This is my first time adding a poll, so hopefully it works
I notice that the issue of gay marriage is a hot topic on these forums, but people tend to skirt around abortion... Gee, I wonder why? Here's a poll, please choose one of the options even if you feel that you're "special" to the point of where none of these options describes you. Please keep in mind, This has to do only with pregnancies that are not the result of rape, are not a danger to the mother's life, and with fetuses that will not have grossly severe deformities or disabilities. I have opinions about each of these special circumstances, but I would like this topic to be about the overwhelming majority of pregnancies which don't have these problems.
Obviously you can voice your stance as well, and feel free to talk about your opinions of how religion relates to all of this... or how it shouldn't. Here's mine:
For me, my strong views about abortion coincide highly with my religious views, but I developed them before I became religious. I view life as sacred from the moment of conception. I don't care if the zef (zygote/embryo/fetus) can think, I don't care how he looks, I don't care if the mother-to-be is a teenager or not, and I don't care about the impact on society. All I care about is the zef's life, and how I define life is not based off of cognitive abilities, development of vital organs, or ability to survive outside the womb. Life is about having a future on this earth. Many people say it's no big deal because there are so many early miscarriages that we don't even realize happen, but that is an awful reason to justify the purposeful destruction of life.
The main pro-choice argument is that the mother has a right to choose since it's her body. I strongly disagree. In the cases of voluntary sex, people know the risks; even when they use protection they know there's still a risk. Even if they don't know the risks, that still does not justify killing the zef because of their ignorance. Even in the worst case scenario, where the mother is a teenager and dirt poor, I strongly believe that abortion is wrong. Life is sacred to the point of where both parents ought to be willing to sacrifice their monetary well-being as well as their personal lives/time/aspirations for the sake of letting their child live.
My faith strengthens my stance, and I'm not ashamed to admit that the only way I could feel so strongly is through my faith. After all, with a non-theistic view it's pretty easy to view life as insignificant if it's a tiny spec that doesn't think and doesn't look anything like a baby. I understand many will be offended by this, but I've seen that this is the case for many non-theists.
The final argument that usually arises is: "Isn't using protection the same as abortion, since you're preventing sperm from entering the egg?" I believe we have the right to choose when we want to create life, but we don't have the right to choose to destroy that life once it has been created. I may not know the precise time down to the second, but somewhere during the moment of conception, life is created. A sperm will not grow into a baby, and neither will an egg; only a fertilized egg. All that is left after conception is less than a year of growing until the life is born. Using protection is no more abortion than is choosing not to have sex for a certain night. Both cases mean that sperm that could have fertilized an egg was prevented from doing so. But destroying a fertilized egg is abortion, because it is killing off a human life that is growing.
These are my views. I know there are many points where people can disagree, but abortion is one thing where I have a very strong stance on, since I believe it is killing. When people are lax on their stances and say things like, "It's only for mothers to decide," it usually means that they don't view the zef as a life.
The abortion issue
Moderator: Moderators
Post #161
How is it different? In both cases a potential human life is destroyed. I never said it was impersonal. Some people get just as upset about those embryos in petri dishes.Jonah wrote:
You said:
"It is the same idea when dealing with an actual pregnancy. The womb is like that petri dish--except it has the ability to grow that embryo into a human being."
But, your other assertion:
"ending a pregnancy through abortion is no different from throwing away unused embryos in labs."
No different? Completely false. If you are asserting that it is possible for a human being to actually abort a fetus from within her and REALLY regard it as the same as a impersonal lab disposal event, then what is that to say of the present state of humanity?
Post #162
Wow.
As a human being, a father, a husband, a pastor, a friend, I have just never run into anyone who would compare the loss of a fetus from within ones body/soul to what goes on in a lab. So, I'll have to take your word for it that such people exist, but it's just outside my experience and imagination.
I've seen my wife have a miscarriage. My daughter was fully witness to the event as well at the age of 8. Both my daughter and I would be entirely unable to understand what you are saying.
As a human being, a father, a husband, a pastor, a friend, I have just never run into anyone who would compare the loss of a fetus from within ones body/soul to what goes on in a lab. So, I'll have to take your word for it that such people exist, but it's just outside my experience and imagination.
