You want Contraversy? You can't handle it!

[jay_a2j]

sooo its okay to kill childern because they did something they cant begin to comprehend, and thats not killing?

First, Give me a break with the "they can't comprehend" argument. Are you saying a teen does not know right from wrong?

face it, the child is not even born yet, it has no life.
none whatsoever. you cannot kill what is not alive.
unless ofcourse you need we should not kill anything at all, like platns, animals for food ect.
so i will amend to this, an unborn child has no file in that it is not capable to breathing on its own, to sustain its own life in any way shape or form.
(this to distinguish from the deathrow inmate whom you so please to shut out of the human race or something, or the elderly senile who is like a unborn child in many respects but has been able to sustain its own life, even it at present it may not be able to do so)

"Life canot come from non-life" If its living when it leaves the womb its living in the womb. A newborn child if left unattended would die. Too many mothers have ended the life of their newborn baby and have been brought up on murder charges. (in which they get far too short of a sentence)

Let me reiterate that I am against the death penalty (I'm a consistent Republican ) But even as such I can see where there is a huge difference between "killing a death row inmate" and a child who has done nothing wrong... has not even been given the opertunity to do something wrong.



backglass.... I have never been pregnant, for sure. But I do know right from wrong. If my neighbor tells me he is going to kill his boss tomarrow, even though I have never killed my boss, should I not intervien? Come to think of it backglass YOU have never been pregant so I guess we will not be hearing from you again on this topic.

[jay_a2j]

If you don't want to get pregnant don't have sex at all. Two reasons I support the "abstinence" side of the "how to protect yourself" debate are:

1) Contraception is an evil and warps the sacred sexual act God created (and I am quite willing to argue this point with any Christian who disagrees).

2) Birth control doesn't guarantee safety. STDs are still transferred in spite of the pill, and condoms are known to have malfunctions every now and again.

I support abstinence as the first choice. I believe sex outside of marriage is sin. However, I wouldn't call contraception "evil". If a married couple do not want anymore children you can't expect them to abstain the rest of their childbearing years.


As for unwed people. Yes, sex outside of marriage is sin. Abortion is also sin. So, at least with birth control you eliminate one of the two sins. (this of course, is assuming that the "they're gonna do it anyways" agrument is true)


In closeing, Gods plan is: wait until you are married to have sex.

[strike wolf]

fine, then make a contribution

Being a bit contradictory here? I hardly consider "think again, nuff said" as contributing.

[cowshrptrn]

As for unwed people. Yes, sex outside of marriage is sin. Abortion is also sin. So, at least with birth control you eliminate one of the two sins. (this of course, is assuming that the "they're gonna do it anyways" agrument is true)


In closeing, Gods plan is: wait until you are married to have sex.

IN closing, the church is going against one of our most arcane instinct that has been rooted into our subconscious through millions of yeras of evolution because they feel that its "immoral" and give no backing as to why it is except for the fact that they say so.

"Life canot come from non-life" If its living when it leaves the womb its living in the womb. A newborn child if left unattended would die. Too many mothers have ended the life of their newborn baby and have been brought up on murder charges

If we were arguing that ending a life in general is terrible the we wouldn't be able to eat anything except salt and water since plants are alive, adn animals are alive.

You, i assume, are then arguing that we are against ending SENTIENT life which fetuses are not, considering they dont' have a developed or functioning brain. I am against late term abortions except for ones that woudl save the life of the mother. If you are so quick to refute a doctor's diagnosis why dont' you try going through about a dozen years of intense schooling, then another dozen of job eperience then take a second look at this case, taking into account the potential that there is more to this case than simple depression which O'Rielly, god forbid, NEGLECTED TO SAY (gasp)

in closing, try not to be too hypocritical

[jay_a2j]

As for unwed people. Yes, sex outside of marriage is sin. Abortion is also sin. So, at least with birth control you eliminate one of the two sins. (this of course, is assuming that the "they're gonna do it anyways" agrument is true)


In closeing, Gods plan is: wait until you are married to have sex.

IN closing, the church is going against one of our most arcane instinct that has been rooted into our subconscious through millions of yeras of evolution because they feel that its "immoral" and give no backing as to why it is except for the fact that they say so.

