How do the So-called Prol-Lifers Feel About Teratomas?

[Anomalocaris]

What I mean is that people often face circumstances in which there really are no good options. Like the street car dilemma where you must choose between allowing a car load of passengers to die if you don’t pull a switch would kill a rail worker.

How has this anything to do with teratomas? 

It's the teratoma in his skull speaking.

[robvalue]

Terror Thomas? I thought it was meant to be doubting Thomas.

This is some messed up stuff. I think I heard about this before and blocked it out.

[Cyberman]

Well I thought it was going to be about Terry Thomas. I thought "oh, they're having a go at him, now?"

[Nope]

What I mean is that people often face circumstances in which there really are no good options. Like the street car dilemma where you must choose between allowing a car load of passengers to die if you don’t pull a switch would kill a rail worker.

How has this anything to do with teratomas? 

Who is facing a choice? The parents didn't make a decision for this to happen to them.

[vorlon13]

If the teratoma is punishment from God/Jesus/Spook for willful sinning then the parents did have some control over it.

[robvalue]

Talk about cruel and unusual punishment.

[Hatshepsut]

In the minds of fundies, a fetus is alive when the first cell splits.  I am not sure that 2 cells have a soul...

Yet it's obvious that first cell is alive. It even has its own genome, distinct from the parents.' Why the shrill cries of "mass of cells" anyway? The abortion issue isn't really about whether the fetus is alive, or even whether it has a soul. It's a question of whether the fetus' "right to life" outweighs the "right of women not to be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies." Both of these rights are reasonable. A fetus has a definite interest in its chance to be born whether it's able to articulate that or not. Pregnancy represents a major burden on the mother. Nor do women generally seek abortions in a cavalier way, "for convenience," as we keep hearing from the anti-sin crowd. Roe v. Wade attempts to resolve the conundrum via a compromise with arbitrarily demarked "trimesters." Perhaps unsatisfying to the partisans on all sides, yet workable in our day and age.

[Nope]

In the minds of fundies, a fetus is alive when the first cell splits.  I am not sure that 2 cells have a soul...

Yet it's obvious that first cell is alive. It even has its own genome, distinct from the parents.' Why the shrill cries of "mass of cells" anyway? The abortion issue isn't really about whether the fetus is alive, or even whether it has a soul. It's a question of whether the fetus' "right to life" outweighs the "right of women not to be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies." Both of these rights are reasonable. A fetus has a definite interest in its chance to be born whether it's able to articulate that or not. Pregnancy represents a major burden on the mother. Nor do women generally seek abortions in a cavalier way, "for convenience," as we keep hearing from the anti-sin crowd. Roe v. Wade attempts to resolve the conundrum via a compromise with arbitrarily demarked "trimesters." Perhaps unsatisfying to the partisans on all sides, yet workable in our day and age.

Could you explain the bolded part more? How does anything have an interest in being born if it doesn't have a brain that is formed enough to care?

Even if that is their slogan, the prolife movement isn't about 'the right to life'. If they cared about the right to life, pro lifers(I detest that term)  wouldn't be so many who believe in the death penalty or seem so crazily pro war.  The fact that most pro lifers are Christian means that the way that they view fetuses is different than nonChristians. Many modern Christians feel that the soul is part of the fetus at conception. 

http://www.christianpost.com/news/gallup...ife-75772/   (Link to prove that most pro lifers are Christian.)

Here is another article. Jewish people, for the most part, believe in the right of a woman to abortion. Why? Because they believed that the soul became part of the child at a later stage of development than modern Christians do.

http://www.jewishjournal.com/judaismands...n_abortion

[vorlon13]

In the minds of fundies, a fetus is alive when the first cell splits.  I am not sure that 2 cells have a soul...

Yet it's obvious that first cell is alive. It even has its own genome, distinct from the parents.' Why the shrill cries of "mass of cells" anyway? The abortion issue isn't really about whether the fetus is alive, or even whether it has a soul. It's a question of whether the fetus' "right to life" outweighs the "right of women not to be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies." Both of these rights are reasonable. A fetus has a definite interest in its chance to be born whether it's able to articulate that or not. Pregnancy represents a major burden on the mother. Nor do women generally seek abortions in a cavalier way, "for convenience," as we keep hearing from the anti-sin crowd. Roe v. Wade attempts to resolve the conundrum via a compromise with arbitrarily demarked "trimesters." Perhaps unsatisfying to the partisans on all sides, yet workable in our day and age.

Regarding the 'anti-sin' crowd, we need to be aware of their sincerity of belief, or lack thereof.   When they claim religious motivation for their protests yet their 'sacred' tome describes life beginning at the first breath, the infant having no value till one month old, birthdays celebrated/noted instead of conception days, censuses not counting infants, and directions for making abortifacients, we rightly and logically conclude they, in fact, do not have religious motivation for their stance.

Makes it very easy for me to disregard the religiousites position on abortion just like they disregard their supposedly sacred book on this topic.

And then a further aggravation, the religousites look down their noses at me for my atheist disbelief in their god, and I am looking back and wondering WTF about THEIR disbelief in His word.


 

[Regina]

How could anyone abort this. Awwwww its so cute.

WTF is that?!

Same reaction, ew