Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

Survey on Abortion


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 456 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Dec 3, 2012 6:06:43 AM PST
M. Galishoff says:
This is just for informational purposes.

Whether you are pro-abortion or anti-abortion:

IF it were clearly established that human life begins at conception and ergo, performing an abortion constitutes taking a human life would you support or oppose abortion on demand.

Please place your current position first and the answer to the hypothetical second:

For example

Against/Against

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 6:28:09 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 3, 2012 6:28:26 AM PST
Joe W says:
MG: Whether you are pro-abortion or anti-abortion:

Joe: You meant pro-choice or anti-choice.

MG: IF it were clearly established that human life begins at conception and ergo, performing an abortion constitutes taking a human life would you support or oppose abortion on demand.

Joe: The phrase "human life begins at conception" is ill-defined. How are you defining "human life", and it what way are you hypothesizing that it "begins at conception"?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 7:00:00 AM PST
M. Galishoff says:
You are reading too much into the question.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 7:14:07 AM PST
Joe W says:
Rather, I am not reading enough into the question to make it meaningful. If you cannot tell me what "human life" means, as you are using it, then how can I decide whether or not that would have any bearing on my opinion on abortion?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 7:21:49 AM PST
M. Galishoff says:
Joe

You really do not know what human life means? How about whatever it means to you.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 7:27:44 AM PST
Joe W says:
MG: You really do not know what human life means? How about whatever it means to you.

Joe: I don't know what you mean by "human life" unless you tell me. It carries differing connotations based on the speaker's person's religious or philosophical bent. I don't use the phrase.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 8:36:28 AM PST
What phrase do you use?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 8:47:33 AM PST
Sorry, but your question, as written, carries with it too many questionable or even outright false assumptions for it to be answered in a meaningful way.

"IF it were clearly established that human life begins at conception..."

This is the very, very common Fallacy of Equivocation that gets used when discussing abortion.

In this case, we are equivocating between two meanings of the word "life":

1. life as in living things
2. life as in entities which warrant the moral status of "person", or a significant portion thereof

When a chicken egg is fertilized, it is life, in that it is alive, but it does not warrant the the moral status of "person."

When a human egg is fertilized, it is life, in that it is alive, and *some* would assert that this *does* warrant the moral status of person... despite the fact that the differences between the two are at the molecular level, and they're both single cells.

"... and ergo, performing an abortion constitutes taking a human life ..."

This is pure semantics. Someone *chooses* to define a fertilized egg as a person, therefore implying that abortion is - purely *by definition* - the taking of a human life. This is an indirect example of the "Begging The Question" fallacy.

"... would you support or oppose abortion on demand."

How about this:

"I am against women having their social status be forcibly changed from "person" to "incubator for the State" the moment they conceive."

Make of that what you will.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:00:35 AM PST
It would seem to me that you would need to define "incubator for the State" to make this assertion possible to understand.

When my wife conceived, I'm fairly sure she didn't consider herself an "incubator for the State."

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:01:37 AM PST
Joe W says:
Who knows? He hasn't explained what he means by the phrase. I might not use any. If I were to use the phrase 'human life', it would be a strict poetic term for a bunch of people walking around, or used in a broader sense, a synonym for humankind. Neither use would have an affect on my position on abortion. What might affect my position would be if it were discovered that embryos have the ability to recognize themselves as individuals separate from other individuals and their environment. But the phrase "human life" has no useful application there.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:04:21 AM PST
Joe W says:
Joseph: When my wife conceived, I'm fairly sure she didn't consider herself an "incubator for the State."

Joe: Presumably her gestation was voluntary. Not imposed by legislative force?

Posted on Dec 3, 2012 9:06:35 AM PST
M. Galishoff says:
The question is so simple. You all are making it more complicated than it need be.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:11:35 AM PST
"It would seem to me that you would need to define "incubator for the State" to make this assertion possible to understand."

