Abortion is evil? WHY?

The source I provided discusses many views held by scientists: http://biology.franklincollege.edu/Bioweb/Biology/course_p/bioethics/When does human life begin.pdf

You're just experiencing cognitive dissonance.

That's just your justification for not valuing human life AFTER it's born.

Go for it. That is your prerogative, but it is just one theory among many and should not be taught as fact.

No one would argue with that.

But she could have an abortion if necessary.

 

How is it not? We literally have polls confirming that the vast majority of abortions are due to 'economic concerns'. In other words, they are saying "We can't afford to have the child, so we'll terminate it." The prevention of further development is both the reason and the outcome. Do you really think a woman is ignorant of what'll happen to an 'aborted child'? Isn't that just as disingenuous of you?

Of course it doesn't happen over the course of a morning(and in those cases, they likely took the 48-hour pill). But it was a deliberative process in which they came to that conclusion.

For my part, I believe they should be required to have a conversation with a man, recorded with a family attorney of some sort so that the decision is made mutually, fairly and that way the fetus has an opportunity(or as much of one as it can) to have it's say as the developing human being that it is.

Fairness is the greatest sense of law, justice, morality and those laws are almost universally upheld. Without morality in Abortion, Abortion will continue to face challenges. It isn't a cost to women or to women's reproductive rights, to seek sanctity and fairness under the law.

 

The subject is a single human life not life in the Cosmos. Get a grip.

When did I promote not valuing human life after it's born?

The link you provided is from Developmental Biology which talks about 'personhood' not human life. So I ask you ...If a human life does not begin at conception then when?

The question is, why are so many abortions necessary in the first place?

 

I don't think this is a religious issue so much as what do we, as a collective culture value.
The evidence I present is, given the number of abortions occurring, roughly 1.2 million per year...sexual intercourse is valued over the possible risk of an unwanted pregnancy. The developing human life is given no regard, it is a life unworthy of life purely on the basis of it's fragile state being dependent upon the host in order to fully develop prior to birth.

I'm just pointing out,
hey isn't the point of an abortion precisely to end an unwanted life?

I'd like to see some intellectual honesty here, and then we can discuss how to go about reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies.

Regardless of it's legality, abortions will continue. I admit this, I"m not naive to think a law will radically change behavior, so then how do we go about changing the behavior which leads a person to seek an abortion. I would even concede, if abortion must exist, I'd prefer to see the woman's life not placed in further jeopardy with some back alley abortion clinic as a result of an out and out ban on abortion.

I don't think abortion must exist, if each of us took responsibility for our sexual behavior, and UNDERSTOOD, the serious consequences of approaching it with a cavalier and casual attitude. This change will not happen over night obviously, the first "baby step" no pun intended, is to acknowledge what an abortion does. It terminates a human life in the developmental stages of that life...the exact same developmental stage each and every one of us having this conversation went through.

 

Today we are teaching our children that abortion and contraceptives are necessary and good things. Morality is shunned because of the progressive secular-humanists who bring lawsuits based on any loophole they can find in a law in an effort to thwart even a hint of morality (that they perceive is a violation of the establishment clause) being on display in any government/public place and that includes schools. Who could blame a hormone-crazed kid from thinking there are no consequences to sex? For many there really aren't any. No morals, no cares. Wasn't there another school shooting recently?

 

And single human life is what Sagan addressed.

You said universal health care, environmental protections, and other quality of life issues were "socialist." All of your "sanctity of life" talk is BS if you don't care about health, education and welfare of those already born.

No, it's about human life. You obviously didn't go there.

There are as many reasons for abortion as there are women who have them.

 

So what?

On the contrary, I believe that any forced altruistic, government-socialist handout program is DELETERIOUS to the quality of life especially here in American where we are supposed to be free to pursue our happiness. It makes me happy to help others but why should I when my income is already being assessed for that very same reason? Moreover the so-called social programs (like social security) has taken The People's money and gives a pittance in return. Since I am a moral person, I have no quibble with social programs that help the TRULY NEEDY but this social program 'mission creep' has exploded into some kind of dollar gulping leviathan.

BTW try to control yourself and stop insulting me with your 'BS' comments.

Well it is slimming.....

 

Funny you should ignore the massive elephant in the room - the one that is driven by capitalism

Yes, I am talking about the advertising industry - more ubiquitous and pervasive than education

Images like this

 

That's what they used to say in Nazi Germany.

 

Yeah, is that what they said in Nazi Germany? Can you translate the exact phrase for us?

 

May I respectfully disagree? Yes I care about the quality of life, and everyone should receive "health care"(which really means being able to see a doctor timely, as well as receiving their medications, etc in a timely manner) and all of those other wonderful things!

But guess what Cady? There's something called scarcity and I'm afraid I don't have the compassion for the Government to charge me extra, just so Lazy Doh X can get the same things I get. If we really want these things, we should try to orchestrate a system that promotes a free market system so that I can save as much as my buck as possible.

