Atheists condone and condemn rape

[Duck]

Atheists say that Death Penalty is murder, but they condone abortion.

I assume you are saying 'some of the atheists I have spoken to' seeing as atheists share no ideology or commonality beyond not believing in god.

A fetus is not aware, does not feel and is not conscious. There may be a point at which it is, and perhaps after that it should not be allowed to be aborted. But, this would curtail the woman's right to determine what happens to her body. Who has the more important right? The unborn fetus or the woman?

[NoraBrimstone]

Atheists say that Death Penalty is murder, but they condone abortion.

I assume you are saying 'some of the atheists I have spoken to' seeing as atheists share no ideology or commonality beyond not believing in god.

A fetus is not aware, does not feel and is not conscious. There may be a point at which it is, and perhaps after that it should not be allowed to be aborted. But, this would curtail the woman's right to determine what happens to her body. Who has the more important right? The unborn fetus or the woman?

Well, I liken this way of putting it:

There is a concept called body autonomy. Its generally considered a human right. Bodily autonomy means a person has control over who or what uses their body, for what, and for how long. Its why you can’t be forced to donate blood, tissue, or organs. Even if you are dead. Even if you’d save or improve 20 lives. It’s why someone can’t touch you, have sex with you, or use your body in any way without your continuous consent. A fetus is using someone’s body parts. Therefore under bodily autonomy, it is there by permission, not by right. It needs a persons continuous consent. If they deny and withdraw their consent, the pregnant person has the right to remove them from that moment. A fetus is equal in this regard because if I need someone else’s body parts to live, they can also legally deny me their use. By saying a fetus has a right to someone’s body parts until it’s born, despite the pregnant person’s wishes, you are doing two things.
1. Granting a fetus more rights to other people’s bodies than any born person.
2. Awarding a pregnant person less rights to their body than a corpse.

[WesOlsen]

Atheists say that Death Penalty is murder, but they condone abortion.

I assume you are saying 'some of the atheists I have spoken to' seeing as atheists share no ideology or commonality beyond not believing in god.

A fetus is not aware, does not feel and is not conscious. There may be a point at which it is, and perhaps after that it should not be allowed to be aborted. But, this would curtail the woman's right to determine what happens to her body. Who has the more important right? The unborn fetus or the woman?

Factor in the development of the brain and CNS in general. What we have is a world in which theists not only believe that they have the monopoly on right and wrong, but believe that abortion should be a purely religious matter, rather than one for medical science, secular politics and most importantly individual liberty. The death penalty for adults has next to nothing to do with abortion, to compare the two is to compare chalk and shite.

[Duck]

I assume you are saying 'some of the atheists I have spoken to' seeing as atheists share no ideology or commonality beyond not believing in god.

A fetus is not aware, does not feel and is not conscious. There may be a point at which it is, and perhaps after that it should not be allowed to be aborted. But, this would curtail the woman's right to determine what happens to her body. Who has the more important right? The unborn fetus or the woman?

Well, I liken this way of putting it:

There is a concept called body autonomy. Its generally considered a human right. Bodily autonomy means a person has control over who or what uses their body, for what, and for how long. Its why you can’t be forced to donate blood, tissue, or organs. Even if you are dead. Even if you’d save or improve 20 lives. It’s why someone can’t touch you, have sex with you, or use your body in any way without your continuous consent. A fetus is using someone’s body parts. Therefore under bodily autonomy, it is there by permission, not by right. It needs a persons continuous consent. If they deny and withdraw their consent, the pregnant person has the right to remove them from that moment. A fetus is equal in this regard because if I need someone else’s body parts to live, they can also legally deny me their use. By saying a fetus has a right to someone’s body parts until it’s born, despite the pregnant person’s wishes, you are doing two things. 1. Granting a fetus more rights to other people’s bodies than any born person.
2. Awarding a pregnant person less rights to their body than a corpse.

There is one crucial point missing here. The fetus is not there through choice, but rather through the actions of the mother. So you could infer the permission to use her body for support, as she got pregnant. The mother gave her permission implicitly by committing the act that caused the pregnancy (this particular avenue would not apply to a rape case, however. But, the fetus should not be considered there as of choice)

[Optimistic Mysanthrope]

What if she got pregnant whilst using contraception? Is the "permission" still implicit?

