The abortion paradox

[Godscreated]

@ aleialoura after reading all the post I can see why you feel the way you do, I think that if a doctor is certain that both the mother and unborn child will die the mother has the right to decide to abort, I believe that is the only time. You are over looking why Christians do not believe in abortion, we see things from God's view and yes God saw that 12 year old girl you had to help through a situation she should have never been in. Those type of situations deserve consideration, I wish I had the answer for those situations, I do not, other than to put dad away forever so he can not do it again.

I would like to give you a short view of how I see this from a Christian view, God says that life is in the blood and in so many ways, spiritual and secular this is true. The unborn child develops it's own blood type before the mother knows she is pregnant, so this is when I see that the fetus becomes an unborn child. In Exodus, I do not recall chapter and verse, God says that if a man strikes a woman with child and the baby is born with a birth defect, that man is to suffer the same ie. born with a deformed arm and ect. If the child is born dead the man is to be put to death, thus God sees the true value of the unborn and we as Christians want to honor God's teaching. Yet remains those cases where the emotion of mankind, Christian or not, runs into conflict with what God teaches, unfortunately God does not give us all these situation and so we must try and make sense of them. This is part of the free will we are given and sometimes it just plain old sucks, there are those situations that just do not make sense. So as Christians we deal with the human emotion and what we believe is the will of God, and that dear lady is not an easy thing to do. I do agree with Chadwooters about abortion of the unborn baby. I do see an exception as I stated above, but what goes own today is total irresponsible on both the man and woman's part, and that irresponsiblity comes about mostly from selfishness and self righteousness and I'm not trying to apply this to you. Before I became a Christian I was against abortion and I told my wife if she got pregnant and the child was a threat to her life she would have to make the choice to abort, it would not have been mine to make.

[Red Celt]

Pssst! People! If you're anti-abortion... don't have one.

There we go. Problem solved. Let's all be happy again.

If you're anti-abortion, your powers to intercede amongst those who aren't... well, that's a big fat zero. But thanks for playing.

Oh, and there's no such thing as souls, so stop bleating on about the killing of innocents.

[The Grand Nudger]

Jesus christ GC, the god you just described is a bloodthirsty little cunt isn't he? Glad he's stuck between your ears. Wouldn't want that fucker out writing policy.

[CapnAwesome]

In Bibical Christianity, a monogamous, loving, committed, heterosexual marriage, sanctified by God, is less likely to end in infidelity, extra-marital promiscuity, family breakdown, unwanted babies, single-mothers, custody battles, family law litigation, unhappy childhoods, gender identity confusion, and the long term social pathologies which tax payers have to provide for years later after the initial damage is done.

The problem with this (or rather one of many problems) is that it simply isn't true. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm

Atheists and Agnostics have the lowest divorce rate, and Conservative Christians have the highest in the United States. Not really surprised that someone making the claims that you are hasn't properly researched it though.

(Edit: Jews actually have the highest, Conservative Christians have the highest amongst Christian Groups, Atheists still have the lowest.)

---

Why do the Christians place a ban on abortion while they simultanously encourage all the paths leading to unwanted pregnancy? I mean:

- lack of protection (both catholics and orthodox ban condoms and from what I have obserced the sheep really adhere to this)
- lack of masturbation (and hence poor awareness of one's own body and response control)
- repressive culture (and hence abnormal behaviour like sudden outbursts of suppressed feelings including murder or rape or both)

I do not perceive abortion as a matter of free personal choice - I am actually against it because it is just cruel to the little human being. BUT: I think we should not ban abortion before we ban all the stupidity leading to unwanted pregnancies. Condoms should always be used not only to protect oneself from pregnancy but also hepatitis, herpes etc. Masturbation should be regarded healthy and normal. And there should be less hatred and hypocrisy towards sex and sensuality in general. If that was the case, the amount of unwanted pregnancies would just plummet towards zero and there would be no need or will to abort. What do you think?

I've always been under the impression that it was to breed more Christians (or Muslims). If you encourage marriage, women to stay home, ban contraception (seriously!) Keep women uneducated baby-makers, etc. You end up with more people who believe like you. In every country where secularism increases, birthrates drop. Somebody figured this out centuries ago and millions of sheep are going along with it today under flimsy moral pretenses about the value of a cytoplasm.

If you can't convert them, breed more.

[genkaus]

Your Op is a complete non-starter.

Christians who think abortion is a sin do so because the unborn life is sacred. Therefore there is no such thing as an unborn child who is so unwanted that their murder is acceptable....to Christians...to Christians who think abortion must be banned...because unborn babies are innocent human beings...etc etc.

