Evidence for God from Science

FearlessLlearsy wrote:Regarding the cases of Rape, honestly, murder remains murder...
Regarding the cases where the mother can die if she gives birth, thats a whole different story, wouldnt that be then self preservation?

FearlessLlearsy wrote:Honestly, i came with the conclusion that different people share different opinions. It is not because my opinion may be right that i may convince someone else who strongly holds a contrasting view. In all, murder shall remain murder by lexical definition. In all honesty, as much as abortion comes to my mind, its a product of sin. Altough I think abortion is murder, another may share a different view. If i should share my reasons why abortion is murder and that other person resists me, what else can i do? Wouldnt it be at this point like talking to a wall?

I believe that women who were, unfortunately, raped should visit the nearest healthcare center as soon as possible. Over there they can report everything to the authorities and get the "day after" pill which should prevent the eventual pregnancy. I agree that murder is murder, that child doesn't deserve death because of its father's sins - makes no sense.

FearlessLlearsy wrote:yes, at the end of the day, its still murder. But the question boils down to this: 19 years later, when the "dead"kid was suppose to graduate... how does a mom like this feel? I want to know. We are all talking about this, but what about those women who have chosen to be... indirectly MURDERERS. What differentiates them with a convicted felon who committed thief (which is a much lighter then murder)

RickD wrote:If you're pro life, you might want to research what you wrote about the "day after" or morning after pill. The makers of the pill say it doesn't end a pregnancy. That's true in their warped thinking, because it seems they've changed the definition of pregnancy. In their mind, pregnancy begins when the embryo attaches to the uterus. So, the morning after pill may prevent an embryo from attaching to the uterus, thus ending a pregnancy that has already begun at the moment of conception.

Reactionary wrote:

RickD wrote:If you're pro life, you might want to research what you wrote about the "day after" or morning after pill. The makers of the pill say it doesn't end a pregnancy. That's true in their warped thinking, because it seems they've changed the definition of pregnancy. In their mind, pregnancy begins when the embryo attaches to the uterus. So, the morning after pill may prevent an embryo from attaching to the uterus, thus ending a pregnancy that has already begun at the moment of conception.

Yes, I'm aware that there have been controversies about the "day after" pill. I believe (I don't know as it's not a part of my expertise) that if taken quickly enough, it could prevent fertilization as it's a rather long and gradual process where it's difficult to define the very moment of conception. Though you were right about me jumping in an area I'm not very well informed of.

So, the main arguments I've read in favor of abortion are the two definitively baseless claims that fetus' are "not human" and "are parasites". Really? In an atheistic worldview, isn't morality tied to reproduction of the human species and spreading genes? Then isn't preserving the life of our children of paramount importance? I'm confused how fetus' with human DNA and developing in a system designed for them (their mother's), why either of those claims made is even sensical. Then again, not much of atheist morality makes much sense to me, because I have a hard time finding non-self-defeating claims.

Atheists have no morality

Imperial wrote:

zoegirl wrote:It's a silly thing to say that one can be pro-choice about murder.

If you believe that abortion is murder, then saying "well, nobody wants to murder, but it should be her choice to murder" makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. essentially anyone claiming to be pro-choice is pro-murder. Obviously they don't feel strongly enough about it so they are ok with it.

Ummmm no.. Once again Pro-"Murder" would be stating that YOU want EVERY baby to be aborted. Pro-*Choice* (which is what it actually is) is when you allow someone else to make a choice, murder or not, it's a neutral thing.

This means that if you're Pro-Choice, you may not be a person who would ever let an abortion of your own baby to ever happen, however you believe it should be a choice for all. Pro-Abortion would mean you are the type of person who would abort every baby you ever have.

Basically ""Pro-Abortion"" would mean you're making the choice for all (which isn't an option in this controversal debate and therefore "Pro-Abortion does not exist), While Pro-Choice would mean you're letting other people decide themselves.



I believe murder is aginst the law.......The debate is weither abortion qualifies as murder or not.

*edit* -

Ok just to make this PERFECTLY clear considering your past posts...

Pro-Abortion = Abortion to All
Pro-Life = No Abortion
Pro-Choice = Choice between Abortion or No Abortion

Reactionary wrote:

FearlessLlearsy wrote:yes, at the end of the day, its still murder. But the question boils down to this: 19 years later, when the "dead"kid was suppose to graduate... how does a mom like this feel? I want to know. We are all talking about this, but what about those women who have chosen to be... indirectly MURDERERS. What differentiates them with a convicted felon who committed thief (which is a much lighter then murder)

SnowDrops wrote:Btw, women do have the choice. No one forces them to have sex, or at least without taking a pill first. I heard a story about a women who got 10-20+ abortions because "who bothers to take those pills anyways"