Abortion

[McBell]

You are not my wife, I'm autonomous from you overall--yet I'm to surrender my life to you under certain circumstances per the scriptures. I'm not autonomous from my spouse, my parents or my children. I go to work and earn money using my body and mind and I'm not autonomous from paying taxes or helping support church leaders--they are depending on the labors from my body.

I hope that helps. Part of my thinking of a child as a blessing rather than a parasite or burden or, to be frank, a free will choice (I have contraception if I choose also) is the blessings and reality in this world of interdependence over independence.

If we maintain abortion as legal due to autonomy should taxes be legal? How about police and fire services? 3,000 died on 9/11, and we recall that most of them were emergency responders who did not flee the scene, willfully at their peril to save the lives of others. There are parallels there with pregnancy, I know it.

Are you seriously unable to tell the difference between consensually giving up bodily autonomy and have no say in giving up bodily autonomy?

A WOMAN WHO CHOOSES TO BEAR A CHILD HAS TO GIVE UP BODILY AUTONOMY. Or at least, that is how those oppose my position on abortion present it. So be consistent, and if you are pro-choice, your question is moot.

Thank you for making it so painfully obvious that you are unable to tell the difference between consensually giving up bodily autonomy and have no say in giving up bodily autonomy.

You seem brighter than this last post of yours.

ROTFLMAO

 

[MysticSang'ha]

A WOMAN WHO CHOOSES TO BEAR A CHILD HAS TO GIVE UP BODILY AUTONOMY. Or at least, that is how those oppose my position on abortion present it. So be consistent, and if you are pro-choice, your question is moot.

No. A woman who chooses to bear a child is simply choosing to bear a child; and therefore exercises her right to bodily autonomy by making her choice.

The argument for bodily autonomy is consistent. As has been stated, you are showing you do not understand.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Yawn.

Help me understand. I noted I felt wounded and patronized so you did it again? Well you have spoken that you neither forgive nor accept. Indeed you are an example of someone on the other side of the world from me, spiritually speaking.

I hope THIS doesn't sound patronizing, but your wounds must be deep. I don't know who hurt you so badly but I would say, and I know you must know this, too, God can heal. I will continue to try to be Christian to you when you are rude and hurtful. That's my (new) nature in God.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Therefore, all the ones who never heard of the Gospel are at a disadvantage (e.g. go to Hell).

Correct?

Ciao

- viole

Respectfully, I disagree. I have more light and information in the NT but God loves many who are without those scriptures, by His nature.

 

[viole]

Respectfully, I disagree. I have more light and information in the NT but God loves many who are without those scriptures, by His nature.

Yes, but...

Does hearing about the Gospel provide an advantage, or not? That is a binary question that requires a binary answer.

So, is it yes... Or no?

Ciao

- viole

 

[BilliardsBall]

The optimal word there is CHOOSES. If a woman completely and willingly opts to not have an abortion, that's her right. She's using her bodily autonomy to make a medical decision about her life, in this case not having an abortion. Good for her.
If abortion is made illegal, however, this choice is taken away. A woman who is FORCED to bear a child to term has lost their bodily autonomy.Because they literally have lost a say in the matter pertaining to their own body.
Bodily autonomy is the underlying fundamental key element in modern medicine and what is considered it's ethical practices. Once someone reaches the age of 18 (or younger depending on the circumstance or country) they are free to choose their own medical procedures. They can avoid lifesaving operations, they can say do not resuscitate me and the doctors MUST follow their wishes, they can opt for homeopathy, they can have their tubes tied etc etc etc. That is their choice. An abortion, like it or not, is considered a medical procedure. A woman should have complete control over that particular medical procedure. To take that choice away for any reason is, according to modern medicine, unethical. Because bodily autonomy ceases as soon as you take away choice in the matter.

If you work for a church you are making a decision freely, unless the church literally owns you (which is against the law just FYI) that is not the same as giving up bodily autonomy.
Taxes are also a choice, but if you rely on today's comfortable lifestyle and public services it's expected that if you make money, a portion goes towards those services. That's not losing bodily autonomy, that's being asked to not be a selfish prick. The legal ramifications only exist to try and prevent freeloading ********. But Government corruption and the usefulness (or lack thereof) of taxes is for another discussion.

Besides which politics/taxes and medicine are two completely different fields, anyway.



You wanted to have emotional appeals in this discussion? Fine, here you go.

