Good people disagree about the morality of abortion because we disagree about what defines human nature. First trimester abortions may have absolutely no moral implications whatsoever, perhaps a first trimester embryo is no more conscious than a kidney or spleen. Or they may have more serious moral implications. Our culture hasn't come to a consensus on that yet. But we know a little bit about murder, and the differences between murder and other forms of killing. And murder, in the way that we define it in all other instances, involves the intentional death of another human person. Even if we were to assume that every embryo or fetus were just as sentient and just as much of a person as any other human being, an argument that is not supportable on the basis of scientific evidence, then the lack of knowledge and intent would still be enough to classify abortion as something other than murder. Let's imagine a scenario in which two men go deer hunting. One man mistakes his friend for a deer, shoots him, and accidentally kills him. As long as we all agreed on the facts of the case, it's hard to imagine that any reasonable person would describe this as murder even though we would all know for certain that a real, sentient human person was killed. Why? Because the shooter thought he was killing a deer something other than a real, sentient human person. Now consider the example of abortion. If a woman and her physician think they're killing a non-sentient organism, then even if the embryo or fetus were, unbeknown to them, a sentient human person they would not be committing murder. At most, they would be guilty of involuntary manslaughter. But even involuntary manslaughter involves criminal negligence, and it would be very hard to judge someone criminally negligent for not personally believing that a pre-viable embryo or fetus is a sentient human person when we don't actually know this to be the case. From the point of view of someone who believes that every fertilized egg is a sentient human person, abortion would be horrific. Tragic. Lethal. But it would be no more murderous than any other kind of accidental death. Hence abortion is not murder.
Well....I think people who have abortions do know what they are doing. They know its a life. Its easy and legal but people work hard to justify the act. Its not the same as accidental killing. Its not murder legally but ethically (if you aren't religious) it is. And if you are religious---in God's eyes its taking life. Which is murder. I mostly don't have condemnation in my heart for people that go through with it....because it IS easy....and its easy to fall into that path. I do feel sorry for those who have gone through with it because I think it will be hard to live with...especially as that person has more life experience.
I don't disagree with you, though I am very specific in saying "If a woman and her physician think they're killing a non-sentient organism", I don't doubt they know it is a life, all pro-choice people I know will agree that a fetus is alive and a member of the homo sapien species. As to being easy, I know in the UK it isn't that easy .. the woman has to go through two separate interviews with two separate doctors and both must agree to the abortion, in some cases she would also be subject to a psychiatric evaluation. Personally, and despite many accusations to the contrary, I hope one day abortions will not be required, not due to laws prohibiting them but due to medical advances enabling the safe removal of the fetus at any stage without harming the woman and either transplanting it into another woman or placing it in an artificial womb. I would also like to see better sex education, including contraception (abstinence as well), that teaches not just about the physical aspect of sex but also the emotional aspect - some Scandinavian countries already do this and they have some of the lowest abortion and underage mothers in the world, perhaps - though I doubt it - pro-choice and pro-life could work together to at least achieve a reduction in abortions. I feel that the whole abortion issue has become polarized with not enough from either side looking at the required compromises in order to finally achieve a state where the issue of abortion becomes moot. What I do know is that I can never support legislation that removes the right of a person to have ownership of a part of their body, even for a short period of time. I try to steer clear of moral arguments on abortion mainly because I believe morality is simply to do with where you are born and the society type you grow up in, placing one set of morals above another, to me, is fundementally flawed
We do disagree on many things. Some morals are better then others. Not all societies are equal. And compromise isn't possible when one person says human life can't be murdered and the other says yes it can. A person with alzheimers gets to the point where they lose sentience. Can we kill them? I say no but others say yes. There is no compromise on THAT type of issue. But we can compromise through compassion. I may not agree with a person who had an abortion but I can have compassion for that person.
Most of the Christians of the world see the bible as the beginning, not the end. The Holy Spirit was given to Jesus' apostles and the the people of the world and has helped man to understand what is meant. Mere man attempting to interpret all of the words of the bible falls way short.
In my opinion, there is but one way. God chose the way and man has perverted His way many times over the centuries. Cafeteria Christians simply chose what they want and then determine how to believe in it. That nagging voice in the background is nothing more than the Holy Spirit trying to reach one's conscience. The only question is not of reproductive rights, or the lack there of, because everyone has the right to choose to or not to procreate; but that decision must be made BEFORE one risks that which one has not chosen.