[NoraBrimstone]

Well, I liken this way of putting it:

There is one crucial point missing here. The fetus is not there through choice, but rather through the actions of the mother. So you could infer the permission to use her body for support, as she got pregnant. The mother gave her permission implicitly by committing the act that caused the pregnancy (this particular avenue would not apply to a rape case, however. But, the fetus should not be considered there as of choice)

That makes no difference. A person who needs blood or an organ is rarely in that position by choice, either. If you cause a car accident and another person invoves needs your blood or one of your organs, they can't take anything without your consent. And please don't start the whole punishing women for having sex crap. We're allowed to have sex. It's none of your business.

[Duck]

What if she got pregnant whilst using contraception? Is the "permission" still implicit?

Yes. Contraception is not perfect. You are responsible for the consequences of your actions. It isn't good enough to tell the police 'I was 99% sure that it wouldn't happen like this, it isn't my fault he is dead'.

---

There is one crucial point missing here. The fetus is not there through choice, but rather through the actions of the mother. So you could infer the permission to use her body for support, as she got pregnant. The mother gave her permission implicitly by committing the act that caused the pregnancy (this particular avenue would not apply to a rape case, however. But, the fetus should not be considered there as of choice)

That makes no difference. A person who needs blood or an organ is rarely in that position by choice, either. If you cause a car accident and another person invoves needs your blood or one of your organs, they can't take anything without your consent. And please don't start the whole punishing women for having sex crap. We're allowed to have sex. It's none of your business.

Well hold the phone. I never said you couldn't have sex, but you do need to understand that there can be consequences. And you are responsible for these. The car crash analogy is not the same. The fetus is dependent on you for survival, you created it and you put it there. The law will punish you for hurting someone with a car, but it will not take parts of your body (in the USA it could take your life, however).

I am not punishing women for having sex. I am just pointing out that they are responsible for their actions. Having sex has the possible consequence of getting pregnant. If you are not willing to take the risk, don't do it.

---

One more point - you are killing the fetus. You are just not helping the crash victim.

[The Valkyrie]

Homosexuality is a choice. Against biology and evolution and a virus in society that is spreading in America

You're saying it's not batural despite the fact it happens in nature?

And it DOES serve an evolutionary purpose.

[NoraBrimstone]

What if she got pregnant whilst using contraception? Is the "permission" still implicit?

Yes. Contraception is not perfect. You are responsible for the consequences of your actions. It isn't good enough to tell the police 'I was 99% sure that it wouldn't happen like this, it isn't my fault he is dead'.

---

That makes no difference. A person who needs blood or an organ is rarely in that position by choice, either. If you cause a car accident and another person invoves needs your blood or one of your organs, they can't take anything without your consent. And please don't start the whole punishing women for having sex crap. We're allowed to have sex. It's none of your business.

Well hold the phone. I never said you couldn't have sex, but you do need to understand that there can be consequences. And you are responsible for these. The car crash analogy is not the same. The fetus is dependent on you for survival, you created it and you put it there. The law will punish you for hurting someone with a car, but it will not take parts of your body (in the USA it could take your life, however).

I am not punishing women for having sex. I am just pointing out that they are responsible for their actions. Having sex has the possible consequence of getting pregnant. If you are not willing to take the risk, don't do it.

If you don't want or can't afford a child, terminating a pregnancy is the most responsible thing you can do.
Women aren't baby making machines, thankfully. We have the same rights to our bodies as anyone else. A foetus has no right to our bodies if we don't give consent.

[Duck]

If you don't want or can't afford a child, terminating a pregnancy is the most responsible thing you can do.
Women aren't baby making machines, thankfully. We have the same rights to our bodies as anyone else. A foetus has no right to our bodies if we don't give consent.

I am not saying keeping a child is necessarily the most responsible thing. I have not said that.

You do have rights, but at some point so must the fetus. If you make a choice that results in an outcome, you and you alone are responsible. You choose to have sex, and the (perhaps untended) consequence of a pregnancy. By the act, you have given consent for sperm to go into your body and thus impregnate you. That is the consent. Your actions give the consent. No action, no consent.