I'm praying that abortion is NEVER repealed. Because I for one would not like to live in a country where 10 year olds die due to lack of legal access to potentially life saving procedures, such as abortion performed on a body not biologically ready for pregnancy. Or a mother dies due to blood poisoning because the hospital refuses to perform an abortion (this happened in Ireland and made headlines.) Or where a woman is forced to term a baby with a life threatening illness and has to hold the forced to term baby in her arms as it agonizingly suffers in it's final moments (this is actually a thing now in some states due to lack of proper access to facilities. *shudders*) Or a woman is forced to carry to term her rapist's child and then abuses it because it looks much like the rapist.
Or a woman is forced to give birth to a "hedgehog baby" (look it up.)
Or a woman stuck in an abusive relationship and does not have the option of abortion and is forced to have a baby to be thrown around by said abusive scumbag. Or the myriad of other extenuating circumstances surrounding decisions to abort that exist right now.

Nobody takes abortion lightly, it is a difficult medical decision that is up to the woman because it concerns her body. When it concerns specifically your body, then you can make any choice you want. I can't make the decision for you, but at the same time, you can't make the decision for me. That's why it's called CHOICE.

Googling hedgehog baby produces literally hedgehogs, so please tell me more.

I think abortion should remain legal when the life of the mother is in danger. Other things can be slippery slopes, e.g. the possibility a child might have a birth defect is playing God and the 100% likelihood of birth defect is STILL to my way of thinking playing God.

I appreciate your candor but we both know most abortions aren't on 10-year-olds or "baby will be thrown about by scumbag after birth".

 

[BilliardsBall]

A woman who chooses is not being forced.

Care to try again?

Your question remains moot. Do people choose to get pregnant? Think carefully before you answer.

 

[BilliardsBall]

​

Thank you for making it so painfully obvious that you are unable to tell the difference between consensually giving up bodily autonomy and have no say in giving up bodily autonomy.

​

ROTFLMAO

Your word salad isn't amusing. Nor would I employ terms like ROTFLMAO when talking about life and death issues! Please, Jesus, never let this man be a legislator or judge, for he has neither mercy nor wisdom.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Yes, but...

Does hearing about the Gospel provide an advantage, or not? That is a binary question that requires a binary answer.

So, is it yes... Or no?

Ciao

- viole

An advantage regarding what? God saves anyone who trusts God. The advantage comes AFTER trusting Jesus.

 

[viole]

An advantage regarding what? God saves anyone who trusts God. The advantage comes AFTER trusting Jesus.

How can you trust Jesus if you never heard of Him?

Let me make an example. Suppose I was born in America 1000 years ago. No Columbus, no missionaries, yet.

Will my odds of salvation be affected by my ignorance about all those Jesus stories?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Marisa]

Help me understand. I noted I felt wounded and patronized so you did it again?

How much consideration have you given anyone who asked you to stop yanking emotional chains in your comments, which you continue to do not just again, but again and again?

 

[leibowde84]

For someone who is employing the Hegelian method, you are remarkably consistent in your approach, which reads to me like if a Christian says it, it is likely wrong on its face in your posts. Therefore, reading your details and seeing your propositions, I may have been mistaken. You may be a devoted Christian who is seeking to strengthen the Christian position by challenging it consistently.

Thanks!

I am in no way trying the "strengthen the Christian position". That is not my intent on this forum. My intent is to force myself and others to challenge their own beliefs and look at issues from alternative points of view.

 

[leibowde84]

You seem brighter than this last post of yours.

A WOMAN WHO CHOOSES TO BEAR A CHILD HAS TO GIVE UP BODILY AUTONOMY. Or at least, that is how those oppose my position on abortion present it. So be consistent, and if you are pro-choice, your question is moot.

If there is a choice involved, bodily autonomy is not at stake. It is only infringed upon when a woman is forced to do something with their body against their will.

 

[SomeRandom]

Googling hedgehog baby produces literally hedgehogs, so please tell me more.

I think abortion should remain legal when the life of the mother is in danger. Other things can be slippery slopes, e.g. the possibility a child might have a birth defect is playing God and the 100% likelihood of birth defect is STILL to my way of thinking playing God.

I appreciate your candor but we both know most abortions aren't on 10-year-olds or "baby will be thrown about by scumbag after birth".

Well a "hedgehog" baby is a baby that is essentially born as a blob of nothing but limbs. It's a slang term so I don't know exactly what medical condition it describes. Though it has been used to describe ectopic pregnancies (fetus develops in the fallopian tubes instead of the womb) which is quite dangerous in and of itself.
I don't care if even 1% of abortions happen on 10 year olds or to prevent that scumbag who throws around a baby (btw there are thousands of children who die now in abusive homes every year, just FYI.) In countries which have completely criminalized abortion those people suffer needlessly. Hell even when there is more lax laws regarding abortion but is still criminalized those people needlessly suffer.

