffering and just not let him be born to begin with.
That's just what I think.
All I have to say is this: If we're gonna drag ass on colonizing other worlds, then we need less fuckers on this planet as a whole.
What a rambling mess. I mean, it feels like that, even if it is rather organized.
I don't think abortion is a right and regardless of whether I think it's wrong, the way this country works permits us, as I understand it, either to allow or to make it illegal. People who want it to be legal should understand that the opposition has an equally valid point as far as the law is concerned. Fighting endlessly over it largely pointless though. Still, if we made abortion illegal, then I think we obligate society, the government, etc to a greater role in supporting women in such circumstances and to providing for the children if they are not wanted by their parents. Of course there are other ancillary dilemmas, but I think that's unavoidable.
I would be exceedingly cautious trying to use the Bible here at all. In this case I think that kind of logic hinges on the meaning of 'knows God' which is a whole debate in an of itself. Regardless, you do have to take the whole of the letter, not just a part, in trying to understand it.
That, right there, is a slippery slope problem. I'm not sure how I feel about laws in this particular subject, but I think, at some level, that we have every right to make them as a society. Whether you like the belief system behind laws or not, they are still the laws and you have to follow them. Our constitution and hence our form of government restrains us to limited freedoms (i.e. the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), but also provides cases in which those can be limited also.
I tend to agree that if the mother's life is at risk then we should NOT compel them to place their own lives in jeopardy. So, if we made it illegal, there would have to be exceptions.
**** politics. You wind up hurting someone no matter what you choose.
3853290 XD. Which is why we shalt love and tolerate!