Overturning Roe V Wade

[Subduction Zone]

I 100% agree.

Although I will add, there has been a double standard with the prolife people on abortion. A mother that does not want to take care of their child is a just exercising her rights, a father that does not want to take care of their children is a dead beat dad. Do you agree that this should change as well? To be fair a woman can choose not to raise her child or not a father should be able to as well right?

Yes, there should be some sort of equity in the system. But sadly perfection may be an unattainable goal. We fix the hard problems first and do the easy ones later.

 

[Trailblazer]

You created confusion using the word exactly. In the first definition, life begins when the spermatozoon and ovum merge. In the second, it's when the soul associates itself with the zygote, which we are told occurs at conception.

Yes, that is confusing. Hopefully what I said below will help clarify.

What point is he missing? You've stated your belief that being human is the deciding factor, and he has said personhood is, which was loosely defined not in terms of physical qualities such as being alive or being made of human tissue, but functional ability. Those are both subjective positions. Mine is that the only relevant factor to consider when assessing the moral status of abortion is the functional status of the nervous system, which is closer to his than yours, but not the same. Insentience and non-personhood are related but distinct concepts.

People have different subjective positions and that is why there is no consensus on the abortion issue.

According to my Baha'i beliefs a soul is a person and life begins when the soul associates itself with the embryo. It is not literally at the moment of conception, which @Subduction Zone pointed out to me some time ago, so a zygote is not a person. I think it should read 'around the time of conception' so the second quote below is more accurate.

Each individual life begins when the soul associates itself with the embryo at the time of conception. But the association is not material; the soul does not enter or leave the body and does not occupy physical space. Bahá’u’lláh uses the metaphor of the sun to explain the relationship between the soul and the body: “The soul of man is the sun by which his body is illumined, and from which it draweth its sustenance, and should be so regarded.”[4]
The Rational Soul | The Human Soul | The Life of the Spirit | What Bahá’ís Believe

"According to the Bahá’í Teachings the human soul starts with the formation of the embryo, and continues to develop and pass through stages of existence after its separation from the body. Its progress is thus infinite.”
Shoghi Effendi, Lights of Guidance, p. 204
Abortion | Bahá’í Quotes

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

According to my Baha'i beliefs a soul is a person and life begins when the soul associates itself with the embryo.

Well, this is one of those things that just can't be shown. Out of curiosity, we know what the zygote was doing before it became an embryo -- it had just been formed from two things that don't even have a full complement of DNA -- just half each -- and egg and a sperm cell.

But the way you put it, "when the soul associates itself with the embryo" is just sort of dangling. What was that soul doing before that? How did it even know the right sperm would win the battle for that egg -- every sperm is slightly different, after all. So how does this "soul," which just seems to be hanging about with nothing much going on, decide which embryo it wants to associate itself with?

See, this is all that magical thinking that we atheists just can't fathom -- because there's nothing, at least in Christian scripture, that says anything at all about it.

 

[We Never Know]

It's weird that abortion laws can stop abortions and yet gun laws can't stop shootings.

Speeding laws don't stop speeding.
Murder laws don't stop murder.
DWI laws don't stop drunks driving.
Drug laws don't stop illegal drugs.
Stealing laws don't stop theft.
Etc etc

 

[We Never Know]

The day after pill should be easily availible to any sexual active female who doesn't want a child.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, this is one of those things that just can't be shown. Out of curiosity, we know what the zygote was doing before it became an embryo -- it had just been formed from two things that don't even have a full complement of DNA -- just half each -- and egg and a sperm cell.

But the way you put it, "when the soul associates itself with the embryo" is just sort of dangling. What was that soul doing before that? How did it even know the right sperm would win the battle for that egg -- every sperm is slightly different, after all. So how does this "soul," which just seems to be hanging about with nothing much going on, decide which embryo it wants to associate itself with?

