• 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!

Overturning Roe V Wade

Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Subduction Zone said:
Wrong, I am not missing the point since no one has denied that fact. But to claim that it has rights then you take on the burden of proof to prove that it is a person, and not just a lump of human flesh. And you miss the point with granny. She is not a person now, that is why it is okay to pull the plug. The embryo or fetus is not a person now so an abortion is not immoral unless you can show some other factor.
Click to expand...
That would only be true if only a person has rights, but I am arguing that a zygote that has the potential to become a person has rights.

Whether abortion is immoral or not is all a matter of personal opinion. That can never be proven in an argument.
 
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Subduction Zone said:
Biologically yes. But biology has no morals. It does not matter what is done to the fetus by biology. All one can do is to measure and observe an organism's response.
Click to expand...
That is irrelevant to the point. A zygote if allowed to develop will become a person.
How do you think you became a person?
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
That would only be true if only a person has rights, but I am arguing that a zygote that has the potential to become a person has rights.

Whether abortion is immoral or not is all a matter of personal opinion. That can never be proven in an argument.
Click to expand...

Can you justify that belief? Not that they have potential, but that the mere fact of potential means that they have rights. I have as of yet to see anyone do that.


Here is a quick question, where do rights come from? There is a correct answer.
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Trailblazer said:
That is irrelevant to the point. A zygote if allowed to develop will become a person.
How do you think you became a person?
Click to expand...

By other humans treating me like that and I believing in it. The other part is in part biology. I never became a person because of biology alone.
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Evangelicalhumanist said:
Well, this is genius: Chuck Schumer and the Democrats in the Senate are going to bring a vote to the Senate floor on a law permitting women to choose abortion. Why is this genius? Because Republicans are going to have to stand up, vote "NO," and then go home and face their electorate, or they are going to have to stand up, vote "YES," and then go home and face their Trump and MAGA base.
Click to expand...
Yep.

Evangelicalhumanist said:
And remember, Americans favor women's right to choose by 2 to 1 (including 38% of Republicans). Will this impact the mid-terms? I rather suspect it might.
Click to expand...
And the figure is even more lopsided when rape and incest is added to whom may not get an abortion. With women, 89% in a recent poll said they cannot accept such restrictions.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
That is irrelevant to the point. A zygote if allowed to develop will become a person.
How do you think you became a person?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that is just a "So what?" argument as posted. A simple 'so what' refutes it. No one has disputed that. That is what makes your argument a "So what?" argument. How do you show that potential means that the zygote has rights?
 
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Subduction Zone said:
Sorry, but that is just a "So what?" argument as posted. A simple 'so what' refutes it. No one has disputed that. That is what makes your argument a "So what?" argument. How do you show that potential means that the zygote has rights?
Click to expand...
How do you show that the zygote has no rights to grow and develop into a person?
That is the hundred-dollar question.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
Is the purpose of this debate to propose a change? I thought it was about moral issues.
Click to expand...
It should be for both.

Now as to the morality of abortion, you do realize that even having unprotected sex is not an invitation to get pregnant. It may happen. It may not happen. But then having your front door unlocked is not an invitation to a homeless person to come in and crash on your couch. In both case the unwanted visitor can be ushered out.
 
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Subduction Zone said:
Now as to the morality of abortion, you do realize that even having unprotected sex is not an invitation to get pregnant. It may happen. It may not happen. But then having your front door unlocked is not an invitation to a homeless person to come in and crash on your couch. In both case the unwanted visitor can be ushered out.
Click to expand...
The unwanted visitor can be ushered out if you can find a clinic to perform the surgery.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
The unwanted visitor can be ushered out if you can find a clinic to perform the surgery.
Click to expand...
Or give you a pill. You might have to call law enforcement to get the homeless person out. There is not that much of a difference. An unlocked, or even an open door, is not an invitation.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Taking my analogy further. If you let the homeless person stay in your house after a while one needs to get the courts involved. One can no longer call the police. And if one lets a pregnancy go for too far then one may be limited in one's ability to end it. I have no problem with that. Nor do most people.

Here is a simple exercise. Just for fun lets take the OP's standard and apply it. No abortions after 20 weeks unless it is due to the health or safety of the mother. And we are not talking just stretch marks here. It would have to be some demonstrable risk.

How much do you think that the abortion rate would drop with that, at least to me, reasonable standard? One poster I saw seemed to think that it would be over 50%. Spoiler alert it is not. What amount, less than 50% we don't want anyone embarrassing themselves would the abortion rate drop?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top