Abortion....why?

[Haagrum]

And as for:

TL;DR: Because it's easier to judge or disapprove than to help or show compassion.

That's a pretty uneducated position.
There are tons of pregnancy support centers, all run by Christian groups, that help women going through unplanned pregnancies, or who are coping with the regret of abortions. I know of about 4 just in my area. These places offer a place to stay, food, diapers, everything to help these women. They are certainly doing what Christ taught, and they are all over the place.

Yeah, there are judgmental Christians. It shames and infuriates me all at once.
But we aren't all that way. Not by a long shot.

It's not an uneducated position, and I wasn't limiting that observation to Christians. The sort of reactionary and venomous sentiments about abortion that the OP referred to are hardly limited to any one group, but IMHO they tend to spring from the same well (i.e. a lack of compassion and empathy). Christ was big on "love thy neighbour", and plenty of people - Christian and otherwise - do not heed that central principle in commenting on abortion. The very existence of the support groups you mentioned shows this delineation, potentially because of the very factors mentioned in my comment and their ability to take the harder path.

I share your indignation with the graceless characterisation of Christians as all being like the fundamentalists. I agree that the support centres you refer to are a better reflection of the Christian ethos and principles than the dogmatists or the political zealots. I'm just as furious about the inaccurate prostitution of a faith for political purposes. Our agreement in regard to the pro-life/pro-capital punishment inconsistency seems to support that. My abbreviated point was about the reason why some people rail so vehemently against the "evils" of abortion - not that having a given faith predetermines this outcome.

 

[aei_haruko]

allright, so let me just make sure I get the cru of your scenario: a bright teenage girl has sex, condom breaks, doesnt want to keep the child, but doesnt want to abandon it?
How can she not want to keep the child, but on the converse not want to abandon it? Those 2 things are contradictory.

i mean that the mother doesn't want the baby, and doesn't feel like she could raise it.

on the other hand, she feels that it would be irresponsible of herself to give it up for adoption, with the possibility that it's life will consist of living in an orphanage for years, or being bounced from foster family to foster family. it might be that the child grows up happy, but she won't take that chance.

she feels, in sum, that it would be best for herself and the baby if it were never born.

Plus, how is it abandoning a child anyway on the other matter? many kids are taken away from their homes all the time because they live with abusive parents, and many of them find good families who can raise their child. In this scenario, I cant ay it for certain because we dont know that, maybe the foster system would be great for her child, maybe the community would be insired that she raises her child, and maybe they would help out, maybe the kid might actually be brilliant and help change the world. We can be reasonably sure that it might be diffucult, or thatit might be hard to see, but yetI still think that we would have no right to take a human life simply because it is a conviniant thing to do, beause if we break it down, how many of our lives are " conviniant". If we lived in a world where your only value on life was measured with only mathemaic value on life, and where we are killed simply for conviniance, then we're nothing more than a natural rescourse, and object. Because when a toy isnt conviniant, we throw it out, when a dog is inconviniant ( in the play of mice and men) we shoot it. I fear we are heading that way with humanity, if a lover is getting inconviniant, we break up, if a child is inconviniant, we kill it. I dont want to see human being made into a cheap type of object, beecause No matter how bad we can be sometimes, I still know that human beings have some type of value that isnt spiritual or intellectual, I just dont know what it is or where it comes from

i dont mean to say that the abortion should happen because it's 'convenient'. i mean to say that, as the happiness or unhappiness of the child are almost impossible to predict, it would be best to focus on the things we can be certain of. in this case, that the mother would be happier if the child were aborted.

of course, this doesn't give a blank slate for people to just use an abortion as a contraceptive. these people do exist, but i would say the best way to deal with them is to send them to a psychiatrist, or make the seriousness of abortion clear in some other way. not by tying them down to a nine - month unwanted pregnancy with no assurances that they'll learn.

OH, thats what you were getting to. okay, i gethcha now.
Allright. So essentially the point is that we cant know for sure what the childs life will be like, but we DO know what his mthers life will be like. So she feels as though it's best if her child didnt get to be born? Allright, why however would it be irresponsible to have the child be in the foster system? it's so much more responsible than saying " well I'll be a GREAT mommy" or " eh, it'll live on the streets". I'd say that it'd be the most responsible thing for the child to be born and live in the foster care system. I guess that all in all, philosophically it'd vary from case to case, but still, the child does have its own life, shouldnt that be respected?

 

[Jakub324]

What? The baby cannot think for itself. It is not aware of it's own existence. It cannot fear death. Yeah, you can say it's a little person, and that every child has a right to life, but suppose the parents can't afford another mouth? Should three people have shit quality of life for the sake of one who wouldn't care if it died? Would you want to live with people who barely scrape by because of you?