Is capital punishment murder? I think the question is flawed to begin with. Abortion is what it is - why label it anything else? A developing human life is being terminated at some stage before it is ready to be birthed and continue living without the environment of its mother's womb. It does not yet have a legal identity during that time, but that is arbitrary - the law could conceivably be changed to recognise embryos as persons deserving of legal protection. Should it be? I think it depends, ultimately, on priorities. If a woman does not want or is unable to keep a baby after it has been born, she can give it away and this is more or less acceptable. But if a woman does not want to carry a baby to term, it becomes a question of her physical rights vs the rights (or lack thereof) of the life growing inside of her. An embryo/fetus exists in a different state than a child post birth - it is not an independent life, but rather is directly dependent on the body of its mother. It is also less developed, most especially in terms of neural and mental capabilities, such that it does not yet possess the mind of even a child, though this of course changes as the pregnancy progresses, so that late in the term it is neurally and mentally quite similar to a typical newborn infant. I personally feel that waiting so long to terminate a pregnancy, and to terminate the child in the process, is wrong. I think the child is far enough along by the third trimester at the latest that it should be saved by some means, most likely by cesarian section as soon as it is feasible. I don't think a child's status as a child deserving of protection should depend solely on the technicality of whether its head has emerged from the mother's body into the open or not. That is not a good measure of whether it is a child deserving of legal protection. More significant, I feel, are whether the child is capable of feeling and suffering, and whether it is capable of surviving outside of the womb. I might even conclude that a third trimester abortion should be considered a homicide, based on the fact that the child is developed enough to be shown mercy rather than brutality. Earlier in development, it probably wouldn't know the difference anyway.
I was kind of hoping that on this one occasion that a debate could happen without it degrading in the usual way. You have missed a very relevant point with your comparrison, a peron with alzheimers had at one time been a fully compos mentis person, a fetus can not claim that disctinction. As far as morals are concerned even you cannot disagree that they are primarily a product of where we are born and the society/culture we are raised in .. your comment could quite easily have been said by a Muslim or any other of the 21 main religions today and in their opinion it would be as correct as yours. I do think there can be a middle ground, but it would require both sides agreeing to disagree on certain issues concerning abortion .. I would hope that the the majority of pro-lifers would want at least a reduction in abortions just as the majority of pro-choicers do.
The OP is just another take on a pro-lifer stating that abortion is obviously murder/homocide, and your position basically mirrors my own - Prior to 21 weeks the decision should be entirely the womans, after that where the question of viability becomes relevant then elective abortions should not be allowed, abortions for medical reasons should still be allowed .. This is pretty much how we have it now .. however I would also add that the time line for elective abortions should mirror the advances in medical knowledge, if or when it becomes possible for a fetus at 16 weeks to survive then that should be the limit on eective abortions.
What is your evidence that God chose the way against abortion? A "nagging voice in the background" could be a result of brainwashing.
Murder is a legal term. Applying it to abortion is a to question which law is violated. When is comes to Biblical or Religious stands on abortion things get tricky for two reasons. 1. We are not governed by the Bible or any one religions interpretation of God's laws. 2. My faith tradition sees some abortions as religious imperatives (when the fetus threatens the life of the mother) so how could we pass a law forcing someone to give up their life for the sake of another against their faith. 3. If we start trying to legislate from a position of moral authority based on God, what stops us from going full on and making Christian sin illegal? We have been there and that caused far more problems than it solved.
Karma Mechanic said, It is a word that has universal meaning. Different cultures and societies might define murder the same way but apply it differently, especially in the Middle East. "Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder) and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder)" Abortion is killing something living (however small) that is a scientific fact. If something was not living then no abortionist would be needed. That which is in the womb is human. The living thing was created by human beings. So that which is in the womb is a living human. Our government gives it rights...but unfortunately for the living human....allows women to kill. This killing is premeditated, and done after deliberation. The definition of the word....BEING. "the fact of existing; existence (as opposed to nonexistence). Anyone with a brain can see that this is legal murder." Something exists in the womb. That something is human. That something is living before an abortion. So that which is in the womb is a living human being. Everyone knows that...but can't say it especially if they are pro-abortion...because they minute they do...they give the unborn personhood. And what rational, loving and caring person would wish abortion on a living human being...such as a child. Moral law....legal law. Abortion kills a living human being. This is not tricky at all...actually its very easy to understand. It is only tricky to those who do not believe the Bible...Gods love letter to all believers. If you love God, you try to keep the Word in your heart. If you don't...the Bible is simply words on a page. Without the Holy Spirit you can read these Words...but they take on a different meaning for those who believe. The Holy Spirit gives interpretation. If you confess Jesus then the Bible tells a believer what they need to know. It tells them about God...and how to live. It defines sin...and a Christian knows based on the Word....Gods commandments for their lives. The Bible reveals to us who and what God is...what He is all about...and how he sent His Son to die for us...to make it possible for us to live. We most certainly need the Word...it is Holy. God would never condone abortion. We see His nature in the Word and since there are scriptures that show God formed us...He knew us in the womb...that the Holy Spirit is with the unborn...abortion could never be right. I struggle even believing He would think abortion to save the life of the mother is even right. BEcause if that woman was a believer...and she believed her child was a living human being...how could she possibly justify killing it. What mother kills their living human child? I struggle with this...I am against all abortion....except to save the life of the baby. But I am believing that for Christians it still is wrong. You believe that killing should be legal...so you are a pro-abort. You want no laws protecting the living human life in the womb. Our laws have always legislated morality. For a Christian Gods law is the most important...even over what any government says is right and wrong. We do not need a government to tell us what is right or wrong. We need to follow the laws of the land...but if those laws ask us to do something that is against Gods law...we always must stand on what God says is right. Example. If the government told me I had to work in an abortion clinic...I would go to jail. If the government told me I had to put a chip underneath my skin for identification...I would die first. On the other hand....I follow the law when I protest at abortion clinics. I would never harm or kill someone in the abortion industry...and I stay back off the property when I go to the clinics. Sin is bad to a Christian...no law has to say it. There have been many laws in this land that were similar to the Ten Commandments. Illegal to murder...illegal to steal....sodomy once illegal.......adultry...etc. Our laws have always reflected Christian values. Why else has gay marriage always been illegal. And until 1973...abortion was legal. If you look at the things our Founders said and did....today they never would get away with that they declared. Importing Bibles...speeches that included the terms...Christ, God....the Holy Spirit....etc. - - - Updated - - - So CAdy...why are you against late term abortion? If God allows abortion....then wouldn't He say...go for it the whole way...through nine months?
