God does not have the right to take our life away. He must carry us to term and let us live our life to its natural conclusion, or that makes him no better then those sinful, sinful people who get abortions.
If giving someone life implies you can take it away, that would mean abortion is permissible.
“But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” 1 Timothy 5:8
& if anyone is interested in a film about what happens when access to abortion is restricted by the government, I highly recommend the film "4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days." Romanian film based on real accounts from women.
Legally speaking health is left purposely vague, it can mean financial health, mental health, emotional health. Almost any reason can be made up as long as you justify it under the word health, also it removes the criminal penalties associated with allowing babies to die if they manage to survive botched abortions.
This is something that caused Gosnell to go to jail for life, not to long ago.
"Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal illness such as cancer or leukemia, and, if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save, life." ~Dr Alan Guttmacher of Planned Parenthood. https://www.abortionfacts.com/facts/8
deletedover 5 years
If the social welfare system ever manages to get itself "fixed" then hopefully less abortions occur, and I'd imagine that "socioeconomic status" ceases to become an acceptable reason.
deletedover 5 years
No, I'm not. Try making actual arguments and using real justification.
well I did say most, I mean I see your point and all but... I don't think we should force women to have unwanted babies, both would probably suffer for the rest of their lives, really.
(keywords probably, exception happen but its the general statement holds I think)
I think your second post is where the main rift is. I would argue the right to life overrides anyone else's inconvenience. I hope you would agree that it's a beautiful thing to have that human dignity that no one can take from you no matter how down you get or how rough life treats you, you deserve to live and be loved and treated with some respect.
Btw I didn't say they had a potential to become a human, they ARE human. An adult and a child and a senior and a teenager and an adolescent etc. may have diff rights to stuff but all have the same right to life. These are all different stages of human development and fetus is included in that, idk why people treat it differently.
@Megami, tbh I like your points, I thought maybe it was long due to repeating but you presented diff stuff there.
Regarding to parasite you first say not to compare fetus/humans to animals/animal rights but then compare fetus/humans to non human parasites (aka animals). Which of course killing a human is murder but killing an animal isn't just like killing a non human parasite wouldn't be considered murder (I agree it would be ridiculous if that was the case). It does indeed take a woman to help the fetus live just like everyone of us did.
"At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life." [Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: etc. I know definitions may vary and other say otherwise but it's certainly not an opinion. The combination of the two sex cells creates an entirely new being which is clearly a human. No one every goes to a pregnant woman wondering if they'll give birth to a human or not.
I'm not trying to harass women, I'm trying to speak for the baby that can't defend it's own life yet and the burden to develop it to get it to that stage falls on the mother (which some find fortunate and others not so much, but no one else can make life so I think it's pretty cool). Laws don't always equal morality. ie. I'm sure no one will say speeding is immoral but it is against the law. Just because it's legal (or illegal) doesn't change its morality. For the record I don't think anyone who has had one should be arrested or anything and I'm sorry you had to go through that.
I actually am not capable of describing the entire philosophy in 2000 words or less, so if you're curious you can just read the article.
@BlackSnakeMoan I can tell you actually don't understand the consequences of what you believe as a logical argument.
Either A. Fetus's have rights and we should be concerned with their suffering.
Or
B. Fetu's don't have rights and we should NOT be concerned with their suffering
You're inability to understand this logically in your own argument is directly the result of something called cognitive dissonance.
You can abort the child in evictionism IF* and only if the Zygote/Fetus/Baby cannot survive outside the womb. This moral theory is superior because it maximizes the preservation of personhood while fundamentally securing the right to bodily autonomy.