"Life canot come from non-life" If its living when it leaves the womb its living in the womb. A newborn child if left unattended would die. Too many mothers have ended the life of their newborn baby and have been brought up on murder charges

If we were arguing that ending a life in general is terrible the we wouldn't be able to eat anything except salt and water since plants are alive, adn animals are alive.

You, i assume, are then arguing that we are against ending SENTIENT life which fetuses are not, considering they dont' have a developed or functioning brain. I am against late term abortions except for ones that woudl save the life of the mother. If you are so quick to refute a doctor's diagnosis why dont' you try going through about a dozen years of intense schooling, then another dozen of job eperience then take a second look at this case, taking into account the potential that there is more to this case than simple depression which O'Rielly, god forbid, NEGLECTED TO SAY (gasp)

in closing, try not to be too hypocritical

God gave man dominion over animals. See, this is where it gets frustrating. You equate human life with that of a chicken or head of lettuce. What you fail to acknowledge is that man has a spirit setting us apart from the other things you mentioned.

[Knight of Orient]

If you don't want to get pregnant practice birth control.

If you don't want to get pregnant don't have sex at all. Two reasons I support the "abstinence" side of the "how to protect yourself" debate are:

1) Contraception is an evil and warps the sacred sexual act God created (and I am quite willing to argue this point with any Christian who disagrees).

2) Birth control doesn't guarantee safety. STDs are still transferred in spite of the pill, and condoms are known to have malfunctions every now and again.


On the topic of abortion, suffice to say I believe it to be one of the greatest abominations in the history of the human race. To put to comfort of a woman in front of the very LIFE of a child... is not right. Granted, I've never been pregnant, I never will become pregnant, so it may sound easy for me to say, but fortunately for me I associate with some very strong young ladies who are quite capable of becoming pregnant (or already have) and yet still believe they should not be given a "right to choose". That gives a perfectly good amount of credibility to our side of the issue, I think.

"It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish." ---Mother Teresa

WHOA WHOA WHOAAA! That is WRONG! No matter what you say, it is alive. The mom cares for it, tends to it in essence, and when she kills her seed, something that wether you admit it ir not, is ALIVE, that is murder. KILLING.

[vtmarik]

If you don't want to get pregnant don't have sex at all. Two reasons I support the "abstinence" side of the "how to protect yourself" debate are:

1) Contraception is an evil and warps the sacred sexual act God created (and I am quite willing to argue this point with any Christian who disagrees).

I can see where that argument comes in, and it's one of the first valid ones i've ever heard made from a Christian standpoint. It does have a side effect of transforming the sexual act from intimate and procreative to something that young men aspire to do before they turn 18. It becomes a rite of passage, and that's somewhat repugnant. At the same time, if it wasn't meant to feel good, then it wouldn't. Not much of a counter-argument at all really, just kinda wanted to throw it out there.

2) Birth control doesn't guarantee safety. STDs are still transferred in spite of the pill, and condoms are known to have malfunctions every now and again.

Which is why the laws of chance don't determine destiny. The rhythm method and premature withdrawal aren't guarantees either. No one single birth control method is safe, which is why it is always wisest to use two. For example the girl takes the pill and the guy uses a condom, this reduces the statistical probability of catastrophic system failure to a much smaller percentage. There is no substitute for the human factor in this equation, and if someone's gonna be dumb then there's really no stopping it.

On the topic of abortion, suffice to say I believe it to be one of the greatest abominations in the history of the human race. To put to comfort of a woman in front of the very LIFE of a child... is not right. Granted, I've never been pregnant, I never will become pregnant, so it may sound easy for me to say, but fortunately for me I associate with some very strong young ladies who are quite capable of becoming pregnant (or already have) and yet still believe they should not be given a "right to choose". That gives a perfectly good amount of credibility to our side of the issue, I think.

"It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish." ---Mother Teresa

Personally, I'm divided on the issue of abortion. Biologically, it's not alive yet. It's not really alive until brainwaves start to form, which I believe is 12 weeks. Spiritually and ethically, that's where the pitfalls start to form. Then we start talking about the soul and when the soul forms and when the baby becomes self-aware (which technically doesn't happen until the first year after being born if my memory serves). Sure there are women who don't believe in abortion just as there are women who are perfectly satisfied with being a housewife. There will always be a difference of opinion but the question remains where do we draw the line.

