Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

Nothing specifically, but it does have implications on the whole potentiality thing. Mind you, actively trying to work toward something promised by God (and thus inevitable even if you don't go out of the way) is probably a sign of very shallow faith, but that's neither here nor there, I guess.

So I imagine there are Christian outlooks that don't rule out abortion, well, besides Unitarians? What would their rationale be for that? Just that the Bible doesn't explicitly exclude it, we must be free to do it?

Ehn, more or less. There's a specific line or two somewhere in the thing (Bible) about following the law of land, at least where it doesn't strictly violate biblical stricture or (more importantly) the teachings of Jesus -- and the latter's moral (and thus the major social interaction part) teachings can mostly be derived from the reciprocity thing (I.e. the Golden Rule). So if it's not directly addressed by the bible and doesn't violate the 'be awesome to one another' rule, you're more or less in the clear so long as it's legal. Giving reproductive rights to women is definitely in the clear.

There's plenty of Christians that accept abortion at the very least in cases of rape or physical endangerment and have no problems with contraception, after all, and there's those that -- rightfully -- say it's none of their damn business if they're not the one making the decision, and there's no reason for there to be a law dictating what that decision should be. Reproductive rights aren't somehow anathema to walking with God... maybe walking with certain Christian sects, but there's a reason heresy is a word, heh.

[Tellemurius]

Er, what does that have to do with life beginning at conception, though?

You know, I just realized that I don't really understand what the philosophical justification Christians are drawing from in their crusade to outlaw abortion. Does the bible mention something about a zygote, embryo or fetus being considered a full-fledged human being? Life begins at conception? I hear that latter term a lot but I don't belief it's in the Bible, is it? Does it just contradict the "be fruitful and multiply" guidance? Do they want to ban it just because it's an icky medical procedure to think about?

I answered his question basically.

[alway]

Sorry Telle, but in this case you are wrong. I have never, in my overly many years going to a fundie church a kid, heard that particular phrase ever used to justify the viewpoint on abortion. For one, such anti-abortion groups do not see themselves as descendants of Abraham, because in fact very few of them are.  However, there is a similar quote which is sometimes used to justify it involving something along the lines of 'go forth and multiply' from genesis, which is then used as a weaker justification of 'it goes against the wishes of god.' However, that justification is greatly overshadowed by the most commonly cited tidbit which goes along the lines of 'god knew you before you were born, he knew even the number of hairs upon your head.' This again goes with a bit of the 'it goes against the plan of god,' but primarily goes for the question of when the soul comes into being. Of course, the phrase itself is rather nebulous in that regard, but with a literal interpretation, as is usually the case among those against abortion, it can be used to support their views.

[Truean]

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/15/426509/the-five-birth-control/?mobile=nc

According to Fox News, liberals support birth control to, "Get rid of the poor."

Nothing to do with a woman's right to choice.... Evil babykillers....

So the whole "life begins at conception" argument is moot and doesn't really matter. Let's say life does begin at conception, ok. She doesn't have a duty to support it and it can't live without her, ergo it dies. By the contrary argument that she does have a duty to support it because it's alive, don't we also have a duty to support the poor, who according to fox news we are trying to get rid of via birth control.

If:
The fetus is alive; without her support, it will die. Thus she has a duty to support it.
Then:
The poor are alive; without your support, they will die. Thus, you have a duty to support them.

See how not being able to think arguments through to their logical conclusion backfires? Being alive doesn't mean you get to continue being alive. By definition all living things one day will not be alive. In many cases, continuing to keep the fetus alive will cause her serious harm or even death, but it doesn't seem that's too important according to some.... I can't find the article but I'm positive Rick Santorum said he would counsel that females who are raped shouldn't be allowed to terminate their pregnancies because they are gifts from God....

[scriver]

According to Fox News, liberals support birth control to, "Get rid of the poor."

But we do. Birth control is a way to get "the poor" out of "poor people".

[RedKing]

Obviously the problem is those lazy fetuses are not going out and getting a job. They'd rather just lay in their warm, cozy womb and let someone else do all the digesting, and oxygenating of blood. They're parasites, that what they are! Probably have an XBox and a hi-def television stashed in there, too.

@Truean:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/jan/25/rick-santorum-rape-pregnancyHere ya go.[/url] (There's plenty of others.)

I think we had this discussion before, because it led to someone opining that Santorum was secretly a worshipper of Zeus, since his god is fond of rape.

[Truean]

According to Fox News, liberals support birth control to, "Get rid of the poor."

But we do. Birth control is a way to get "the poor" out of "poor people".

Won't you concede there's a bit more to it than that?

Obviously the problem is those lazy fetuses are not going out and getting a job. They'd rather just lay in their warm, cozy womb and let someone else do all the digesting, and oxygenating of blood. They're parasites, that what they are! Probably have an XBox and a hi-def television stashed in there, too.

@Truean:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/jan/25/rick-santorum-rape-pregnancyHere ya go.[/url] (There's plenty of others.)

I think we had this discussion before, because it led to someone opining that Santorum was secretly a worshipper of Zeus, since his god is fond of rape.

Thankies.

Quite frankly, there's a wonderful example from way back in my constitutional law book that I haven't seen for years and years. I'll try to dig it up and post it here with full credit to the author of course.

[Tellemurius]

Sorry Telle, but in this case you are wrong. I have never, in my overly many years going to a fundie church a kid, heard that particular phrase ever used to justify the viewpoint on abortion. For one, such anti-abortion groups do not see themselves as descendants of Abraham, because in fact very few of them are.  However, there is a similar quote which is sometimes used to justify it involving something along the lines of 'go forth and multiply' from genesis, which is then used as a weaker justification of 'it goes against the wishes of god.' However, that justification is greatly overshadowed by the most commonly cited tidbit which goes along the lines of 'god knew you before you were born, he knew even the number of hairs upon your head.' This again goes with a bit of the 'it goes against the plan of god,' but primarily goes for the question of when the soul comes into being. Of course, the phrase itself is rather nebulous in that regard, but with a literal interpretation, as is usually the case among those against abortion, it can be used to support their views.

I just heard it two weeks ago from a sermon at my catholic church. Whether its true or not i really don't give a damn.

[scriver]

According to Fox News, liberals support birth control to, "Get rid of the poor."

But we do. Birth control is a way to get "the poor" out of "poor people".

Won't you concede there's a bit more to it than that?

Of course, but it's part of it

[Truean]

According to Fox News, liberals support birth control to, "Get rid of the poor."

But we do. Birth control is a way to get "the poor" out of "poor people".

Won't you concede there's a bit more to it than that?

Of course, but it's part of it

See, I don't think that has anything to do with it, at all, because birth control is for the rich and the poor. It isn't targeted at the poor. It's targeted at everyone. Rich women are often on birth control.
Now, if it were mandated that you HAD to take birth control if you were poor, then maybe. As it stands, letting people have the option no matter where they are economically, does no such thing.

[Descan]

Having to support 6-8 kids because you can't get birth control ain't gonna make you rich any time soon.

[RedKing]

Of course, 50 years ago these were the same people advocating sterilizing the poor. Till they realized that the poor make a great service labor force. Middle-class people don't cut your lawn or clean your toilets for cheap.

[Montague]

Nobody is going to elect Santorum- even if he was elected he isn't going to ban birth control.

[Reelya]

That's for sure, big pharmaceutical companies make a bundle off birth control, and also fund both parties.

[Leafsnail]

@Truean:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/jan/25/rick-santorum-rape-pregnancyHere ya go.[/url] (There's plenty of others.)

If Piers Morgan can make you look like a detestable idiot...