ATHEIST ONLY: Atheist View On Abortion

[leahrachelle]

I totally agree. In that case, we allow each person to follow the dictates of their own conscience: those who want abortions can get them and those who don't want them don't have to have them. Nobody's opinion supercedes anyone else's.

I understand what you are saying and I agree, but I do not feel that it is constitutional. And despite what anyone thinks, that is what matters.

 

[Willamena]

2.) You're going to say that you wont judge them but your going to call them a murder -_-

He just meant that the Pro-Life stance would consider them a murderer.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I understand what you are saying and I agree, but I do not feel that it is constitutional. And despite what anyone thinks, that is what matters.

Constitutionality matters. Your feelings about constitutionality don't... not in the context of what is legal, anyway.

 

[leahrachelle]

No...Im pro contrraception.(all forms)

Love

Dallas

Sorry for the mistake

 

[leahrachelle]

Arrgh. I sure hope you didn't learn this stuff in school.

Short version:
- people knew all along that the Earth was round, back for thousands of years.
- all through Western civilization, the educated people in the upper class at the very least always knew that the Earth was round. The Greeks even had decent estimates of its size as far back as the 1st century, which were well known in Europe and the Middle East.
- Columbus' voyage wasn't about proving the Earth was round, it was about finding a better sea route to China.
- Columbus got laughed out of every royal court but one (and even Isabella didn't think he was right; she was just desperate enough to try a gamble) not because they thought the Earth was flat, but because they recognized that his plans were based on an Earth that was half the size it actually is.
- If it weren't for North America, which nobody in Europe knew about at the time (except perhaps for the Vikings, but they were keeping it a secret), Columbus and his men would have certainly died mid-voyage when they ran out of food and fresh water.

That garbage about Columbus trying to prove that the Earth wasn't flat was apparently made up by Washington Irving around 1800.

Edit: sorry for going off-topic a bit. This is just a bit of a pet peeve for me.

What are they teaching us...
And just a week ago even, one of my teachers said 'Aristotle knew the earth was round but no one believed him.' Grrrr..

 

[leahrachelle]

He just meant that the Pro-Life stance would consider them a murderer.

I'm pretty sure he said it was his own opinion

 

[Willamena]

I'm pretty sure he said it was his own opinion

There can be no doubt it was his own opinion that that is the Pro-Life stance.

 

[leahrachelle]

Constitutionality matters. Your feelings about constitutionality don't... not in the context of what is legal, anyway.

Then whose does?
Here is how I feel about this.
We cannot come to an agreement about whether the fetus is human, and therefore if it falls into our basic rights - that everyone has the oppurtunity to life, liberty(?), and the pursuit of happiness.
Since we are unsure, we should go with the way that FOR SURE does not go against the constitution, and that is not allowing abortion.

 

[leahrachelle]

There can be no doubt it was his own opinion that that is the Pro-Life stance.

? Im confused.
I said that I'm pretty sure he said that he personally believes that
Yes it is a pro-life stance, so that why it didn't make sense to me why he said that

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What are they teaching us...
And just a week ago even, one of my teachers said 'Aristotle knew the earth was round but no one believed him.' Grrrr..

There were cultures that knew the Earth was round long before that, but I'm not sure when it became common knowledge in ancient Greece. Apparently, the first Greek scholar to suggest that the Earth was spherical was Pythagoras, who lived about 100 years before Aristotle. But less than 100 years after Aristotle, not only was there absolutely no doubt that the Earth was spherical, but Eratosthenes had come up with the first precise estimate of its circumference.

Of course, I have no doubt that uneducated people thought all sorts of things about the shape of the Earth right up until recent times.

 

[Willamena]

Since we are unsure, we should go with the way that FOR SURE does not go against the constitution, and that is not allowing abortion.

And then we are back to the part where the guarantee of life to the offspring and liberty to the parent clash.

 

[leahrachelle]

There were cultures that knew the Earth was round long before that, but I'm not sure when it became common knowledge in ancient Greece. Apparently, the first Greek scholar to suggest that the Earth was spherical was Pythagoras, who lived about 100 years before Aristotle. But less than 100 years after Aristotle, not only was there absolutely no doubt that the Earth was spherical, but Eratosthenes had come up with the first precise estimate of its circumference.

Of course, I have no doubt that uneducated people thought all sorts of things about the shape of the Earth right up until recent times.

:/ Sadly, I'm almost positive this was in our textbooks as well. That most of the explorers were trying to find out if the world was truly flat...

 

[leahrachelle]

And then we are back to the part where the guarantee of life to the offspring and liberty to the parent clash.

No, because your freedom does not include the right to take away another's life.

 

[Willamena]

There is a clause in our Charter of Rights, that I'm sure is reflected in your Bill of Rights, that guarantees that one right shall not be infringed upon by another.

26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.

 

[Magic Man]

That was my idea

But I was explaining how it's not inconsistent for you to use the "potential" argument for an embryo but not for a sperm. He was equating the two as if it was hypocritical to use it in reference to the one and not the other.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Then whose does?

Nobody's. It's not about feeling, it's about legal interpretation. At the end of the day, that's up to the Supreme Court.

Here is how I feel about this.
We cannot come to an agreement about whether the fetus is human, and therefore if it falls into our basic rights - that everyone has the oppurtunity to life, liberty(?), and the pursuit of happiness.

That's one way to put it. I think another would be to say that a convincing case has not been made to show why a fetus should be considered a person under the law.

Since we are unsure, we should go with the way that FOR SURE does not go against the constitution, and that is not allowing abortion.

But it's not so easy. According to the Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade, denying a woman the right to an abortion goes against her constitutional rights. In the same decision, the court ruled that fetuses were not "persons" for the purposes of the Constitution.

 

[Magic Man]

Awww that poor, poor woman. Stress, diabetes, anemia?!? Oh gosh I'd rather kill my baby than have to go through that!!
Sorry, but that really ****** me off.
I have a blood disease where I bleed insanely more than most people because my blood is very, very thin. I have my period almost every single day of the year. I talked to my gynecologist and she said that it would be risky if I want to have a baby because I'm going to lose a lot a lot of blood when the baby is born.
To me this is absolutely nothing. No amount of suffering I could bare is worth taking my childs life, and I think it is completely, completely selfish to think otherwise.

It's selfish to save your own life over the life of an unborn child (that you're not even 100% sure will survive yet)?

I don't think that's selfish. I think it's reasonable.

 

[Magic Man]

I understand what you are saying and I agree, but I do not feel that it is constitutional. And despite what anyone thinks, that is what matters.

How is it not constitutional?

 

[Willamena]

No, because your freedom does not include the right to take away another's life.

I consider both rights to be valid.

 

[leahrachelle]

There is a clause in our Charter of Rights, that I'm sure is reflected in your Bill of Rights, that guarantees that one right shall not be infringed upon by another.

I dont understand..?
If you are saying that one right cannot be more important than another, than that would mean that you can kill people and do whatever you want for whatever reason. Obviously this is not the case. There are limitations on the term 'liberty' and most of these limitations are to protect the rights of others.