An "incubator for the State" is a human being whose autonomy and personhood are considered to be outweighed by her functioning as an incubator for the fertilized egg within her. Her rights, desires, needs, etc. all become subservient to that function.

In my opinion, the outlawing of abortion would mean that women would become "incubators for the State" the moment they conceive. Taken to its logical extreme, and we have something akin to Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale.

Do you have any comments on the rest of my post?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:11:55 AM PST
Joe W says:
The question is simple for you because you are making certain assumptions. Assumptions that you are unable or unwilling to articulate. If you want responses within that framework, then you have to give it better definition. If not, then this is what you get.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:21:20 AM PST
The question isn't about gestation, though. It's about conception, and when human life, however you define it, begins. I'm pretty sure there are not many American women who conceived by legislative force (although I'm happy that Monica Lewinsky was careful).

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:24:48 AM PST
"The question isn't about gestation, though. It's about conception, and when human life, however you define it, begins."

In other words, it's a question of semantics, the meaning of words.

In this case, it's a roundabout way of saying "If we define abortion as being the equivalent of murder, will you still be in favor of abortion?"

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:25:54 AM PST
Sure...keep it in your pants and keep your legs closed. Problem solved.

And that goes for women who do not wish to become "incubators for the State" and the men who don't want to become "mandatory fertilized egg supporters" should the "incubator for the State" decide to gestate to term and deliver a human life.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:29:00 AM PST
S. Friedman says:
For / For

I simply see no inherent value in a fertilized egg, no matter how defined -- especially when we're talking about someone else's egg. What I find immoral is requiring a woman who isn't physically, mentally, emotionally, and/or financially prepared to carry and give birth to a baby.

There's no question that the fertilized egg is alive (as were the sperm and egg an hour earlier), so it really comes down to rights. Does the egg's/fetus' right to grow and be born outweigh the full-grown woman's right to reproduce responsibly without being forced to accept the burden of carrying and giving birth to a child she didn't plan for? You obviously say yes; I say no.

In my view, if the time/circumstances aren't right, we have the means to undo the mistake and allow for a do-over when the time is right. It's not like there's a shortage of sperm and eggs.

I don't see the phrase "life begins at cenception" as being particularly meaningful.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:29:21 AM PST
logical fallacy erroneous questions

i am PRO CHOICE
AND ANTI abortion
but realise that on occasion abortion is the lesser bad thing to do

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:31:00 AM PST
human life begins at BIRTH
hebrew law said it was not a person until the head was out
the bible showed that a fetus is not a person

so your question is meaningless
it is like talkign about the empty set
everything is both true and false
and meaningless

you need to frame the question in terms of reality
A FETUS IS NOT A PERSON

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:32:30 AM PST
HOW can anyone think that a cell , zygote, blastocyst, or even a fetus is a human. They are not. It is silly to try to discuss abortion in terms of life. cows are alive and we eat them.
a fetus is not a person and cannot be killed.

you would do better with this nonsense in teh catholicism forum

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:33:36 AM PST
there are actual human

and there are fetus, zygotes, blastocysts, and cells
that are NOT human. confusing them with humans by trying to equate life with human is nonsense. cows are alive and we eat them. a fetus is not a person.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:34:46 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:35:02 AM PST
It will always be a question of semantics. That's the problem with legislating either for or against it. One person's definition of "human life" is always going to be different from another's.

In any case, as a Christian, I am told that it's not for me to judge another person. Abortion, to my definition, is the ending of a human life. It is the same definition for my wife (she told me...don't worry, I didn't impose my definition on her). I will be judged by God, not by whether or not I forcefully stopped someone from having an abortion, but whether or not I, if asked, counseled someone according to my beliefs. My responsibility ends there.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 3, 2012 9:35:41 AM PST
no

you are trying to oversimplify it to slip the whore of babylon republican party position by us as if it were true
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 19 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  37
Total posts:  456
Initial post:  Dec 3, 2012
Latest post:  Dec 12, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions