RE: Abortion: 10 years as an atheist and I still don't get it
February 25, 2020 at 10:58 am
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2020 at 11:09 am by Mister Agenda.)
(February 24, 2020 at 11:00 am)FlatAssembler Wrote:(February 24, 2020 at 8:24 am)Belacqua Wrote: Suppose the father doesn't want to pay to support the child after it's born. Is it ethical for the government to force him to pay?Well, I think it's unethical for a government to force a father to pay alimentation. Unless the father stole the money from the mother. The father might have legitimate reasons for refusing to pay. Maybe he needs that money more than the mother does, maybe he needs that money to pay for his medication which he will die if he doesn't manage to pay. The government can't be expected to always have the information it needs to make such decisions.
How do we decide when a parent should be forced to support and when he or she shouldn't be forced?
All those are the kinds of things family courts routinely make decisions about; and if the father doesn't make the court aware of the relevant information, that's hardly the court's fault. Maybe where you're from the father must pay child support if he's penniless and at death's door but in these parts the courts will make allowances for the father's situation; and the mother's as well; not all women need child support to meet their child's needs.
(February 24, 2020 at 11:08 am)Fierce Wrote: I do agree that if a woman can make the decision on her own what to do with her own body, the man should have a viable option of not providing care for a child he never wanted. There are two people to consider, and the law favoring the woman in a time when women are keen on equality and independence makes no sense. If the woman wants autonomy over her body, let her alone take care of the child she wants to keep when the father wants no part.
There are three people to consider: the father, the mother, and their child. The government and society have a vested interest in ensuring the child's material needs are adequately met.
(February 24, 2020 at 11:48 pm)Agnostico Wrote:The Grand Nudger Wrote:Yes, abortion is mentioned in magic book, as I already explained to you. Magic book is fine with it, magic book recommends it
Does it? Where?
Numbers 5: 11-31
You know, the Bible is a highly influential book, I recommend you read the whole thing when you can find the time, front to back. You don't have to be a Jew or Christian to get insight into modern religious thinking from it. Not everyone's cup of tea, though.
(February 25, 2020 at 7:07 am)Klorophyll Wrote: It's amusing to see atheists rationalize abortion with all kinds of analogies, the underlying reasoning being that the infant's life is less worth than the mother's. All this just to comfortably have more sex. You are senseless murderers at the baby scale. The more mature murderers who understood atheism better are the kind of exemplary leaders like Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, etc. and the pyramids of skulls associated with their names.
How can you justify killing millions of bacteria when you shower, atheists? Aren't they life too?
A fetus is not an infant. Check your dictionary.
And why would you think killing bacteria would be an issue for atheists?
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.