I've seen my wife have a miscarriage. My daughter was fully witness to the event as well at the age of 8. Both my daughter and I would be entirely unable to understand what you are saying.
Post #163
Jonah wrote:Wow.
As a human being, a father, a husband, a pastor, a friend, I have just never run into anyone who would compare the loss of a fetus from within ones body/soul to what goes on in a lab.
You fail to explain the difference. The embryo in the petri dish simply has not attached itself to the uterus--but it's the same embryo. A fetus in an unwelcome pregnancy has found no place in a woman's soul. During the first trimester there is no human consciousness there--nothing that would identify the fetus as a person. An abortion simply prevents the fetus from becoming a person--it is not the disposal of a person.
You should get out more.Jonah wrote: So, I'll have to take your word for it that such people exist, but it's just outside my experience and imagination.
Miscarrying a wanted pregnancy is a totally different matter. There's absolutely no comparison. But I've seen looks of relief on many a teenage girl's face when confiding in me that she has had a miscarriage.Jonah wrote:I've seen my wife have a miscarriage. My daughter was fully witness to the event as well at the age of 8. Both my daughter and I would be entirely unable to understand what you are saying.
-
Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #164
I think this bears repeating.kayky wrote: Miscarrying a wanted pregnancy is a totally different matter. There's absolutely no comparison. But I've seen looks of relief on many a teenage girl's face when confiding in me that she has had a miscarriage.
There are several situations.
A wanted pregnancy
An unwanted pregnancy
a wanted pregnancy where there are health issues
An unwanted pregnancy where there are health issues.
These are the major ones.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Post #165
"A fetus in an unwelcome pregnancy has found no place in a woman's soul." I think this would poll pluralistically, at least.
As for my explaining the existence of what I cannot imagine, I have no resources.
I think this is a handle on why "progressives" find law-based religion so objectionable. It smells like it has to do with the deity of the self locked in an adversarial relationship to social accountability. There tend to be two kind of humanisms...one radically individualist and libertarian, the other socialist. Jews and Catholics would be of the socialist kind...and Catholics so, only because they got the idea from the Jews.
Which is to bring up a sore subject within the Jewish community and that is that many Jews are radically pro-choice, especially in Reform. My rabbi straddles the fence on this and talks out of both sides of his mouth. On one hand, the politics of pro-choice within Reform corner him, but on the other hand there is the historical fact that traditional Judaism has frowned on abortion. And of course, the more convervative the Jew, the more you will find a pro-life position. Ben Stein comes to mind.
For me, the radical pro-choice position of many Reform Jews is a symbol of the question of how seriously Reform Judaism will be able to be taken into the future...even by itself. The pro-choice is part of Reform's tradition of respect for individual conscience....ummmm, but, on the other hand, the accusation by Orthodox Jews hits a nerve....is Reform just a little too convenient for Jews, who still want to call themselves Jews, but really it's just a micro-thin dipping sauce of an otherwise generic American synthetic protestantized potted meat product?
But, again. As to how others achieve a Stepford mindset in regard to their abortions is just beyond me, and I will just leave it there. There's not anything I could possibly do about it anyway. So. I will maintain fidelity to my family culture which generally held that tragedies happen to folks, and hard decisions have to made sometimes, and we will just decide to have empathy for all that because we see the pathos in it. For practical purposes though, I still think the higher road is to take abortion seriously enough to work for reduction of unwanted/unplanned pregnancies.
As for my explaining the existence of what I cannot imagine, I have no resources.
I think this is a handle on why "progressives" find law-based religion so objectionable. It smells like it has to do with the deity of the self locked in an adversarial relationship to social accountability. There tend to be two kind of humanisms...one radically individualist and libertarian, the other socialist. Jews and Catholics would be of the socialist kind...and Catholics so, only because they got the idea from the Jews.
Which is to bring up a sore subject within the Jewish community and that is that many Jews are radically pro-choice, especially in Reform. My rabbi straddles the fence on this and talks out of both sides of his mouth. On one hand, the politics of pro-choice within Reform corner him, but on the other hand there is the historical fact that traditional Judaism has frowned on abortion. And of course, the more convervative the Jew, the more you will find a pro-life position. Ben Stein comes to mind.
