No, we shouldn’t “force” a woman to raise a child from her rapist. However, she may also adopt it out to a couple who really want a child and have been waiting for one (assuming David Crosby is too busy).
“An independant thinker”?
You know perfectly well you will believe whatever the LDS “prophets” decide on the subject.
So if you believe it should be left between the woman and God, then why did you write the following in a prior post?
This tells me you don’t want to leave it between the woman and God, but that you want abortion to be illegal. Are you saying that you want it to be illegal but that you don’t want any punishment for breaking the law?
Porcupine wrote:
I’m just saying that it’s ultimately God’s place to judge, not ours. I’m in favor of illegalizing abortion to the extent that violators would have to pay a hefty fine and maybe do some community service, things like that.
Sorry. You asked a question regarding the souls of the unborn. I believe they do have souls, and since science cannot prove or disprove the existance of souls, I rely on my faith as the basis for my belief. I think it odd that you would ask a religious question (souls are a religious concept) and then counter my response by saying that you are an atheist. 
Jeremiah is significant, for me (I also qualified my previous post this way), because the statement that God knew us before we were knit, confirms the existence of an immortal soul. I don’t expect ppl that profess no faith to agree with me. I also didn’t see where the OP requested that responses based on faith not be submitted.
ZooMom:
Why should someone base their ethics on a book they don’t believe in?
Why should laws be changed because of a book that jab1 doesn’t believe in?
Let’s say my religion MANDATES abortion. Should that be sufficient reason for me to make you have an abortion? After all, that is my religious belief.
From what you said, you are pro-choice and against abortion personally unless you can show me why people who do not look at the Bible for spiritual guidance need to do so because of you and others who do.
Yer pal,
Satan - Commissioner, The Teeming Minions
I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, one day, 15 hours, 9 minutes and 44 seconds.
7385 cigarettes not smoked, saving $923.16.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 4 days, 15 hours, 25 minutes.
I think in this case, ZooMom was specifically addressing the earlier question of “does it have a soul”…hard to answer that kind of a question without some type of religious reference. It didn’t appear (from what I read) that scripture was her sole reason for a pro life position…but then again I should probably not speak for here and just shut up (like the mrs tells me to do all the time 
)
I never said they should. But I think it is safe to say that the western world’s concept of morals and ethics has been heavily influenced by Judaism/Christianity for centuries. I mean, most ppl accept that the Ten Commandments are morally sound, even if they don’t accept the Bible.
I didn’t say that laws should be changed to accomodate the Bible. Those laws weren’t always in place. They were created to accomodate ppl who don’t ‘feel’ that it’s morally wrong to kill babies in the womb. But why should I uphold a law that I feel is morally repugnant.
Then I would say that you would have a very short lived religious experience. Catch my drift?
I am not pro-choice. I do not see that there is anything moral or ethical about ripping a baby from the womb. I never said ppl should look to the Bible. I’m not evangelizing here. I have yet to see anyone present proof that abortion is either moral or ethical. Convienient. Yes. Inevitable. Maybe. Medically necessary. Very seldom. But moral and ethical. Nope, not yet. You claim to have your own set of morals and ethics with no reliance what-so-ever
on the Bible, but if I mention my own morals and ethics I’m a bible-thumper. Hmmmmmm.
To be honest, I feel that it is worse morally and ethically to bring an unwanted child into the world than it is to have a first trimester abortion.
That’s something else I don’t understand. How do you morally justify that it’s better for the child to kill it rather than let it be ‘unwanted’. By that philosophy we should euthanize every child in every orphanage on the planet. No abortion decision was ever made with the child’s welfare in mind.
And this is not directed at anyone personally, but the “it’s not a person yet” argument just doesn’t hold water. No-one can know that beyond a shadow of a doubt. You’re gambling an immortal soul on a ‘feeling’. And don’t bother with the aetheist comeback. I can offer evidence that there is a possibility that souls do exist, but you cannot offer any evidence that they don’t.
What is wrong morally/ethically with a second trimester abortion (or third trimester)?
Check out this month’s issue of Popular Mechanics. Some scientists are working on the problem right now. Why, if souls exist, would it be impossible to scientifically determine that they exist?
Just be cause I’m an atheist doesn’t mean I don’t ask religious questions. I do so to find out what others believe. And why.
So many people are opposed to abortion because they believe fetuses have souls. Well, if the soul exists in the brain (And why would it exist anywhere else? If it’s our consciousness, the brain is the only organ that could house it. When people say they believe something in their hearts, they don’t mean this literally. At least, I hope they don’t. I hope they know the heart does nothing more than pump blood.), where was it before the brain developed? Snark apparently believes souls have always existed and they attach themselves to a fertilized egg at the moment of conception.
Or is the soul created by the brain when it is sufficiently formed? If so, why would abortion be murder if the fetus has no awareness of self and its environment and does not feel pain; in short, it does not have even the faintest trace of cerebral activity? I see it as akin to removing a life-support system from someone who is brain-dead.
If there is no brain, there is no person. If there is no person, there can be no murder. QED.
No one said you couldn’t state your religious beliefs. Just don’t be surprised if someone asks you why you believe as you do.
You’ve been asked.
Although many pro life folks may believe that an e/z/f contains a soul…I don’t know of ANY who use that as a main rationale for a pro life life position (there may be some pro life folks who use that as an argument, I feel safe in saying that they are in a minority of popularly expressed pro life opinions)
I didn’t see the Popular Mechanics dead tree issue, and couldnt find the article on line…I’m skeptical about a scientific basis for a soul though…
You statement that “if there is no brain, there is no person” is a philosophical statement. Other pro choice folks define personhood (not the same, necessarily as “human”)along the lines of sentience or viability or dependency…again philosophical definitions.
