Posts: 28389
Threads: 226
Joined: March 24, 2014
Reputation:
184
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 3:03 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2014 at 3:31 am by Losty.)
(May 21, 2014 at 3:00 am)Esquilax Wrote: (May 21, 2014 at 2:55 am)Buzz Wrote: 1That is a strange stereotype regarding Pro-life people.
1The term pro-life is a label for persons who wish to safeguard infants by opposing abortion, not persons who wish to safeguard adults and older children.
The goal of the pro-life movement is to protect developing beings who are in a state where they are unable to defend and speak for themselves, 2not to provide healthcare and food; there are organizations specifically made to provide those necessities. Once the being who needs protecting develops to the stage where it can defend itself; (the age of reason) the job is done.

That's not pro-life, then. That's just pro-forced birth. Kind of a dishonest use of language, not to mention a demonstration that all of that emotionally charged rhetoric about poor little babies is just a smokescreen, and you don't actually care about the children themselves.
Or even babies. Wtf is this guy really actually serious??
(August 21, 2017 at 11:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: "I'm not a troll"
Religious Views: He gay
0/10
Hammy Wrote:and we also have a sheep on our bed underneath as well
Posts: 5598
Threads: 112
Joined: July 16, 2012
Reputation:
74
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 3:22 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2014 at 3:22 am by Ryantology.)
(May 21, 2014 at 2:55 am)Buzz Wrote: That is a strange stereotype regarding Pro-life people.
1The term pro-life is a label for persons who wish to safeguard infants by opposing abortion, not persons who wish to safeguard adults and older children.
The goal of the pro-life movement is to protect developing beings who are in a state where they are unable to defend and speak for themselves, 2not to provide healthcare and food; there are organizations specifically made to provide those necessities. Once the being who needs protecting develops to the stage where it can defend itself; (the age of reason) the job is done.

Is it such a strange stereotype when you go and show yourself to fit it perfectly?
You call yourself "pro-life", but you're not. After a certain age, the sanctity of human life isn't of concern to you.
Posts: 596
Threads: 3
Joined: January 21, 2013
Reputation:
7
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 3:33 am
This has probably been said but many religious "pro-lifers"are only pro-life when it suits them and you only need to get them talking about the unborn victims of the flood or the amalekites to see them making excuses for their abortionist god.
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 4:18 am
Hey Buzz, if god came down and ordered you to kill an unborn infant, would you do it?
Actually, that question goes to all the religious pro-lifers who come to this thread.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Posts: 11
Threads: 0
Joined: January 28, 2014
Reputation:
0
RE: Posters who replied to post #58
May 21, 2014 at 4:40 am
1Pro-life is a term concerning abortion, not human life in general. You folks misunderstood my post, taking it to mean that we shouldn't care about children after they reach a certain age.
That was in fact not my intent. I was merely discussing terminology.
(May 21, 2014 at 2:55 am)Buzz Wrote: (May 21, 2014 at 1:53 am)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: Anybody who feels a moral compulsion to force women to have babies they don't want, and who does not feel an equally-strong moral compulsion to ensure that these babies grow up without the fear of starvation or preventable medical problems, isn't pro-life at all. They believe that life is sacred until it is out of the womb. Then, fuck it.
The term pro-life is a label for persons who wish to safeguard infants by opposing abortion, not persons who wish to safeguard adults and older children.
The goal of the pro-life movement is to protect developing beings who are in a state where they are unable to defend and speak for themselves, 2not to provide healthcare and food; there are organizations specifically made to provide those necessities. Once the being who needs protecting develops to the stage where it can defend itself; (the age of reason) the job is done. This post means to say that providing food and medicine for children is not the goal of the pro-life movement.

Adults seeking aid for parenting look to organizations intended for parenting.
Teenagers who seek aid for drug abuse rely on organizations intended to address drug abuse.
Likewise, infants who need help have organizations intended to meet the needs of infants. Such an organization is the pro-life movement, which is not intended to provide food, healthcare, or child rearing.
The pro-life movement deals specifically with abortion, not food distribution. If we wish to protect infants from starvation, then we shouldn't look to the pro-life movement, which isn't intended to deal with such matters, but to certain charities and other organizations.
The job is done for the pro-life movement. They have played their part in preserving life; now other movements must play their part.
(May 21, 2014 at 3:22 am)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: 1You call yourself "pro-life", but you're not. After a certain age, the sanctity of human life isn't of concern to you.  If anything, preventing our children from being born is showing disrespect for the sanctity of human life.
(May 21, 2014 at 4:18 am)Esquilax Wrote: Hey Buzz, if god came down and ordered you to kill an unborn infant, would you do it?  God wouldn't come down and give me orders like that.
Buzz
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 4:59 am
(May 21, 2014 at 4:40 am)Buzz Wrote: 