See, this is all that magical thinking that we atheists just can't fathom -- because there's nothing, at least in Christian scripture, that says anything at all about it.

Here is the obvious answer:

 

[SomeRandom]

Speeding laws don't stop speeding.
Murder laws don't stop murder.
DWI laws don't stop drunks driving.
Drug laws don't stop illegal drugs.
Stealing laws don't stop theft.
Etc etc

Well I guess laws aren’t really designed to stop anything.
Merely enforce society’s ideals, for lack of a better phrase.

Although I do think it’s a better idea to look at the impact of making something illegal. For instance, yes drunk driving laws don’t physically stop anyone from driving drunk. But the sanctions have reduced the number of deaths on the road. It is in the interest of public safety to make that illegal or at least have sanctions against the behaviour.

Making abortion illegal won’t stop abortions. What will happen (and we can draw from historical and even present day examples/precedence) is that back alley abortions, provided without medical expertise, proper medical care and without proper safety measures, will likely increase. And the fact that that will occur will inevitably increase deaths.

Which is the sheer irony that no one has mentioned yet (that I’m aware of, apologies if any of you have.)
Laws restricting or outlawing abortion based on the guise of “preserving life” always lead to far more deaths that were otherwise easily preventable.

How very pro life of such folks

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Here is the obvious answer:

Well, yes, we all know that quite well -- (should've seen how high eyebrows could raise when that came out, awesome!) -- but it still says not a word, nada, about what some expectant "soul" was doing while waiting for that sacred sperm to fertilize a hopeful egg. Or how it chooses which pair to join up with -- does it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, yes, we all know that quite well -- (should've seen how high eyebrows could raise when that came out, awesome!) -- but it still says not a word, nada, about what some expectant "soul" was doing while waiting for that sacred sperm to fertilize a hopeful egg. Or how it chooses which pair to join up with -- does it?

Maybe that would be ineffable. Though I am sure that a lot of "f" bombs are dropped when certain pregnancies are announced.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

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.

What's scary is the Republicans have shifted so far right so rapidly that calling a pregnancy from rape a "beautiful part of god's will" totally sunk and absolutely obliterated and annihilated a Tea Party Republican's landslide chances of a Senate seat in Indiana. Today we are seeing more and more rape restrictions. That is simply unacceptable and America has no business or right calling itself free when its women are being forced to be baby makers.

 

[SomeRandom]

What's scary is the Republicans have shifted so far right so rapidly that calling a pregnancy from rape a "beautiful part of god's will" totally sunk and absolutely obliterated and annihilated a Tea Party Republican's landslide chances of a Senate seat in Indiana. Today we are seeing more and more rape restrictions. That is simply unacceptable and America has no business or right calling itself free when its women are being forced to be baby makers.

I do have to say, as an outsider, the US Republican Party does seem to have shifted very right very fast

 

[Trailblazer]

According to my Baha'i beliefs a soul is a person and life begins when the soul associates itself with the embryo.

Well, this is one of those things that just can't be shown. Out of curiosity, we know what the zygote was doing before it became an embryo -- it had just been formed from two things that don't even have a full complement of DNA -- just half each -- and egg and a sperm cell.

But the way you put it, "when the soul associates itself with the embryo" is just sort of dangling. What was that soul doing before that? How did it even know the right sperm would win the battle for that egg -- every sperm is slightly different, after all. So how does this "soul," which just seems to be hanging about with nothing much going on, decide which embryo it wants to associate itself with?

See, this is all that magical thinking that we atheists just can't fathom -- because there's nothing, at least in Christian scripture, that says anything at all about it.

Of course nothing about the soul can be shown since it is a religious belief.
Baha'is believe that the soul is a sign of God, a heavenly gem that the most earned of men have failed to grasp.
The individual human soul did not exist before it associated with the embryo, but maybe it existed with God.