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

There are many out there that believe the instant a woman becomes pregnant (I.E. the first few days), that the future-child is alive and that an abortion is murder. Personally, I find this view fucking stupid, because most people that believe this are not vegans and seem to have no problem eating meat. Until about the eighth or so month, the foetus is more or less a circulatory and nervous system with no cognitive thought.

And like a fair few, and the OP, I am fully behind a persons free will of choice. Because really, if your daughter was raped and fell the preggers, would you have no problem with the prospect of her giving birth to an assholes baby? Would you feel no problem to your daughter having a child, and being constantly reminded that she was raped instead of moving on?

(I'm not trivialising rape, I'm simply not making it the main point)

agreed with this.

and now this isn't necessarily true nor do i 100% believe it, HOWEVER:

obviously if abortion is being considered, it is because the parent(s) aren't ready to raise a child, let alone if they truly wanted one in the first place, so based off of that alone the child is going to come into a world where it wasn't wanted in the first place, on top of that if the mother doesn't have the time/money to care for the baby, it'll end up in an adoption agency/home, not having the full love/care of having parents like all children should. or even worse, it could be a dumpster baby that ends up dying a horrible death in a dumpster/can/etc..

would people not say that most "troubled" adults (robbers/rapists/etc..) grew up with a fucked up child hood or parents that were not caring to do the whole "parent" part of life? that can easily be avoided by giving people the choice early on, if they aren't ready for a baby/child, or if they don't think they would ever be a good parent, to do the procedure.


so yeah, i'm pro choice, but at the same time i might frown at it if your aborting babies left and right not giving a single fuck.

 

[DracoSuave]

Feel free to troll, flame, or otherwise do forum stuff that could get you banned or the thread deleted. I want to hear from both Christians, sociologists, and smart-alecks alike. Why is this a Christian cause? Who made it that way? And how is it perpetuated?

It's really simple. If you believe an unborn child is a living being with the same rights as those who have been born, and you believe that life should be protected, you're pro-life. I don't understand how the pro-life argument doesn't make sense... it's 100% logical.

The argument isn't difficult to understand. If you're going to be meaningfully pro-choice, then it helps a lot of you try to understand the other side's point of view.

Whether their argument is based on true or false premises is a completely different matter; there's no definitive right answer there. (The reason I am pro-choice despite my beliefs--I am not capable of having children so I am not capable of weighing in on the argument in a meaningful, rather than authoritative manner)

 

[Saxnot]

*snip*

OH, thats what you were getting to. okay, i gethcha now.
Allright. So essentially the point is that we cant know for sure what the childs life will be like, but we DO know what his mthers life will be like. So she feels as though it's best if her child didnt get to be born? Allright, why however would it be irresponsible to have the child be in the foster system? it's so much more responsible than saying " well I'll be a GREAT mommy" or " eh, it'll live on the streets". I'd say that it'd be the most responsible thing for the child to be born and live in the foster care system. I guess that all in all, philosophically it'd vary from case to case, but still, the child does have its own life, shouldnt that be respected?

i see your point. it's not by definition irresponsible to give a child up for adoption at all.

the crux of the problem is that we can't be sure either way. even if the child grows up with his own parents he might end up bad. it is therefore essentialy very difficult to make grounded arguments for or against the life of the child from that perspective.

foster care might work or it might not. we can't be sure.

which forces us to look at this from another perspective. i would say that the first choice in that regard should be the mother, and what she wants (assuming she's capable of making these kinds of decisions).

you might say that we should look at it from the childs perspective, but even the assumption that the child has a will to live is difficult to ground. we simply can't know.

in short then, the mother is the best reference point we can have with regards to this question. (assuming, again, she's responsible enough to make it)

this brings me to your last point: shouldn't we respect the life of the baby?
i say this is diffficult, again. what can we know about this life? how can we speak for or against it?

if it is something inherently so valuable that it's more important than the certainty we can derive from the mother's assement, how can we ground this inherent value?

 

[Something Amyss]

Sorry, I'm a little confused. I believe that birth control, contraception etc is fine. But after conception that baby, foetus, human, whatever, has been created and exists, and in my opinion you shouldn't consciously remove or kill it once this has been set in action.

Except for a few exceptions.

So you're okay with killing an embryo?

Edit for additional comment: You indicated you weren't excluding fertilised eggs by asking how you were excluding them. Yet you're okay with birth control. Do you understand how birth control works?

 

[Something Amyss]

Those aren't living, GROWING beings. A fetus will be born a human unless something is done about it, while eggs and sperm only has the potensial.

Except after fertilisation. Do you understand how birth control works?