Is Abortion Murder? No, obviously. That notion is something the bullyboys thought up to enslave women, as you know. Won't work.
No one is taking the woman's right to her body away. At 21 weeks, she has already made her own decision.
Fugazi said, On this one occasion? LOL Degrading for you pro-aborts....is someone who does not champion abortion. So what you are saying is that mentally handicapped people are less in human value than someone with a fully functioning brain. Hitler thought that way too didn't he? But all religions can't be right...that is why I believe that the only truth is Gods Word....and Jesus. Most religions contradict one another...so how could someone believe Christ and worship Buddah, or Allah. Impossible. There is truth. If a traffic accident happens...and ten people see it happen...there can be ten different accounts...but that accident happened only ONE WAY...whether they people got it right or not. I do not accept other religions as the truth. There is no middle ground when it comes to the truth. You either stand on it or not. There is no middle ground on abortion...you either believe in life or death. There is no middle ground on rape...or murder....or abortion. They all are premeditated, sinful and wrong. Reductions are nice...yes...but the work should always continue to against make abortion legal. You have to fight for what is right. Would it have been ok, if they compromised on slavery? People can have only one slave, not a household or barn full of them. The numbers would have diminished. But the ones still in bondage....is it fair to them to just stop fighting for their freedom? That is why the pro-life work will never stop...there can be no compromise because that is settling...and we can never settle not when abortion is still legal.
'Pro-life' is, apparently, American for enslaving women. Can the slavers not even begin to see that it is the woman's business, and hers alone. Pompous, bullying self-righteous prigs have no rights over other people's bodies, any more than other rapists!
No your position is hypocritical. You want abortion legal......UNTIL. UNTIL WHAT? Until you think that the unborn looks more like a baby and then YOU TAKE AWAY THE WOMANS CHOICE...TO DO WHAT SHE WANTS TO DO. What do you mean she has made her own decision? What does that have anything to do with this? You should be fighting for the woman who want to abort after 21 weeks. BEcause of course the woman has the right to her body...its should be her decision....not yours or the government right? Where did you get 21 weeks? - - - Updated - - - Of course you are also for allowing late term abortion, right LOLO? There should be no stipulations and the law should be changed to allow women to abort even in the ninth month....right? - - - Updated - - - lolo.....for late term abortion......right lolo?
Dunno - women's business, but yes, I expect so. Not my body - and I suggest you look after yours, not those of other people..
No one wants to take her choice away. At 21 weeks, she has made her own decision. At that point, it would still be legal for any woman who needs one to protect her health or life. It isn't taking away the woman's choice, if she has a limited time to make that choice . No woman WANTS to abort at 21 weeks except to protect her own health and life, or in the case of fetal conditions incompatible with life..
Go back and read my post. I did not say if I was for or against abortion. I clearly was talking about your comment relative to "some denominations." In my opinion, relative to religious belief, there is but one way. Man has clearly perverted virtually every conclusion found in the bible. In addition, I do not believe the bible is the whole story. God sent us the Holy Spirit to guide us through the mire of conflicting opinions. If you wish to call ones conscience brainwashing that is your prerogative. It appears you have become one of those who appeals to reason and intellect such that you chose what to believe rather than accepting God's choice. - - - Updated - - - I am not sure whether we should legislate against abortion. God has a way of punishing defectors from the faith without the need for human law. BTW, the word murder had clear biblical connotations as the original "Ten Commandments" used the term "Thou shalt not commit murder." Thou shalt not kill is a new change. The term murder applies to those killings which are of innocent humans.
Indeed, why do people feel a need to call their conscience "God"? I don't have any name for mine but "conscience" :thumbup:
