• 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!

Life Begins at Conception

Status
Not open for further replies.

Venatoris

Active Member
That's because it has never been the national pasttime of any nation before.

Now it is considered the new "birth control." Abort!

I thought hockey and baseball were the national pass-time in north america. Abortion is not a form of birth control, it's what you get when birth control fails. I don't think it would be anywhere near as common if all the fundies would shut up about educating students on the use of birth control.
 

Misty

Well-Known Member
I thought hockey and baseball were the national pass-time in north america. Abortion is not a form of birth control, it's what you get when birth control fails. I don't think it would be anywhere near as common if all the fundies would shut up about educating students on the use of birth control.

If contraception fails, which it sometimes does, there is always the morning after pill, which should be taken immediately. It is freely available in the UK, and can be given to underage girls without their parents permission. (although I must admit I wouldn't have been happy if my girls had taken it without me being informed)
 

Theo_Book

Member
Where is it?

page 12

Nothing will follow unless the girls allow it.

I think that's what I said. That's what I called "choice." Remember now?

WTF does this have to do with your attempting to elicit an emotional reaction

Already told you, not emotional, logical.

by telling lies about the definition of murder?

o.k. What is YOUR lie as to how to define Abortion, and Murder? How do YOU differentiate between them?
 

Theo_Book

Member
It is far better to abort a pregnancy in the early stages rather than bring an unwanted child into this world who could be abused.

That IS the issue isn't it? THAT is what you call "choice." I call it "choice" when a woman "chooses" to not get pregnant in the first place. And no, I am not including rape and incest in that evaluation. Those are not matters of a woman's choice.
 

Misty

Well-Known Member
That IS the issue isn't it? THAT is what you call "choice." I call it "choice" when a woman "chooses" to not get pregnant in the first place. And no, I am not including rape and incest in that evaluation. Those are not matters of a woman's choice.

A woman should always have the right to choose if she wishes to continue with a pregnancy.
 

Tiapan

Grumpy Old Man
Individuality begins at conception, sperm and ova are actually living although by their nature they would not survive long in the real world environment. Initially the fertilized ovum is the start of a new individual, yet after a few divisions some of the cells will never develop into the individual. Instead these cells become the placenta and umbilicus and are therefore outside the discussion I presume. If these cells were identifiable at an early stage we could use embryonic stem cells ethically.

So in answer to the question, on day one, yes, after that not necessarily.

Further humans developed larger brains quicker than female exit tubes. Hence the dangerous delivery (like opening a safe left half turn, right half turn, exit, or bypass with a Caesar) also the moving fontanels, as such all human babies are normally very premature at birth and require months more to develop adequate motor skills like any other animal, let alone intellectual skills that could be equated with a non-premature animal.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
That IS the issue isn't it? THAT is what you call "choice." I call it "choice" when a woman "chooses" to not get pregnant in the first place. And no, I am not including rape and incest in that evaluation. Those are not matters of a woman's choice.

That's a rather self-righteous pseudo-responsibility.

Many folks who are against abortion don't want to take responsibility for other people's children or care at all for single mothers.

In case it hasn't dawned on you yet, people are going to have sex.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
I thought hockey and baseball were the national pass-time in north america. Abortion is not a form of birth control, it's what you get when birth control fails. I don't think it would be anywhere near as common if all the fundies would shut up about educating students on the use of birth control.

You're imprecise here.

Abortion is a type of birth control, used when contraceptives fail.

note: "contraceptive"
an agent or device intended to prevent conception
capable of preventing conception or impregnation; "contraceptive devices and medications"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
 

McBell

Unbound
Which post number.
I ask simply because I have my settings to show 40 posts per page...

I think that's what I said. That's what I called "choice." Remember now?
Really?
You seem to be implying that once the hands go below the waist, pregnancy follows.
I am merely stating that that is not true.
But hey, whatever helps you to sleep at night.

Already told you, not emotional, logical.
Using a logical fallacy (false dichotomy) in an attempt at an appeal to emotion fallacy is not logical.
It is either desperation or ignorance.
Perhaps you could clarify which for us?

o.k. What is YOUR lie as to how to define Abortion, and Murder? How do YOU differentiate between them?
I actually use the definitions of the words.
See abortion is legal in the USA.
So it is not murder.
Perhaps if you were to actually look up the definition of the word "murder" you would understand?

"WordNet (r) 2.0"
murder
n : unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human
being [syn: slaying, execution]
 

McBell

Unbound
That IS the issue isn't it? THAT is what you call "choice." I call it "choice" when a woman "chooses" to not get pregnant in the first place. And no, I am not including rape and incest in that evaluation. Those are not matters of a woman's choice.
Like it or not abortion is a choice.
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
I....Wrong. nations have been destroyed because its citizens ignored every command of God and ignored every warning sign of a pending judgment for infractions committed in ignorance.

Does a woman have choice? Of course she does, like "Hey bozo, keep you hands above the waist." THAT'S the free exercise of choice.

Abortion? THAT's MURDER.

1. Examples of these "nations that were destroyed" by your god, please.

2. Contraceptives fail, men lie, poop happens. Denying the basic sexuality of the human animal invited psychosis. Just look at those segments of the human population who live in forced celibacy.