 

[Macrobstar]

There is no rational reason to have an abortion, even from a pro-choice view! If you don't want/can't support a kid, keep your legs closed. Don't punish your own child's life because you have no self-control. Put it up for adoption, there are millions of families who want children but aren't capable of having their own.
Abortion is murder, anybody that tells you otherwise is full of shit.

Abortion is not murder, a fetus is not a conscious life. Until it is born its a parasite living off of the mother and it is the mothers life whether to keep it. The mother could have gotten pregnant from failed birth control or in a worst case scenario rape. It is a much simpler and kinder thing to do to end the possibility of a human life then have a child abandoned from its mother in the adoption system when it is fully sentient. In the end though it all comes down to what the mother wants to do, a child is a heavy burden and if you think anyone who doesn't want to live with that is "full of shit" then you sir are an assh*le

 

[mb16]

if it isnt sentient, it isnt a human. its just a mix of cells.

 

[Stublore]

The other day at work I had to listen to a coworker (a guy I sort of like) do a mini-rant about the evils of abortion to five other guys. I was going to pop in my prepared pro-choice / pro abortion / troll speech, but I didn't bother. Not because I agreed with him, but because I really don't care anymore. Being a man, I can never have an abortion, nor can I legally bind someone against having an abortion. I'm all about freedom of choice and want it to be legal on that basis alone, but other than that it's difficult for me to work up the spirit to defend it strongly. (I mean I could, I just didn't and don't feel like it at the moment.)

The question I'm really posing was brought to me by moviebob's Breaking Dawn review. Why do so many people care so passionately and want to tell everyone why abortion is baaaaaadddddd? Entire works of art are devoted to it, even going as far back as Nightmare on Elm Street 5. It seems like a lot of Christians tend to be the "pro-lifers," but why is that really? I read the Bible. I really don't remember abortion being a topic for discussion, seeing as how the people who wrote the Bible and were alive when it took place didn't even know what germs were, let alone how sexual reproduction worked, let alone have a word for the concept of intentional aborted pregnancy.

Feel free to troll, flame, or otherwise do forum stuff that could get you banned or the thread deleted. I want to hear from both Christians, sociologists, and smart-alecks alike. Why is this a Christian cause? Who made it that way? And how is it perpetuated?

Wow, where to begin?
First off here's some breaking news, abortion is NOT a modern invention/discovery.
It's probably been practiced since the dawn of time. However from what little I know, the method of the past would include "herbal" remedies, rather than surgery.
Do you think that it was only in the past century that people were able to make the connection that sex=babies? Some more breaking news, that's been know for a much longer time.
Amongst it's many contradictions, the bible says that life is precious. Christains extrapolate from that that life now begins at conception, so abortion = murder(never mind the fact that most of them also seem to have no problem with the Death Penalty, but consistency and the bible/christains have never been bedfellows).
As for why they want others to know this so passionaltely? I suspect because they are not really allowed to have sex for fun, so the idea that others do so, often with gusto and regularity, drives them insane with jealousy. If it's not good enough for them, it's not good enough that others should have a good time either!
Who made it that way? Idiots/bigots.
Who propagates it?
Idiots/bigots.

 

[Raven_Operative]

I know this is kind of hypocritical since I'm a christian but my stance is that since the fetus (a rather large bundle of cells) isn't sentient, killing it is just as bad as scratching my arm hard.

Both kill cells, neither are self aware.

 

[michiehoward]

Wow, today was the first time I said my opinion on abortion here at the Escapist. I usually avoid these threads like the plague, but I thought "what the hey"

And I actually read a large amount of posts, glad too see there are people who see this issue from a same point of view.

 

[Rin Little]

Because everyone needs something to ***** about and a lot of people need a reason to feel better than someone else, abortion just happens to be one of those things that lies within the parameters to say "You are a horrible person for choosing it, and I'm better than you because I don't" without any need to understand why the person might have chosen pro-choice rather than pro-life.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

Why are you trying to find logic in people who don't function logically? Why would you expect it in people who actively refute it as evil?

When you ask them "why" you're doing something they refuse to do, let alone answer honestly, so you can't expect a real answer out of it.

But there is a "reason" for things, even if it is not a logical one. I feel some very valid points were made in this post from Haagrum

Spoiler

{As lacktheknack says, if you take the view (based on religious beliefs) that (1) people have souls, and (2) "ensoulment" occurs at conception, then abortion is a form of lawful homicide committed against the most vulnerable "people" in the world. If you accept that position as true (leaving aside the lack of actual evidence), it's fairly simple to see why people would get pretty steamed up about the "evils" of abortion. If you reject or question any element of that understanding, "pro-lifers" will probably seem like nutters to you.