Not that I'm cold and heartless, and not that I don't care for the living or soon to live. I believe they have as much right to their own freedom and labor. Hence I reject our current 'system'. It takes labor from us all, which also means taking away future labor. We can see this as the job market has shrunk for young adults like myself(18-34). And if we should be stupid enough to follow in our parents footsteps, our kids will also face similar problems.

Yes to Universal Health Care, not like this. That's my MO/2 cents.

 

Read the rest of the comment.

 

You have answered your own question.

"We literally have polls confirming that the vast majority of abortions are due to 'economic concerns'" - The reason

It is disingenuous of you to simple ignore what the reasons are, you may not agree with them, that does not make them any less of a reason.

Reason - a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event:

Absolute rubbish unless you have no understanding of what reason means.

Yes, they look at the situation, look at how or even if they can cope (Reasons) and if not they decide on an abortion (the outcome) .. the opposite is true as well, they may decide they can cope (reasons) where the outcome will be continuation of the pregnancy.

and the majority probably do have a conversation with a man .. however that conversation still does not negate the final decision rests entirely with the woman. You may think that is unfair, but as you have already said life is unfair.

As yet you haven't provided a single overwhelming argument why the morality of others should supersede the morality of the person involved, and if you really think the law is fair then you must have lead a very sheltered life so far.

 

If you are going to use the 1.2 million abortions as evidence that ".sexual intercourse is valued over the possible risk of an unwanted pregnancy" then you have to compare that with the number of pregnancies that result in birth, in 2009 there were over 4.1 million births so your assertion is invalid, if as you state "sexual intercourse is valued over the possible risk of an unwanted pregnancy" then that 29% would be a lot higher.

I find that comment very disingenuous, you have no idea of the mindset of the women who decide on abortion . .yours is just a broad brush stroke comment similar to saying that all pro-lifers are religiously motivated, I know that not to be true just as you know your comment is not true.

That is not what you stated, you stated that the reasons behind an abortion is to end an unwanted life, the abortion is the outcome of the reasoning not the reasoning itself.

You would have been better saying "hey isn't the point of an abortion precisely to end an unwanted life, because ...", there are numerous reasons a woman may choose abortion, just because you don't agree with them doesn't make them any less valid.

As would I, there is no argument from me that an abortion ends the life of a zef . .however, the way you are trying to portray it is that this is the only reason a woman uses when having an abortion, that is not intellectually honest, and you know it.

You cannot change behavior by fear, it has to be done with education .. people will always have sex, they always have and no matter what legislation is used it won't stop that happening.

The whole mindset of people regarding sex has to change, and as much as it might anger some people, parents are not doing their children any favors by not addressing the issue, burying their heads in the sand and hoping it will go away will not work. We (and I include the UK in that) should be looking to other countries where the sexual taboo has been removed, then and only then can we move forward and look to ways to ensure our children are fully knowledgeable concerning sex, not only in the mechanics but in all other aspects as well.

I'm sorry but you are asking for people to suppress one of the most natural things we have, it isn't going to work that way .. I would hope you have no desire to return to the days of "slut shaming" women.
Again I find it disingenuous of you to assume that people do not know what an abortion is or does, do you honestly believe that people are so stupid they don't know?

 

Absolute rubbish.

It is not the job of schools or government to force a belief system onto people, children are not slaves to be told what to think and do, as you guys keep telling us they are individual people . .so why not give them the tools to make rational decisions on their own .. parents, schools and the government are not there to force their own versions of morality into people, they are there to guide.
I admit that some of the lawsuits are petty, but pro-lifers are just as guilty of that when it comes to imposing TRAP laws.

 

The law is on our side? That really is a specious argument. Just because you have a law that you like, does it make it moral or right?

 

From the context, I think it means that when you make the accusation of murder, the burden is on you to provide the proof. Yes, that is moral and right.

 

If 50% of the people believe it is murder and 50% don't, then there is no social agreement and any law, pro or con, will force one belief on the other. Best to leave it between the doctor and patient and between the patient and their Creator.

 

Having no abortion law leaves the decision to the woman and her doctor, and doesn't force beliefs on anyone.

 

Roe v Wade is a law about abortion based on overturning other laws. All of them should go.

 

What are you implying?

 

You're mistakenly assuming people who get government assistance are lazy. Most recipients just need a temporary safety net for a short time. We're not talking about the government providing "the same things you get;" we are talking about basic needs.

 

Then the 50% who truly believe it is murder don't have to have one. And the 50% who don't believe it is murder, since it has never, ever, ever been proven to be murder, may continue practicing their freedoms over their own internal organs.

 

For government to get out of telling people what to do. There is no agreement on this issue.

 

No it isn't.

How is teaching little girls and boys that abstaining from sex forcing a belief system on them? Children (especially the young ones) do need to be told what to think and do. "This is how we make a capital B" or "it is bad to pull little Shinya's hair" etc.