Personally, I'm trying to remain balanced on this issue. I'm coming to the point where I can rationalize both sides of the argument and I realize that I'm not pro-choice or pro-life, but I am anti-criminalization. There was an article on AlterNet where someone went around talking to various pro-lifers who said that abortion should be outlawed. These same people who wanted the act itself to become criminal couldn't come anywhere near a consensus within their group or their own minds as to how women who get abortions should be punished. It also comes down to legality. If we illegalize abortions we'll have secret clinics where people go that aren't the most sanitary or trained and we'll have a slightly more clinical version of the wire-hanger abortion.

So in response to your standpoint, I'd like to rebut with a question. If you criminalize abortion, will pro-life organizations turn to supporting families that cannot afford to care for their children or will they just move on to the next thing that they're against?

[Stopper]

If you don't want to get pregnant don't have sex at all. Two reasons I support the "abstinence" side of the "how to protect yourself" debate are:

1) Contraception is an evil and warps the sacred sexual act God created (and I am quite willing to argue this point with any Christian who disagrees).

I can see where that argument comes in, and it's one of the first valid ones i've ever heard made from a Christian standpoint. It does have a side effect of transforming the sexual act from intimate and procreative to something that young men aspire to do before they turn 18. It becomes a rite of passage, and that's somewhat repugnant. At the same time, if it wasn't meant to feel good, then it wouldn't. Not much of a counter-argument at all really, just kinda wanted to throw it out there.

I don't want to pick on you vtmarik, but I thought you were an atheist or agnostic. In which case, how can the above be a valid argument? The sexual act is nothing but a product of evolution, and it has to be good fun, otherwise the human race would never have procreated in the first place. Let's not elevate what is good fun (between consenting adults) into something more than it is.

Personally, I'm divided on the issue of abortion. Biologically, it's not alive yet. It's not really alive until brainwaves start to form, which I believe is 12 weeks. Spiritually and ethically, that's where the pitfalls start to form. Then we start talking about the soul and when the soul forms and when the baby becomes self-aware (which technically doesn't happen until the first year after being born if my memory serves).

Again, the soul doesn't come into it, because there is no reason to suppose there is any such thing as a soul. Hanging on to the idea of a soul (and the "quickening") without believing in the theology to back up the concept is just sentimentalism.

There is an argument to be had about how late abortions should be allowed, because if we're not to condone baby-killing, then eight months is clearly too far down the line. But apart from that, I see no reason why any atheist shouldn't believe that a woman has absolute sovereignty over her body, and anything that happens to be growing in it.

Banning abortion is a recent Catholic invention which brings happiness to no-one, and just increases the control of Men over Women.

[Backglass]

Banning abortion is a recent Catholic invention which brings happiness to no-one, and just increases the control of Men over Women.

Bravo.

[jay_a2j]

But apart from that, I see no reason why any atheist shouldn't believe that a woman has absolute sovereignty over her body, and anything that happens to be growing in it.

Grrrrr Its not "her body" she's killing... its the life inside her that is the loser on the twisted game of abortion. I think you pro-deather's need to watch an abortion being preformed before you judge it as a "nonviable" mass of tissue. They can be googled (but I'm betting that your not up to the task of watching one). Abortion is nothing more then legalized murder. I have a question. At what point does the conscience die?

[Backglass]

I think you pro-deather's need to watch an abortion being preformed before you judge it as a "nonviable" mass of tissue.

It all depends on when you do it. 9 months is a long time. At one week, I would say it IS a just a mass of tissue. FWIW, I am generally against any abortion in the 2nd/3rd trimester.

"Pro-deather". I guess I should call you "Anti-Women" then?

[Stopper]

But apart from that, I see no reason why any atheist shouldn't believe that a woman has absolute sovereignty over her body, and anything that happens to be growing in it.

Grrrrr Its not "her body" she's killing... its the life inside her that is the loser on the twisted game of abortion. I think you pro-deather's need to watch an abortion being preformed before you judge it as a "nonviable" mass of tissue. They can be googled (but I'm betting that your not up to the task of watching one). Abortion is nothing more then legalized murder. I have a question. At what point does the conscience die?

I don't want to watch a video of what goes on in an abbatoir either, but I still eat meat (and suffer no guilt doing so.)