For me, the radical pro-choice position of many Reform Jews is a symbol of the question of how seriously Reform Judaism will be able to be taken into the future...even by itself. The pro-choice is part of Reform's tradition of respect for individual conscience....ummmm, but, on the other hand, the accusation by Orthodox Jews hits a nerve....is Reform just a little too convenient for Jews, who still want to call themselves Jews, but really it's just a micro-thin dipping sauce of an otherwise generic American synthetic protestantized potted meat product?
But, again. As to how others achieve a Stepford mindset in regard to their abortions is just beyond me, and I will just leave it there. There's not anything I could possibly do about it anyway. So. I will maintain fidelity to my family culture which generally held that tragedies happen to folks, and hard decisions have to made sometimes, and we will just decide to have empathy for all that because we see the pathos in it. For practical purposes though, I still think the higher road is to take abortion seriously enough to work for reduction of unwanted/unplanned pregnancies.
Post #166
My 30 years as a public high school teacher has given me a very different perspective on this issue. I've seen young women with great potential ruin their lives by becoming mothers too soon--doomed to lives of poverty--a legacy passed on to the children. If my own daughter (who starts law school next month) had become pregnant as a teenager, I would have strongly urged her to have an abortion.
Post #167
kay,
I understand that. I taught middle school, and dealt with pregnant girls there, and of course in the parish. My particular experience is such that I would always take very seriously the sense of heaviness a girl in those circumstances is likely to just not feel at that given moment, but for all time. People can want easily solutions, but abortion is not that. It's not easy. Which goes to my point of the greater amount of energy being needed to prevent folks from facing this trauma. Easier said than done, especially in a case of rape/incest. I am wondering if you are taking a "no big deal" approach just out how that helps grease a pro-choice policy task...if it's no big deal, it kind of takes the wind out of the pro-life sails. It might work in debate. But, in the kids I've dealt with, they were not predisposed to consider it no big deal.
Moreover, I think the intellectual/abstract positions people articulate on abortion are informed by their concrete life issues...and I respect that. I certainly have no need of denying that in my own case. Both my wife's miscarriages and my own birth defect (many would defend abortion for) are part and parcel of my predisposition to taking the human factors here very seriously. My fear is that opting for a no-big-deal petri dish view of abortion may well lead to a false sense of resolution...or an expansion of sociopathic tendencies in the culture at large. We have seen the same slippery slope with divorce, and the effect on the family. And that is not to throw stones at divorced people, but again, to stipulate that these things are hard...and not everyone deals with the serious implications.
I will never forget a middle school girl I had in 7th grade English. Good student...articulate...good writer...very artistic. Very messed up and truant. Was home a lot taking care of siblings who were also going nuts in their classrooms. The mother came in for a conference. She told me straight out, that Dad had just moved out...and Boyfriend had just moved in...and the kids were all going nuts over it. The mother actually said, "I can't put my life on hold for these kids."
I can't imagine where that mindset comes from. It is hard for me to actually believe the person fully means what she is saying.
I understand that. I taught middle school, and dealt with pregnant girls there, and of course in the parish. My particular experience is such that I would always take very seriously the sense of heaviness a girl in those circumstances is likely to just not feel at that given moment, but for all time. People can want easily solutions, but abortion is not that. It's not easy. Which goes to my point of the greater amount of energy being needed to prevent folks from facing this trauma. Easier said than done, especially in a case of rape/incest. I am wondering if you are taking a "no big deal" approach just out how that helps grease a pro-choice policy task...if it's no big deal, it kind of takes the wind out of the pro-life sails. It might work in debate. But, in the kids I've dealt with, they were not predisposed to consider it no big deal.
Moreover, I think the intellectual/abstract positions people articulate on abortion are informed by their concrete life issues...and I respect that. I certainly have no need of denying that in my own case. Both my wife's miscarriages and my own birth defect (many would defend abortion for) are part and parcel of my predisposition to taking the human factors here very seriously. My fear is that opting for a no-big-deal petri dish view of abortion may well lead to a false sense of resolution...or an expansion of sociopathic tendencies in the culture at large. We have seen the same slippery slope with divorce, and the effect on the family. And that is not to throw stones at divorced people, but again, to stipulate that these things are hard...and not everyone deals with the serious implications.