A woman has a choice to take to term a fetus or not. That's what bodily autonomy is, that's what medical ethics deem absolutely necessary and that's what we need as a society. For a woman to have to "prove" she's a victim of something is unnecessary. It's literally inside her body, she can get rid of it. Would I personally make that choice? Don't know, there are a myriad of circumstances that can occur if I get pregnant. So I can't really say definitively, nor should I have to get permission from anyone else regarding that choice. Because I'm an adult with a full say on what happens to my body. A fetus just doesn't equate to a properly developed human, I'm sorry if that sounds cold. But it's the truth. A fetus should not have the same rights as a living breathing human. It's just the potential for a human. It should be considered, but how much consideration it gets really depends on the woman in question. A woman can sacrifice her life for her fetus if that's her choice, a woman can also get an abortion for any reason if that's her choice. Being pro choice, I support both options if that's really what the woman wants. I can't say that I agree with both scenarios, but whatever. Life is like that.

You want to talk about slippery slope? As soon as we start to erode the legal definition of abortion to cover just life threatening scenarios, we could end up sacrificing abortion altogether and have women die from coat hanger abortions and mother's in jail unable to feed their kids because they got a necessary abortion in their scenario.

 

[SilverOrb]

There are a lot of religious arguments (and general political ones) against abortion. But I think that the argument, generally speaking, demonstrates the scientific illiteracy of the everyman.

So you're against abortion for whatever reason, but consider this argument from Neil DeGrasse Tyson:

"Most abortions are spontaneous and happen naturally within the human body. Most women who have such an abortion never know it because it happens within the first month. It is very, very common. So in fact the biggest abortionist, if god is responsible for what goes on in your body, is god."

Now when he says 'very common' what he means is 50-70%. That's 50-70% of all pregnancies end in a spontaneous abortion that you 1) can't control and 2) are never aware of.

So how is the anti-abortionist stance tenable given this dataset?

I do not often get involved with things of this topic but you have my interest.

 

[McBell]

Your word salad isn't amusing. Nor would I employ terms like ROTFLMAO when talking about life and death issues! Please, Jesus, never let this man be a legislator or judge, for he has neither mercy nor wisdom.

Bold empty ad hominems?
How long before you threaten me with your gods wrath?

 

[McBell]

Your question remains moot. Do people choose to get pregnant? Think carefully before you answer.

nope.
Doesn't work that way with me.

See, you still need to present a scenario where a person has has to give up their bodily autonomy.
Or concede you cannot.
BEFORE I answer your sad attempt at diversion tactic questions.

 

[JoStories]

Billardballs said: However, I'm not 100% sure how Jesus feels about your posts here. I was speaking from how I feel. I appreciate your desire as you stated for you to look at controversial issues from different perspectives without promoting your own beliefs, which implies you would lurk and read here without posting, which you do not do. I don't believe you are able to post without promoting your own belief systems or biases. I've never met a person who did so on any forum--besides, you continually tear at my posts and contradict others' viewpoints with your own.


This is completely erroneous. Leibowde has never promoted his views. For a couple of months, I didn't know what faith or lack thereof, he followed. He questions viewpoints to further learning and I see nothing wrong with that at all. It speaks, to me at least, of an open mind willing to entertain other POV's on issues. Something not too many other people do here. He doesn't 'tear' at anything. He questions to try to make you think.

 

[JoStories]

BillardBall said: If we maintain abortion as legal due to autonomy should taxes be legal? How about police and fire services? 3,000 died on 9/11, and we recall that most of them were emergency responders who did not flee the scene, willfully at their peril to save the lives of others. There are parallels there with pregnancy, I know it.

There is absolutely no comparison between bodily autonomy and taxes or the other services you mentioned. The former is about you not having any right to my physical being. The other does even compare at all.

 

[JoStories]

You seem brighter than this last post of yours.

A WOMAN WHO CHOOSES TO BEAR A CHILD HAS TO GIVE UP BODILY AUTONOMY. Or at least, that is how those oppose my position on abortion present it. So be consistent, and if you are pro-choice, your question is moot.

No, she doesn't give up bodily autonomy. She CHOOSES to do what she wishes. If that is to have the fetus, that is her right and choice. If she doesn't, the same rules apply. I cannot for the life of me understand how you can't see the difference there.