1Pro-life is a term concerning abortion, not human life in general. You folks misunderstood my post, taking it to mean that we shouldn't care about children after they reach a certain age.
So that'd be... misleading, to call the movement "pro-life," wouldn't it? If we're having to be as specific as you're being here, you'd have to call it something like "pro-forced birth," just to keep the terminology accurate.
Quote: (May 21, 2014 at 4:18 am)Esquilax Wrote: Hey Buzz, if god came down and ordered you to kill an unborn infant, would you do it?
God wouldn't come down and give me orders like that.
Classic avoidance. He gave orders like that in the bible, and even if he factually doesn't, this is what's called a "hypothetical," where you answer a "what if?" scenario. It doesn't have to literally happen; hell dude, I'm an atheist, I already know god doesn't come down and give orders. But I'm trying to gauge your commitment to your stance, and so I'm asking: if god gave you that order, would you obey it or not?
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Posts: 7179
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 5:29 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2014 at 5:32 am by Tonus.)
(May 20, 2014 at 11:31 pm)Heywood Wrote: (May 20, 2014 at 3:56 pm)Tonus Wrote: I think it's mostly a religious issue, promoted by male-dominated religions. So they could just as easily shift the burden by starting a bit earlier in the process. For example: if you masturbate, you are potentially destroying a human life. If you use a condom, or pull out before you ejaculate, or perform anal or oral sex, you are preventing the conception of a human being who might live for 80+ years because you don't want to be inconvenienced for 18 years. A sperm is as much a potential human being as a tire is a potential car. A tire by itself has no potential to be a car and a sperm by itself has no potential to be a human being. Claims that masturbation kills future human beings are rubbish. Eh, it's no more or less rubbish than lots of other religious claims. My point is that the line is drawn at a point that is very convenient for men, which is not surprising in male-dominated societies.
(May 21, 2014 at 12:26 am)Zidneya Wrote: And parenthood is a lifetime job genius not a 18 year old one. You seem to have completely missed the point. Where in my post did I state or imply anything about parenthood?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 6990
Threads: 89
Joined: January 6, 2012
Reputation:
103
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 7:05 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2014 at 7:07 am by Fidel_Castronaut.)
(May 21, 2014 at 4:40 am)Buzz Wrote: 

1Pro-life is a term concerning abortion, not human life in general. You folks misunderstood my post, taking it to mean that we shouldn't care about children after they reach a certain age.
That was in fact not my intent. I was merely discussing terminology.
Arguably, then, it's a meaningless term.
Pro-life to me indicates a position where the stance is life at any cost. Life doesn't stop at birth.
I understand all the objections people have raised regarding this and indeed agree with them. The argument over the terminology is almost redundant because the term pro-life seems like a contradiction when you have the same people advocating for cuts in welfare and/or healthcare.
It's certainly not a compassionate position to hold.
(May 21, 2014 at 4:40 am)Buzz Wrote: (May 21, 2014 at 4:18 am)Esquilax Wrote: Hey Buzz, if god came down and ordered you to kill an unborn infant, would you do it? God wouldn't come down and give me orders like that.
I have to ask how you would know this?
Posts: 9176
Threads: 76
Joined: November 21, 2013
Reputation:
40
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 8:28 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2014 at 8:42 am by Chad32.)
(May 20, 2014 at 11:47 pm)Losty Wrote: (May 20, 2014 at 11:31 pm)Heywood Wrote: A sperm is as much a potential human being as a tire is a potential car. A tire by itself has no potential to be a car and a sperm by itself has no potential to be a human being. Claims that masturbation kills future human beings are rubbish.
By your own logic, a fetus by itself has no potential to be a person. Thanks have a nice day.
How did you get that from what Losty said? I mean yes, if left literally by itsself, a fetus will die. A baby would too. That's not what Losty meant, and you know it.
Posts: 1965
Threads: 83
Joined: June 15, 2010
Reputation:
37
RE: Pro-life atheists
May 21, 2014 at 8:56 am
(May 21, 2014 at 12:13 am)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: That's weird. You keep changing your position here.
When you are that used to moving the goalposts......
"How is it that a lame man does not annoy us while a lame mind does? Because a lame man recognizes that we are walking straight, while a lame mind says that it is we who are limping." - Pascal
|