"According to the Bahá’í Teachings the human soul starts with the formation of the embryo, and continues to develop and pass through stages of existence after its separation from the body. Its progress is thus infinite.”
Shoghi Effendi, Lights of Guidance, p. 204

The Bible is outdated and most Christians believe that the soul is the breath of life and that it dies when the body dies, so they do not even believe in an eternal soul that survives death.

 

[Secret Chief]

Speeding laws don't stop speeding.
Murder laws don't stop murder.
DWI laws don't stop drunks driving.
Drug laws don't stop illegal drugs.
Stealing laws don't stop theft.
Etc etc

Let's not bother with laws then.

 

[SkepticThinker]

And my point was that newborns are always wanted by many families.
What difference do you think it would make if there were more newborns available for adoption?
Do you think less older children would get adopted out?

I think there are too many unwanted, starving and neglected children in this world as it is. And that's without forcing people to carry pregnancy's to term against their will.

But none of this is really relevant. All that is relevant is whether life begins at conception and if it does abortion is choosing to take a human life that could have been lived.

I think the only relevant thing here is can we force people to bring pregnancies to term without their consent? Can we use peoples' bodies as incubators against their will?
I say no.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Like I said, I don't know the answer to those questions because I am not a scientist. However, according to my religious beliefs each individual life begins when the soul associates itself with the embryo at the time of conception, so that is what I believe.

The Rational Soul | The Human Soul | The Life of the Spirit | What Bahá’ís Believe

I have no knowledge of the existence of souls. I don't think anybody else does either.

What is the difference between a human being and a person? Does a human being have to have a personality to be a person?
But that is neither her nor there because if allowed to develop a human being becomes a person and this is the pertinent point when it comes to the abortion debate.

I find these kinds of questions to be kind of weird. Like, we can't tell the different between a blastocyst or a zygote compared to a fully developed, fully grown, conscious, thinking human being with an actual life, social connections, etc.?

I think the difference is rather obvious.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, it is not my stance that abortion be banned altogether
That said, a pregnancy would not necessarily ruin a young life. An abortion a young woman regrets could also have a negative impact on a life.

Well, it should be her choice and no one else's then.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Well I guess laws aren’t really designed to stop anything.
Merely enforce society’s ideals, for lack of a better phrase.

Although I do think it’s a better idea to look at the impact of making something illegal. For instance, yes drunk driving laws don’t physically stop anyone from driving drunk. But the sanctions have reduced the number of deaths on the road. It is in the interest of public safety to make that illegal or at least have sanctions against the behaviour.

Making abortion illegal won’t stop abortions. What will happen (and we can draw from historical and even present day examples/precedence) is that back alley abortions, provided without medical expertise, proper medical care and without proper safety measures, will likely increase. And the fact that that will occur will inevitably increase deaths.

Which is the sheer irony that no one has mentioned yet (that I’m aware of, apologies if any of you have.)
Laws restricting or outlawing abortion based on the guise of “preserving life” always lead to far more deaths that were otherwise easily preventable.

How very pro life of such folks

This deserves a round of applause.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

No. Nature has decreed that the sexes do not share an equal burden in the reproductive process. It is nature that says they have different responsibilities and different rights. That is why it is the mother’s right to choose, not the father’s or anyone else’s.

If you want to correct this “double standard” get reincarnated as a seahorse.

This has nothing to do with my point. I was not talking about anyone's right to choose.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yes, there should be some sort of equity in the system. But sadly perfection may be an unattainable goal. We fix the hard problems first and do the easy ones later.

We can fix hard and easy problems at the same time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We can fix hard and easy problems at the same time.

Sometimes. But there is no sign of a solution right now and the proposed solution will only make it worse. I would suggest studying how European countries with very liberal abortion laws but very low abortion rates solved their problems.

One part of the answer may be more sites like Planned Parenthood. PP does much more than abortions. They offer free or very low cost family planning including birth control in a non-judgemental environment. Something one cannot get at Christian sites. Having a PP site close byhas been shown to reduce abortion rates.