And so you're right back where you started this false dilemma. There's no such thing as an unwanted baby if you are an opponent of abortion.

One thing for certain in Biblical Christianity, is that the love of money does not take priority over the life of an unborn baby
making such babies an unwanted inconvenience.

Can anyone see the fallacy committed here? Anyone?

First you say that to those Christians, no babies are "so unwanted to warrant their death". From that, you conclude, no babies are unwarranted. That's an invalid conclusion. The babies can still be unwanted enough to be abandoned, to be given away or to be resented every day of their life for the missed opportunities. The opposition to contraception is still not justified.

In Bibical Christianity, a monogamous, loving, committed, heterosexual marriage, sanctified by God, is less likely to end in infidelity, extra-marital promiscuity, family breakdown, unwanted babies, single-mothers, custody battles, family law litigation, unhappy childhoods, gender identity confusion, and the long term social pathologies which tax payers have to provide for years later after the initial damage is done.

So its weird that so many of them do end exactly that way.

---

And a child is just a potential adult...whatever you choose to call it fetus, unborn baby, whatever, it is still a human, a very very young and vulnerable one. We all have a moral obligations to human life even in its earliest stages. Failures to implant occur naturally and are very different from actively removing an otherwise viable embryo. It's like comparing a heart attack to a gun shot wound.

Actually, its not human. That's the whole point. It's just a potential human and therefore does not incur any moral obligations.

The only contradiction is in the hearts of people who need to convince themselves that abortion is not evil so they can continue having guilt free sex and avoid any real responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Except, healthy consensual sex should be guilt-free and it shouldn't incur any real responsibilities that both parties do not want to take on.

---

What if the unborn child is unloved, and the mother isn't willing to stop drinking and doing drugs while she's pregnant? Are you willing to take care of and love born people whose parents are unwilling?

Of course. Aren't you? Or are you saying that because you don't want to love and care for the unwanted children, they should be killed?

You are? So must have literally hundred of adopted children that you love and take care of. Do you?

Unless we have a moral obligation to very very young and vulnerable human beings.

We don't. Not unless we chose to.

Therefore your solution is to kill all the problem children. The person who aborts to cut expenses greedily places a higher value on their own comfort that the life of another human being. Greed drives them to kill.

By allowing children to die in Africa while you live in comfort, you are greedily placing a higher value on your comfort than on the life of other human beings. Greed is driving you to kill.

[Faith No More]

Therefore your solution is to kill all the problem children. The person who aborts to cut expenses greedily places a higher value on their own comfort that the life of another human being. Greed drives them to kill.

Do you go to abortion clinics and offer to pay and care for every child in the womb of a mother preparing to have an abortion?

[festive1]

And a child is just a potential adult...whatever you choose to call it fetus, unborn baby, whatever, it is still a human, a very very young and vulnerable one. We all have a moral obligations to human life even in its earliest stages. Failures to implant occur naturally and are very different from actively removing an otherwise viable embryo. It's like comparing a heart attack to a gun shot wound.

The only contradiction is in the hearts of people who need to convince themselves that abortion is not evil so they can continue having guilt free sex and avoid any real responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

HUGE difference between a glob of cells that has to grow and be nurtured in a woman's womb and a child. Babies can survive as long as they have access to food, admittedly for an infant to grow into a functioning, healthy adult they need significantly more than just food, but also being held, interacted with, and taught by the examples of their caregivers with how to interact with other people and their environment. The potential baby has to be fed and grow inside a woman's body. At the very least, whether a woman wants to carry the fetus to term is that woman's decision, and hers alone. Adoption is often seen as the "gentler" solution, but as a woman who has carried two babies to term (one of which was an unplanned pregnancy), I know it is often the case that women become bonded to the fetus long before it is viable outside of the womb. How heart wrenching is it to become bonded to a life then give it up? Far be it for me to say how an unplanned pregnancy should end. I at least allow some room for the woman's feelings. If she doesn't want a baby, and doesn't feel she would be strong enough emotionally to give it up, it's not up to me to decide for her.

P.S. The medical term for miscarriage is "spontaneous abortion."

[KichigaiNeko]

By definition then....

EVERY period a woman has is an abortion??

Tread carefully here.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's why you murderous whores are so unclean.
(no, of course not, as with everything proposed by these motherfuckers...nothing noteworthy is happening until there's a dick involved)

[KichigaiNeko]

Basically ....yep Rhythm.

silly bloody males.