Koldo
Outstanding Member
Me personally? I don't have a horse on this race.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Abortion
- Thread starter an anarchist
- Start date
Me personally? I don't have a horse on this race.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Okay, so here is the problem. In biological terms the potential starts with the sperm and the egg. So for people not to have sex when it could result in a potential unborn child, is already potential before sex, so they kill children by not having sex.
The cut off based on conception is arbitrary and could also be set at not having sex. So people should have no choice in having sex or not for the purpose of the potential unborn humans!
McBell
Unbound
The only time I have ever heard the claim that a zygote or a blastocyst or a fetus is not human is from pro-lifers creating a strawman.
McBell
Unbound
I'd say you do not understand what bodily autonomy is..
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Killing life =/= preventing life from coming into existence
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, that is a subjective evaluation if that matters as relevant or not. That is the point.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Well I've heard the claim plenty by pro-choicers.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Then elaborate
Many people don't, actually. And ironically, a lot of the people who oppose protections for young children call themselves "pro-life."
I find it especially telling that the anti-choice community don't generally treat fetuses as people in any context besides abortion. For instance, there's no Evangelical or Catholic campaign to get fetuses recognized as citizens for immigration purposes or even to get them to count as a passenger for HOV lanes.
The only time they're interested in treating a fetus as a person is when they can use it as a weapon to harm pregnant people.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
No, that was not the point. Your point was to equate the prevention of conception to the killing of humans. But it was false equivalence.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yes, but the broader point was that it is a choice in both cases and not just facts. But yes, in the strict sense, you are correct.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
I disagree
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Because in world where all women and the needed relevant men had sex as relevant more children would be born. But they choose not to, so in effect between those 2 worlds, in the one the children are in effect as for the process in time and over time including not having sex killed as they are never becoming children, because of the choice not to have sex as relevant, whereas in the other world they are.
And that is a fact over how the world works. By choosing not to have sex, a child is not born, which could have potentially be born if having sex.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yes, that is the point. It is subjective also for you and not just the other side.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
The point is for me to disagree?
an anarchist
Your local loco.
That still isn't killing.
an anarchist
Your local loco.
This paragraph doesn't clarify it for me. What "2" worlds?
PureX
Veteran Member
It's really very simple.
None of us knows when a fetus becomes a human being.
None of us know why we humans exist. If we exist for any reason at all.
So none of us knows when or whether or not to fully gestate a human fetus.
Therefor, none of us has the wisdom or the right to force a pregnant woman to do so. She must decide this for herself, because she is the one that nature has given that responsibility. Like it or not.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Depends on the definition of killing. If we change it to include that, it is. That is the point. You are subjective and so am I. I just know it is the case for us both.