The tactic of pro-lifers of showing pictures and videos of foetuses and abortions is disgusting, because it is nothing but emotional blackmail. Just because a picture of a foetus makes it LOOKS like a viable and independent lifeform, that doesn't mean that it IS.

As far as your conscience question goes, I'm not sure what you're driving at, so I'll answer it literally. It (such as it is) dies when you die. And it ain't got no afterlife either.

[bluereaper]

wow...that amy chick...what an idiot...she has no morals. Letting babies being killed and rapists being aloud to walk streets....she is a freakin idiot.
Don't get me wrong, I am for abortions...but with only weeks before baby born..i believe if the mother can proceed with the birth witout being harmed, then the baby should have to be borned and just given up for adoption. And I am for abotions for woman. With the example of the 10 year old being raped...yes i am completly for the abortion, but the medical place that performs it, should have to give out the rapist name so the rapist could be cought.
Man can't believe how stuck up the amy person is and won't say do the right thing.

[jay_a2j]

"Pro-deather". I guess I should call you "Anti-Women" then?

There are plenty of women who feel th same way. So I guess in your view they are "Anti-themselves".


Its not about women, its about the child. It should no more be a "choice" than a mother who sufficates her newborn. Why not just make abortion legal up to say 18 years old? Then it will fall in line with the right to vote and buying tobacco.

[vtmarik]

I don't want to pick on you vtmarik, but I thought you were an atheist or agnostic. In which case, how can the above be a valid argument? The sexual act is nothing but a product of evolution, and it has to be good fun, otherwise the human race would never have procreated in the first place. Let's not elevate what is good fun (between consenting adults) into something more than it is.

I'm not, and I don't know how I got this reputation as an atheist/agnostic. I'm a philosopher and metareligious theorist who also happens to be a member of the Church of the Subgenius and the Paraametamystikhood of Eris Esoteric. Yes, it is a product of evolution, but it is also a very vulnerable place to be emotionally for either one or both participants in the act. Yes it feels good, yes it's a lot of fun to do, but that doesn't change the intimacy involved between two partners who feel something for each other.

It's not a valid argument, simply my attempt at trying to make sense of the other person's point of view in my own context. Never did I say "I agree" or "I disagree" I merely attempted to understand both sides of the issue and be unbiased. Is that so wrong?

Again, the soul doesn't come into it, because there is no reason to suppose there is any such thing as a soul. Hanging on to the idea of a soul (and the "quickening") without believing in the theology to back up the concept is just sentimentalism.

The soul isn't simply a religious concept, considering that neither philosophers nor scientists can determine where our sense of self and our identity comes from. The soul is the part that makes a person who they are in terms of personality, likes, dislikes, etc. It is the 'I' in the statement "I am who I am." And where did this quickening come from? The only quickening I know about is what immortals go through whenever they slay another immortal in the Highlander series.

There is an argument to be had about how late abortions should be allowed, because if we're not to condone baby-killing, then eight months is clearly too far down the line. But apart from that, I see no reason why any atheist shouldn't believe that a woman has absolute sovereignty over her body, and anything that happens to be growing in it.

Banning abortion is a recent Catholic invention which brings happiness to no-one, and just increases the control of Men over Women.

That is true, and it also goes one step further when you have laws on the books like the one in Virginia that says 'Any woman who has a miscarriage must inform a doctor within 12 hours or face jail time' presumably for having an unlicensed abortion. That's where the pro-life argument takes a turn for the wacky.

[Backglass]

Its not about women, its about the child.

Of course...pregnancy has nothing to do with women or their opinions. How silly of me!

I contend it's not a child without brainwaves.

The thing that gets me is that these anti-abortionists will be the first to run their 15 year old down to the Gynocologist for a "D & C" (a common gyno procedure that has the same abortive effect) when they are raped or pregnant by a boy from the wrong side of the tracks. Suddenly it becomes MUCH different when it's your child in your own home.

I have seen it happen several times.

[ksslemp]

This issue has been going on for so long that both sides have become to "Polarized" to facilitate a resolution. The debate needs to be taken out of the hands of the professional "Pro-Choice/Pro-Life" organizations.

Put forth a practical piece of legislation and let the people of America decide.

I think to allow the use of the "Morning After" pill, and at the same time abolishing abortions except in the case of Rape/Incest/Life of Mother would be supported by most Americans.