If it doesn’t have a soul, killing it would not be murder. If it does have a soul, killing it could be murder. If that is not the rationale behind the anti-choice viewpoint, then I don’t think they have any rationale at all.
It’s not available online yet, but it is on the newsstand. As part of the article, “Science’s Greatest Unsolved Mysteries,” (as opposed to solved mysteries, I guess :rolleyes: ) which includes such topics as Faster Than Light Travel, Curing Cancer, Time Travel and Immortality, they also say that some are trying to determine if a soul exists using brain scanning. I think it’ll be as successful as cold fusion experiments, but I’m no expert. I’m trying to have an open mind about it. And the existence of a soul would not necessarily mean the God of the Bible exists. It may be that some other religion got it right. It still might mean they are all wrong.
But it’s our brain that distinguishes us from all other forms of life. Without a brain, there is no sentience, it is not a viable human being and it is most certainly dependent. If a creature without a brain can attain the status of person, then I guess you’d better not eat your vegetables or get rid of the weeds in a flower garden. Someone may accuse you of committing murder.
Go to this site. http://www.visembryo.com/baby/stage11
Doesn’t even look like a baby yet does it? But the brain is developed. Go through all the stages. At stage 23, only 56-57 days after ovulation, the baby looks like a baby,
Well?
What is the cut-off week for abortions?
If you can read that site and come away thinking a ‘fetus’ isn’t alive and aware, then nothing I can do will convince you.
Um, the fetus is 2.5 - 3 millimeters. That’s smaller than a grain of rice. Do you think that fetus is truly aware?
ZooMom, the complex cerebral cortex does not begin to develop until the fifth month, and is not complete until around the sixth month or so. The cerebral cortex is the brain that can “think”, not just monitor functions, react to stimuli, etc. Until approximately the 26th week at the earliest, the fetus cannot even feel pain…the nerves exist, and the receptors in the brain exists, but they’re not “hooked up”. When the complex cerebral cortex in an adult is irrevocably dead, we consider the person dead, although the lower brain may still regulate heartbeat and breathing.
http://anatomy.med.unsw.edu.au/cbl/embryo/history/page5c.htm
"Indeed, the current conception regards the entire cerebral cortex as chiefly composed of centres of ultimate co-ordination of impressions, which in their cruder form are received by more primitive nervous tissues–the basal ganglia, the cerebellum and medulla, and the spinal cord.
This, of course, is equivalent to postulating the cerebral cortex as the exclusive seat of higher intellection."
http://www.2think.org/science_abortion.shtml
"But large-scale linking up of neurons doesn’t begin until the 24th to 27th week of pregnancy–the sixth month.
By placing harmless electrodes on a subject’s head, scientists can measure the electrical activity produced by the network of neurons inside the skull. Different kinds of mental activity show different kinds of brain waves. But brain waves with regular patterns typical of adult human brains do not appear in the fetus until about the 30th week of pregnancy–near the beginning of the third trimester. Fetuses younger than this–however alive and active they may be–lack the necessary brain architecture. They cannot yet think."
I believe you can have at-will abortions in the first trimester, and restricted abortions in the second. IIRC, the majority of elective abortions occur before the fourth month. Is there a period of time during which you think it is acceptable, or less heinous, to abort?
jab1 wrote:
No. I believe that intelligences have always existed, co-eternal with God, and that God organizes and clothes these intelligences with spirit bodies. These pre-mortal spirits are then clothed in bodies of flesh and blood here on earth. How long they existed in the “pre-existence” is not known, but I believe we did exist before mortal Earth life. This is according to my understanding of LDS theology.
As for when the spirit and the developing e/z/f are joined together, I haven’t the faintest idea. But I still see it as a silly argument that says the e/z/f won’t eventually become a fully-developed human being if allowed to live.
And Vanilla, when you stop believing in biblical prophets, I’ll take your statement that my belief in modern prophets invalidates my “independent thinking” status more seriously. If I can’t think independently and still believe in prophets, then neither can you. But of course we both can and do.
i’m sorry, abortion is the god given right for a woman to choose. how dare a pro-lifer invade a woman’s life for his or her selfishness? if you don’t like abortions, keep it between you and your spouse. it’s not anybodys business what the hell you think. i’m tired of hearing on the news that a future family clinic has been blown up and the doctors inside were intentionally killed for the satisfying feeling that these doctors wont be “killing” anymore. that’s horseshit! the irony of this is that pro-lifers will kill to help others live. well, where is the satisfaction? the murderers(bombers) killed a doctor who is also a father or mother and left the children to live with a now widowed parent. where is the justice? do these children with their dead fathers or mothers deserve this? NO! death should not be a punishment for abortionists. think about being a rape victim and forever living with the bastard child who’s face of the rapist you wil forever have to see and probably even grow to love. THAT’S SICK! abortion should be left for women and ONLY women to decide for themselves. nobody outside of direct influence has the business to go beyond that!
…ahhhh the smell of fresh whitewash, thanks AsianMajik
I just can not understand how the word “soul” can be used in the context of this post.
I cant imagine that IF a fetus (or any other living creature) has a soul and is aborted that God would damn that being… what is this “soul” talk all about? Does the person have to live a certain while to attain its worthiness. If not then by your own beleifs it is headed for something much better.
Actually If abortion were illegal, I would like to take it a step further. I believe at that point the government should own all sperm and eggs as well as fetuses. That way both men and women are treated equally under the law.