3. Please cite any laws in the US that describes abortion as "murder". Or you can save time and understand that the term "murder" is nothing more than demagoguery at it's most hideous, which turns people away from your message. And only serves as an identifier among theodemocrats.

The number of abortions today have been driven down to nearly pre1973 statistics by targeted education, not hysterics, abstinence only training, gnashing of teeth and beating of breast, or questionable "sneaky" legislation that attempts to blindside a SCOTUS ruling, such as Kansas' requirement that women must undergo an ultrasound first.

But what this whole debate boils down to is the simple fact that religion has no business in US laws due to that whole pesky "Constitution thing", and the simple fact that you have no inherent right to make this choice for other people.

Don't like the idea of abortions America? Don't have one, leave off the illegal laws, clinic picketing (which we all know people do to look like "good Christians"), shouts for abstinence only training, and especially the juvenile demagoguery and support the targeted education that has helped lower abortion numbers.
 

Theo_Book

Member
No, it was an admittedly flippant reference to you believing in a god who kills and destroys himself on one hand but condemns killing and destroying on the other. Hence, "do as I say, not as I do".

If interest is there, I may begin a separate thread on that issue, but not on this thread. Good question.
 

Theo_Book

Member
Where is it?


Nothing will follow unless the girls allow it.


WTF does this have to do with your attempting to elicit an emotional reaction by telling lies about the definition of murder?

So, tell me if I missed the methodology of this board...
You express your opinion,
But
If I express disagreement it is not opinion, but is lies?

I'll see if I can learn this subtle difference.
 

Theo_Book

Member
Yeah, it is worse. The alternatives are infanticide and exposure, both of which are practiced today all over the world, and it is ignored almost completely by every nation.

When even a mother doesn't want her newborn, nobody else cares.

Welcome to earth.
Well, it seems to me (in my humble opinion) that you might have missed one or two options; i.e., adoption, Adoption, and adoption.

There are literally millions of married couples begging for children they can adopt. But either governments get in the way, or rules are prohibitive, or expense is too high to process the adoption. And yes, there ARE many who DO care.
 

Theo_Book

Member
Not your body or your baby. You do not know the circumstances nor does anyone have to explain themselves to you. They will decide with their doctor not with you.

What has any of that got to do with my question? How can you birth and abort a baby?

Ahh is that what happened with the Mayans? Which god are you on about? Which command? No god has ever been revealed to me.

Mayans practiced human sacrifice. Sufficient reason for God to judge.

Perhaps your problem with the obvious logic could stem from your acceptance of a god and basing your decisions on a series of rationalizations forced upon you by accepting said fantastical world. Compound that with the fact that you reject every other god humanity has at one time embraced with the fact that you couldn't possibly know of every other god and never mind that acceptance of all historical gods while impossible would also result in utter nonsensical contradiction and you have your argument?


Quite an assertion. Any evidence, or just blowing off steam?

Further searching for an answer or the morality of an abortion is not your goal as you have already decided on the answer and are basing your acceptance and reason on an ideology and concept which is personally to you not even up for debate.

Close, but theology, not ideology.

You don't even have the freedom to actually think about the subject reasonably because of the framework you are attempting to work within in order to discuss it. The answer was thought out and answered based on whatever religious framework you have based your life on and you personally actually have nothing to do with it. You have nothing new or interesting to say nor can you even attempt to do so because you can't try by your own design.

Sure I can. I told you in my post, show me one (Jesus Christ being the exception) out of several gazillions of humans through history, who was originated outside of the system described in my post. I offered to rethink my position based on that premise.

What do you offer as a counter premise?
"Hunh uh!"

Ultimately I find most people with their "ignore god doomsday conspiracy theorys" are reality challenged and value their personally accepted fairy tale AFTERLIFE rather then this real LIFE they share with the rest of us.

Missed it again. We are not sharing a life. I am not living your life, and YOU certainly cannot begin to comprehend my life. (Doesn't mean you cannot learn to, just that you choose to live your own, which is reasonable)

Placing their value and efforts towards insuring they get into their afterlife is most of the time a conflict of interest with doing well and striving to do right in this life.

Not really. I will not get into the successes I have already had, as it is not germain to the issue, nor can it be related without sounding like a braggart if misunderstood. But I have done well, and striven for rightness in this life, and look forward to the next.

So I would be skeptical of your argument anyways since I care more about doing well by the people and myself in this real life and nothing about empty promises of eternal life be it an eternity of bliss or one of suffering as so many religions threaten us with.

I don't remember threatening anyone. Unless you consider a warning of impending judgment a threat.

Kinda like if you were walking on a sidewalk, and keeping your attention on a dog that was threatening to tear a chunk of you out of you, and I warn "look out for that pot-hole" and you walked right into it and fell down where the dog can get at you so much easier, because you don't respond to warnings because you consider them to be threats.
 

McBell

Unbound
So, tell me if I missed the methodology of this board...
You express your opinion,
But
If I express disagreement it is not opinion, but is lies?

I'll see if I can learn this subtle difference.
Your sad attempt at playing the martyr is pathetic at best and downright dishonest at worst.

Perhaps you would like to try to present an argument that is not a blatant logical fallacy?
Or are you content with merely attempting the self martyr role?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top