[vtmarik]

This issue has been going on for so long that both sides have become to "Polarized" to facilitate a resolution. The debate needs to be taken out of the hands of the professional "Pro-Choice/Pro-Life" organizations.

Put forth a practical piece of legislation and let the people of America decide.

I think to allow the use of the "Morning After" pill, and at the same time abolishing abortions except in the case of Rape/Incest/Life of Mother would be supported by most Americans.

Then all a doctor has to do is ask "Were you raped? *winkwink*" and anyone can get an abortion.

Do you realize how dumb that idea is?

[ksslemp]

GEEEE, I guess i haven't given it enough thought! sic sic

[Stopper]

Yes, it is a product of evolution, but it is also a very vulnerable place to be emotionally for either one or both participants in the act. Yes it feels good, yes it's a lot of fun to do, but that doesn't change the intimacy involved between two partners who feel something for each other.

None of which I'd disagree with - even as my toes curl with embarassment - but when I said let's not elevate it into something that it isn't - that was in response to your response to OnlyAmbrose's idea that sex is a God-given act which shouldn't be "warped" by such nasty things as Evil Condoms...

The soul isn't simply a religious concept, considering that neither philosophers nor scientists can determine where our sense of self and our identity comes from. The soul is the part that makes a person who they are in terms of personality, likes, dislikes, etc. It is the 'I' in the statement "I am who I am." And where did this quickening come from? The only quickening I know about is what immortals go through whenever they slay another immortal in the Highlander series.

The soul may have many definitions, but in the context of what we're talking about here, I was assuming something more or less like the Christian definition, which is presumably what OnlyAmbrose meant when s/he mentioned it - I doubt many Christians would agree with your definiton! (For a start, the first part of it doesn't leave much of a soul for a new-born baby)

(I dunno about the Highlander [should I?], but the quickening is when the baby can be felt moving by the mother - at one time, as I understand, it was thought that this marked the time when the soul entered the foetus.)

[subdork]

IN closing, the church is going against one of our most arcane instinct that has been rooted into our subconscious through millions of yeras of evolution because they feel that its "immoral" and give no backing as to why it is except for the fact that they say so.

There's plenty of reasons given, if not by the church, then by science. A fetus has human DNA, thus making it human. It's DNA is distinct from the mother's DNA, thus making it not part of the mother.

When you talk about instincts being inherently good (or at least not evil), then you're on a slippery slope. It's a basic instinct to to exact revenge on those that have wronged you. Many times for men, it is their instinct to have sex with attractive women, whether the woman wants to or not (I would imagine this to be especially true in early human development). It is instinct to have sex with any girl that has gone through puberty. Not succumbing to our instincts is partly what makes us human.

"...in realizing the self is 'nothing' one is said to 'own the world', because as the book states in its last line: 'all things are nothing to me'"

And while I don't believe it a sin to have sex before marriage, I realize that it is bad. I fear that we are that much closer to owning the world. Sex is nothing; to be human is nothing; all is just brainwaves - pleasures and pains.

[Stopper]

And while I don't believe it a sin to have sex before marriage, I realize that it is bad. .

Nonsense. When I was 10, I knew my birthday, my parent's wedding date, and the average length of gestation...and worked out I owe my life to it

[subdork]

And while I don't believe it a sin to have sex before marriage, I realize that it is bad. .

Nonsense. When I was 10, I knew my birthday, my parent's wedding date, and the average length of gestation...and worked out I owe my life to it

Funny you should bring that up... you also owe your life to the fact that your mom did not have an abortion.

[Stopper]

And while I don't believe it a sin to have sex before marriage, I realize that it is bad. .

Nonsense. When I was 10, I knew my birthday, my parent's wedding date, and the average length of gestation...and worked out I owe my life to it

Funny you should bring that up... you also owe your life to the fact that your mom did not have an abortion.

I'd say touche, but I somehow think I'd have been somewhat less than indifferent if she HAD done.

[subdork]

And while I don't believe it a sin to have sex before marriage, I realize that it is bad. .

Nonsense. When I was 10, I knew my birthday, my parent's wedding date, and the average length of gestation...and worked out I owe my life to it

Funny you should bring that up... you also owe your life to the fact that your mom did not have an abortion.

I'd say touche, but I somehow think I'd have been somewhat less than indifferent if she HAD done.

And hence you'd be indifferent if they hadn't had sex?