How can Abortion be Wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RWMorris
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ribozyme said:
And yes, a fetus is a living human being okay, but under a utilitarian scheme we can abort it because it cannot suffer nor does it possess any preferences.
Click to expand...
Live nerves mean the baby can suffer. Most young living things try hard ot live. There is no reason to assume the human young are different. In general the younger the creature the greater the effort toward life. It therefore makes inductive sense to assume the youngest humans desire life the most and that as soon as the nerves function the child has an intense will to live and can and does hurt badly when injured.
 
The leading causes of abortions are a lack of financial and emotional support. It is simply not enough to try and win the argument if appropriate emotional and financial support is nowhere to be found for pregnant women.
 
ribozyme said:
So do you think PC only effects conservatives? As an environmentalist, I am shocked about how unPC it is to talk about population control.

And yes, a fetus is a living human being okay, but under a utilitarian scheme we can abort it because it cannot suffer nor does it possess any preferences.
Click to expand...
It is not unPC to talk about population control, it is unsupportable. No matter how you feel about the subject, any premise you advance is false. In other words, it is a lie. The problem people face discussing population control is not political correctness, it is mental fatigue.

And concerning utilitarianism. As a Christian I cannot view the philosophy as a serious option. The law exists, not to ensure the safety of the greatest number of people, but the safety of every person. Is it successful? No. But we must never stop trying. Utilitarianism is simply an excuse to stop trying. The common good is not greater than the individual, but equally important. Abortion is allowed under utilitarianism because the common good is greater than the individual, because abortion is useful.
 
RWMorris said:
It is not unPC to talk about population control, it is unsupportable. No matter how you feel about the subject, any premise you advance is false. In other words, it is a lie. The problem people face discussing population control is not political correctness, it is mental fatigue.

And concerning utilitarianism. As a Christian I cannot view the philosophy as a serious option. The law exists, not to ensure the safety of the greatest number of people, but the safety of every person. Is it successful? No. But we must never stop trying. Utilitarianism is simply an excuse to stop trying. The common good is not greater than the individual, but equally important. Abortion is allowed under utilitarianism because the common good is greater than the individual, because abortion is useful.
Click to expand...
Population control is based on a simple premise: this is a finite world, and we cannot perpetually satisfy everyone’s needs if population is growing exponentially.

Utilitarians never mention that we should stop trying. I am simply saying that the “welfare” of a fetus should not be calculated in the utilitarian calculus because it lacks the capacity to suffer and have preferences.
 
ribozyme said:
Population control is based on a simple premise: this is a finite world, and we cannot perpetually satisfy everyone’s needs if population is growing exponentially.
Click to expand...
And that simple premise is false on two points. This is not a finite world. Technology, innovation, and conservation make it, for all practical purposes, infinite. And the so-called exponential population growth has been proven false in the biological world. Populations do not grow exponentially, they only appear to over the short term.
ribozyme said:
Utilitarians never mention that we should stop trying. I am simply saying that the “welfare” of a fetus should not be calculated in the utilitarian calculus because it lacks the capacity to suffer and have preferences.
Click to expand...
Your own words reveal the depravity of your premise. Abortion is a utilitarian tool for population control. The silence of a fetus is your licence. In your mother’s womb, in a bag full of amniotic fluid, without air to flow across your vocal chords, can anyone hear you scream?
 
How about this:
The right to life is the most fundamental of all human rights. Without a right to life, all other rights are valueless. What good does freedom of speech do a dead man? How can a corpse exercise the right to trial by jury?
Click to expand...
The right to life accrues to each of us as a part of our basic humanity. It is as much a part of us as our minds, our personalities, or our arms and legs. It is given to us by no one. It is ours merely because we are living human beings.
Click to expand...
There are those who say that “society” or the government decides when we get the right to life. If that is so, then it is no right at all, but merely a privilege, for if the government can grant the right to life, it can surely withhold it. Once you accept that the government has this power, you must accept, willy-nilly that the government can decree some people – perhaps Jews, or Blacks or Catholics – never get the right to life.
Click to expand...
If, therefore there is such a thing as a right to life, it must accrue to every living human being. This sets up a simple, three-part test.
Click to expand...
 Is the unborn child living? If it were not, we would not be having this debate!
Click to expand...
 Is it human? Check the DNA. If it has rabbit or squirrel DNA, then it is not human. But if it has human DNA, it is human.
Click to expand...
 But is it a being? Check the DNA again. If it has the mother’s DNA, then it is a part of her body. But if it has its own DNA, then it is a being – a separate and distinct human life.
Click to expand...
Very clearly, the unborn has the same right to live as any other living human being. Who denies that, denies the whole concept of human rights.
Click to expand...
 
ribozyme said:
Population control is based on a simple premise: this is a finite world, and we cannot perpetually satisfy everyone’s needs if population is growing exponentially.

