Abortion is morally wrong

[The Grand Nudger]

"We atheists" do not have collective thoughts.

Why do you resist? Assimilation is inevitable.

[bennyboy]

If fetuses are human beings than the question becomes what business is it of mothers to do with other humans bodies? The answer to me, is clear. If a fetus is a human than bodily rights must also be given to them and murder is ontologically wrong.

Bundles of cells are not people.

/thread

If a collection of cells with a DNA sequence was all it took to establish protection, our world would be retarded. You'd have to hook up hair follicles to life support. You'd have to convict every teen with a wet dream with murder.

We don't care about those things BECAUSE THEY DON'T THINK OR FEEL. And neither does a young fetus.

[Arthur123]

Esquilax, I will attempt to address your arguments in this post.

I believe what a human fits firmly in with genetics. In fact, I believe this is all it comes down too. Enter my Domesticus Marsus example: A being who thinks, behaves and looks exactly like us but has a different genetic history and evolved from different organisms on a different planet. This organism though functionally equivalent, is not a human being. You state that under your definition certain things would be considered human beings that clearly are not. Can you site any examples besides a human corpse? I think this example is an ineffective argument because it is incoherent. A corspse is a *dead* human being. You cant kill something that is already dead. In the case of fetuses, the nature of it being alive is assumed. As for narrow arguments, I am using Modus ponens as my argument structure. Simply, if P, Q. P ergo Q. If fetuses are human beings than abortion is wrong. Fetuses are human beings therefore abortion is wrong.


In regards to the car crash example, it was an illustration showing where the blame should directly lie in regards to Thomsons article. Which ties into this principle.


If one puts another in a situation without their consent, that situation can not be worse than they would have been in otherwise, and that consent to put someone in a dependent situation, includes the responsibility of caring for that person.
This means that:
If causing someone to exist and then killing that person, does more harm than not causing such a person to exist, abortion is not permissible.
Also,
If one consents to a situation where another is dependent upon them, and that it would have been otherwise true that the person was not dependent upon them, the person consenting is obligated to provide for the other.


Furthermore, I shall quote you, "We do not prevent other humans from seeking to mitigate the consequences of their actions." Of course we do when by mitigating their they commit a morally impermissible act.


Lisa, thanks so much for joining the discussion! I believe there is an inherent difference between a zygote and a toenail cell. One is a part of a human being while the other is an actual human being. As Dr. Dianne Irving puts it, "the issue is not when does human life begin, but rather when does the life of every human being begin. A human kidney or liver, a human skin cell, a sperm or an oocyte all possess human life, but they are not human beings - they are only parts of a human being. If a single sperm or a single oocyte were implanted into a woman's uterus, they would simply rot. They would not grow as human embryos or human fetuses who are human beings."

And Dr. C. Ward Fisher, "Let’s frame the issue: in human sexual reproduction, when conception [or fertilization] occurs
the continuum of life is initiated. There must be a moment of time at which the time continuum of life begins.
For all these reasons among others, I believe the strength of my argument stands...Biologically, then,first contact
is the event from which all else will follow. There is no point beyond that at which development is suspended or held in abeyance." Stated similarly in Alexander Prus' metaphysical principle, if an organism who once existed has never died than this organism still exists. There i biological continuity between me and my fetus and since I am a human it follows that so is a fetus. This genetically complete, whole, human organism directing its own growth and genetic future in an unbreaking chain of growth is nothing like that of a toenail cell that can be harnessed and experimented with to clone a human being. My definition does not rest on potentialities but actualities and ontology.

Kindest Regards,

[Little lunch]

Well, we Atheists do seem to have exactly the same answers about abortion, none of us thought of all this ourselves. I've seen quite a few abortion threads and I'm getting serious dejavu from both sides, and I know we're all sick of hearing about it.

Recently I read that a couple on IVF in Sydney had twin boys terminated because they wanted a girl. I know that the standard response as a male is for me to say it's not my body, not my business, but my brain doesn't allow me to just switch off on certain subjects.
To me, that couple's actions were inhuman.
I wouldn't call them murderers but I wouldn't give them the time of day either.

I also think it's dangerous to have one standard type answer to deal with any situation.
Babies aren't video games where you can keep resetting til you get what you want, but that is currently how the law sees it.

Every other aspect of pro-choice I agree with.
Although I would prefer to see less abortions and more funding for mothers. Everyone should be free to be parents if they wish, no matter what their financial situation is.
In an ideal world, anyway.

[KUSA]

All this talk about abortion is making me hungry.

---

---

[GrandizerII]

Esquilax, I will attempt to address your arguments in this post.

I believe what a human fits firmly in with genetics. In fact, I believe this is all it comes down too. Enter my Domesticus Marsus example: A being who thinks, behaves and looks exactly like us but has a different genetic history and evolved from different organisms on a different planet. This organism though functionally equivalent, is not a human being. You state that under your definition certain things would be considered human beings that clearly are not. Can you site any examples besides a human corpse? I think this example is an ineffective argument because it is incoherent. A corspse is a *dead* human being. You cant kill something that is already dead. In the case of fetuses, the nature of it being alive is assumed. As for narrow arguments, I am using Modus ponens as my argument structure. Simply, if P, Q. P ergo Q. If fetuses are human beings than abortion is wrong. Fetuses are human beings therefore abortion is wrong.


In regards to the car crash example, it was an illustration showing where the blame should directly lie in regards to Thomsons article. Which ties into this principle.


If one puts another in a situation without their consent, that situation can not be worse than they would have been in otherwise, and that consent to put someone in a dependent situation, includes the responsibility of caring for that person.
This means that:
If causing someone to exist and then killing that person, does more harm than not causing such a person to exist, abortion is not permissible.
Also,
If one consents to a situation where another is dependent upon them, and that it would have been otherwise true that the person was not dependent upon them, the person consenting is obligated to provide for the other.


Furthermore, I shall quote you, "We do not prevent other humans from seeking to mitigate the consequences of their actions." Of course we do when by mitigating their they commit a morally impermissible act.


Lisa, thanks so much for joining the discussion! I believe there is an inherent difference between a zygote and a toenail cell. One is a part of a human being while the other is an actual human being. As Dr. Dianne Irving puts it, "the issue is not when does human life begin, but rather when does the life of every human being begin. A human kidney or liver, a human skin cell, a sperm or an oocyte all possess human life, but they are not human beings - they are only parts of a human being. If a single sperm or a single oocyte were implanted into a woman's uterus, they would simply rot. They would not grow as human embryos or human fetuses who are human beings."

And Dr. C. Ward Fisher, "Let’s frame the issue: in human sexual reproduction, when conception [or fertilization] occurs
the continuum of life is initiated. There must be a moment of time at which the time continuum of life begins.
For all these reasons among others, I believe the strength of my argument stands...Biologically, then,first contact
is the event from which all else will follow. There is no point beyond that at which development is suspended or held in abeyance." Stated similarly in Alexander Prus' metaphysical principle, if an organism who once existed has never died than this organism still exists. There i biological continuity between me and my fetus and since I am a human it follows that so is a fetus. This genetically complete, whole, human organism directing its own growth and genetic future in an unbreaking chain of growth is nothing like that of a toenail cell that can be harnessed and experimented with to clone a human being. My definition does not rest on potentialities but actualities and ontology.

Kindest Regards,

All of this is just a massive red herring, Arthur. We're not just simply discussing whether a fetus is this or that. Rather, whether the rights of a fetus should trump the rights of a person who may not want to have it residing within her body, and taking advantage of it, for nine months.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion

---

Ah, I missed this one the first time round:

If one puts another in a situation without their consent, that situation can not be worse than they would have been in otherwise, and that consent to put someone in a dependent situation, includes the responsibility of caring for that person.
This means that:
If causing someone to exist and then killing that person, does more harm than not causing such a person to exist, abortion is not permissible.
Also,
If one consents to a situation where another is dependent upon them, and that it would have been otherwise true that the person was not dependent upon them, the person consenting is obligated to provide for the other.

I strongly disagree. Even if the woman caused the existence of a fetus, she is not obliged to carry it in her body for nine months. As long as the fetus depends on her for survival, the fetus also puts her at a risk of suffering and even dying because of it. So the fetus is actually responsible for her suffering. And if that's the case, then the fetus should not have the right to do so, and should be aborted if the woman so wishes.

[Losty]

Recently I read that a couple on IVF in Sydney had twin boys terminated because they wanted a girl. I know that the standard response as a male is for me to say it's not my body, not my business, but my brain doesn't allow me to just switch off on certain subjects.
To me, that couple's actions were inhuman.
I wouldn't call them murderers but I wouldn't give them the time of day either.

What the fuck. I am tempted to go to the insult thread and look up every insult I can find. I think the comment is so stupid that I am tempted to call you a wanker even though I think it's creepy when Americans say it.

IVF, you fertilatize eggs. Usually too many in case some are defective. Then you choose the ones you want and and toss the rest. That's how that works.

Unless mean they were alread so many weeks along and terminated when the found out the gender. In which case I still think you're comment is really stupid. If they abort the baby their reasoning makes no difference. Why does it matter if it's because they're just not ready, or because they hate babies, wanted a girl, baby has down syndrome, whatever reason it's still none of your business

[Minimalist]

8 pages in and I have yet to see a single rational argument for why this obnoxious putz thinks he gets to tell someone else how to live.

Could I have missed it?

[Losty]

No

[Little lunch]

I'm sorry you feel that way, Losty.
I'm working my way through it, I may change my mind but that's my opinion at present.
No need to write me off like that.
I realise it's a touchy subject because men have been telling women what to do with their bodies forever.
If men got pregnant there would be an abortion clinic tucked away in the back of every pub.

I apologise if I offended anyone and I will graciously bow out of the conversation and go away to reevaluate my opinions.