For some, it is even more objectionable because it places freedom from the consequences of irresponsible or immoral conduct (including consumption of drugs or alcohol) ahead of an innocent person's life. This trumps any other concerns for many - although I can't see how genuine threats to health for a pregnant woman could be so easily disregarded. Taking an absolutist principle and attaching both moral judgments and religious tenets to it... well, it's easy to see why some people would take it to the lengths that some anti-abortionists do.

I don't hold with the view that the religious traditionalists just want to subjugate women or, as prestoprozak says, to punish people for having sex outside marriage - although I'm sure many of them do. In most cases, I'm confident that it is simply an under-considered and dogmatic certainty which drives opposition, without the compassion that comes from taking the time to consider why someone might want to end a pregnancy or the effects (of either carrying to term or terminating). There is a bias built into our biology which means that men don't have to deal with the consequences of those choices or attitudes in anything like the same fashion as women.

In fairness to anti-abortion campaigners, they are correct in saying that abortion is undesirable. No-one should ever view abortion as being anything other than a "least worst" option, or that women should have more of them. It's just a shame that there is all too frequently a readiness to judge and an unwillingness to help - while many are willing to condemn, few are willing or able to suggest alternatives. Don't get me started on the ineffectiveness of "teen abstinence" programs. Demonising abortion is a lot easier than presenting a "better way" (or one that isn't bound up in the advocate's personal religious beliefs, at least).

TL;DR: Because it's easier to judge or disapprove than to help or show compassion.

OT: Why are so many "pro-lifers" also in favour of the death penalty, and why do a minority of them promote violence/murder against doctors who perform pregnancy terminations? I've met many devout Christians who are utterly opposed to abortion and capital punishment, which is internally consistent at least, but I can't understand how a different view can be reconciled with the "sanctity of human life" approach. Surely, if life is sacred, there should be no moral distinction between intentionally taking the life of an unborn child/foetus for "the mother's health/convenience" and intentionally taking the life of a convicted murderer who is in custody for "justice/vengeance"?}

 

[Raven_Operative]

Who made it that way? Idiots.
Who propagates it?
Idiots.

Hey, don't lump all Christians together like that. There are plenty of us who think reasonably, and are pro choice.

 

[DracoSuave]

Okay, let me ask you a question: Would you be willing to undergo the same destruction of your body that is performed on the unborn during an abortion, and if not ? why?

Yes, if I felt the reasons were good enough.

QV: Cancer.

 

[Suicidejim]

Personally, I can hardly say abortions are a purely good thing, I believe they should only really be used when there is no other option, but they do have a place in society, and it should be left to the individual to decide whether they have an ethical problem with the procedure.

That said, I do understand the pro-life position's point of view, in that they frequently consider the unborn foetus as an equivalent to a living, breathing baby, and thus equate the process to the murder of an infant, which is obviously not something that people should be given the choice to do. That, and there is often a fear that abortions can encourage unsafe sex and promiscuity, since pregnancy is no longer a deterring factor. I disagree with those positions, but I respect them, which is why I am firmly pro-choice, since it allows those who find abortion immoral to decline the procedure, while still allowing others the freedom to do so.

 

[JMV]

For the record, you don't need to be religious to not be in favor of abortion. Just wanted to throw that little nugget out there.

OT, I really don't like discussing this in public forums, because no matter what my opinion is, it is going to be bashed and deemed either "dirty-hippie" or "fascist-pig", so I'll just say that I believe in planning and contraception. After that (although that is really the whole basis of my feelings towards this topic), responsibility. I also think it is something that needs to exist for clinical and exceptional cases, so it could NEVER be banned.

But yeah, I don't discuss this with anyone anymore, and it feels like it's slowly becoming less of a taboo, as is (almost) every taboo nowadays. In a society of growing tolerance, no matter what your opinion of it is, it doesn't make much sense to forbid people from doing it, if it is truly what they desire, even if morally questionable.

 

[Thistlehart]

It's not about the babies, or 'right to life', because these people are the same ones who don't give a shit about providing for these children after they're born. They are clearly against birth control, the single best way to prevent abortions from being needed in the first place. They don't oppose 'abstinence only' education in schools, the only possible thing i can think of that fails with more regularity than prayer. It's not obviously not about life. It's about their extremely uncomfortable standing with sex. Outlawing abortion is about punishing the diry sl*ts for having the AUDACITY to have sex.

I hate to say it, but ^This! ^This! A thousand times ^THIS!

What it really boils down to is that the religious types that hate abortion also hate the idea that sex can be a pleasurable past-time and not a (as they believe) a shameful act for the sole purpose of reproduction.

They are also jealous and bitter because they know that their beliefs limit their ability to experience all the flavors of life. The fact that people are out there having more fun rankles them. Misery loves company, and they want to legislate theirs.