Utilitarians never mention that we should stop trying. I am simply saying that the “welfare” of a fetus should not be calculated in the utilitarian calculus because it lacks the capacity to suffer and have preferences.
Click to expand...
Do you understand how danger it is for a guy who’s never had a job to argue for utilitarianism?😛
 
Obviously God is perfect and would never allow the murder of
innocent babies without a greater purpose.

Perhaps it is a test.

The apostles were all martyred except John.

Despite our self-inflicted importance, we really are so insignificant.

Eternity exists despite us.

Rather than worry about the evil others do, let’s do God’s will.

He will sort it all out.
 
grandma_glor said:
Abortion is wrong and will always be wrong

grandma glor
Click to expand...
I’m with you, grandma glor. I’m grandma-age but not a grandma yet, but hey -

do we REMEMBER when every country on earth with Christian citizens said:

“Abortion? IT’S ALWAY WRONG.
ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS.”

All around us now are young folks who say: “Abortion? Who cares?”
Special shame on the older ones who say it. I do mean SHAME!
 
ribozyme;3879812
So do you think PC only effects conservatives? As an environmentalist, I am shocked about how unPC it is to talk about population control.
Click to expand...
No more than saying sieg heil.
And yes, a fetus is a living human being okay, but under a utilitarian scheme we can abort it because it cannot suffer nor does it possess any preferences.
Click to expand...
And you just proved my point.
 
AndyClaymore said:
The leading causes of abortions are a lack of financial and emotional support. It is simply not enough to try and win the argument if appropriate emotional and financial support is nowhere to be found for pregnant women.
Click to expand...
Too bad. They are not children. They are old enough to know the rules and yet took that risk anyway. I know plenty of single mothers who have no money or support and manage to pull it off anyway. And that includes minimum wage earners.
 
ribozyme;3880325
I am simply saying that the “welfare” of a fetus should not be calculated in the utilitarian calculus because it lacks the capacity to suffer and have preferences.
Click to expand...
We are not calculations, we are humans. The Nazis couldn’t make that distinction either.
 
AndyClaymore said:
The leading causes of abortions are a lack of financial and emotional support. It is simply not enough to try and win the argument if appropriate emotional and financial support is nowhere to be found for pregnant women.
Click to expand...
No, the leading causes of abortions are not a lack of financial and emotional support. Abortion leads to the need for financial and emotional support. And each additional abortion a woman gets multiplies that need. Check the stats; you’ve got the “tail wagging the dog.”

What causes abortions?
  • Bad advice.
  • Access
  • Bad choices.
  • Pressure from the baby’s “father”.
  • Peer pressure.
  • Lack of knowledge.
  • PP marketing efforts.
  • Lack of moral education.
    I can think of a bunch more.
Low socio-economic status doesn’t lead to abortion anymore than it causes large families. You can’t have it both ways. Low socio-economic status is a third-party excuse, not a cause.
 
vern_humphrey said:
Do you understand how danger it is for a guy who’s never had a job to argue for utilitarianism?😛
Click to expand...
😃 😃 😃 😃 😃 😃 thumbsup: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL No kidding! Lead by example, ribozyme! LOL Be sure to do YOUR part in dealing with the overpopulation issue! LOLOL
 
RWMorris;3883124
Low socio-economic status doesn’t lead to abortion anymore than it causes large families. You can’t have it both ways. Low socio-economic status is a third-party excuse, not a cause.
Click to expand...
How true. My grandperents grew up during the depression. My grandfather had 11 brothers and sisters, with one income. Ever made pasta from flour for 14 people? lol

a 50 lb bag is between $15-18 dollars and eggs are cheap. And aint no one having 12 kids today!(rare)

It CAN be done, it’s just that abortion is an easy way out for spoiled people.
 
Plenty of us know these factoids. They’ve been around since pre-nternet days.

If you knew a woman who was pregnant and she had 8 kids already…of which 3 of them were deaf, 2 were blind and 1 was mentally retarded…and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she should have an abortion?

*If you answered “yes”, then you would have killed *
Beethoven.

[BAYI’s Email dated 13 Nov 2005, 8:00 am]
 
The problem, unfortunately, is not that we must convince people that abortion is the killing of a human being. The main point in contention is whether a woman should have the right to choose to kill that human being.

Absurd, I know…

So many people have pushed aside their innate moral knowledge that it is inherently evil to murder a baby. Pro-aborts do not dispute the fetus’ humanity as vehemently as once was the case; instead, they fight for the woman’s right to choose, and paint pro-lifers as oppressive and bigoted and mysogynistic.

Talk about a red herring.

So, my point is that we must focus our logic on that paradox: how can a woman’s right to choose trump the fetus’ right to live?

Peace,
Dante
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top