I will never forget a middle school girl I had in 7th grade English. Good student...articulate...good writer...very artistic. Very messed up and truant. Was home a lot taking care of siblings who were also going nuts in their classrooms. The mother came in for a conference. She told me straight out, that Dad had just moved out...and Boyfriend had just moved in...and the kids were all going nuts over it. The mother actually said, "I can't put my life on hold for these kids."
I can't imagine where that mindset comes from. It is hard for me to actually believe the person fully means what she is saying.
Post #168
Much of the mental anguish felt by girls having abortions is because of social, religious, and family pressures. I'm not saying it should be easy: it should not be used as a solution to promiscuity. At the same time, if a girl gets the proper support in the face of this crisis, it does not have to be a life-crippling decision. I just think we need to be more realistic about what is actually being "lost" in a first-trimester abortion. It is not a baby. It is not a person. That has been prevented.
Post #169
Your take on it in such an across the board kind of way, leaves me all the more comfortable with the counseling community. It's a good thing mainline denominations and many others require CPE (clinical pastoral education) of their clergy in which they work in hospitals. Part of CPE training is intensive confrontation by the head of the program in group sessions on what is going on with the self...toward separating out our needs/projections and what is really going on with patient/client. Certainly religious culture has the power to impose. On the other hand, all human beings have the right to determine who they are, and what their values are...even when their sense of values is conflicted. People should not have to be talked out of who they really are in order for them to make a very hard decision. And certainly the goal is for people to not be crippled for life. But, getting through hard things is work and it is a process.
Perhaps it is your assumption that an academic view of what a fetus is not is somehow potentially therapeutic. Again, I focus on the person in their whole context...their background, family system, hopes and plans for the future. The idea that one can compartmentalize or even perhaps surgically remove a large event from a person's life just never really works. I did a year of law school and there's a concept of "legal fiction"...rather a utilitarian way of artificially saying something is so, when it really isn't....kind of like some marriage anulments.
I think of another similarity from my experience in alcoholism counseling. Most counseling advises the alcoholic that their recovery is a life long thing...and that AA or other counseling is really important in the early years of recovery. Some people say to blazes with that and assert that it is possible for a person just to quit cold turkey---no counseling...no processing of anything. It is possible...it's called "the dry drunk"....these are a minority of people who do stop drinking but the psychological cost of the way they've done it...does them in.
If a person doesn't process a major trauma...the repression squeezes out hard somewhere else. Thus, I would not advise the no-big-deal model of dealing with abortion.
Perhaps it is your assumption that an academic view of what a fetus is not is somehow potentially therapeutic. Again, I focus on the person in their whole context...their background, family system, hopes and plans for the future. The idea that one can compartmentalize or even perhaps surgically remove a large event from a person's life just never really works. I did a year of law school and there's a concept of "legal fiction"...rather a utilitarian way of artificially saying something is so, when it really isn't....kind of like some marriage anulments.
I think of another similarity from my experience in alcoholism counseling. Most counseling advises the alcoholic that their recovery is a life long thing...and that AA or other counseling is really important in the early years of recovery. Some people say to blazes with that and assert that it is possible for a person just to quit cold turkey---no counseling...no processing of anything. It is possible...it's called "the dry drunk"....these are a minority of people who do stop drinking but the psychological cost of the way they've done it...does them in.
If a person doesn't process a major trauma...the repression squeezes out hard somewhere else. Thus, I would not advise the no-big-deal model of dealing with abortion.
Post #170
(Bold Added for Emphasis)kayky wrote:At the same time, if a girl gets the proper support in the face of this crisis, it does not have to be a life-crippling decision. I just think we need to be more realistic about what is actually being "lost" in a first-trimester abortion. It is not a baby. It is not a person. That has been prevented.
How do you determine this? Have you just decided that this is the case or is there a reason you are saying this? Babies have heartbeats in the first trimester. Also it can be determined what sex the baby is around week 12. The baby develops its bones arms and legs during this time as well. I think you need to rethink your argument as it seems to be completely unfounded.
