Being a Pro-Life Atheist (page 4)

5go

What is your opinion on the Death Penalty Burn?
What is your opinion on sex education programs?

Do we really want to know?

BurnTheShips

What is your opinion on the Death Penalty Burn?
What is your opinion on sex education programs?

To me, the first is a last resort only. As for the second, knowledge is power. Burn

MissingLink

And I'm sorry my memory has forgotten already who said it on the first page but it bears a repeat...any two idiots can make a baby -- the miracle lies in raising a happy child. Amen sister - and preach on!

So it'd be ok to kill all the trailer-trash kids under 2 years old?

The argument is made that these unwanted children would not benefit society in general, and therefore will not be missed. Using this argument you could justify killing everyone in prision or in 3rd world countries where nobody is contirubting to society because they're just struggling to stay alive. Allowing people to freely choose to kill on a whim because of the inconvenience of the other person's existence is just sick.

Have there been any orphans in history who have made contirubtions to our society? Would it have been OK to kill them because their lives were inconvenient at the time?

lonelysheep

May God have mercy on the souls of the poor unborn, and may He forgive those that murder them.

<-------------------------My honest reply.

Cells in their earliest stages are not people.

An unborn child is not merely a medical condition, it is a living human being.

I'm not talking about a breathing, kicking, and/or rolling around in the womb infant who has to finish growing to 7 pounds. I know that's the way you want to think of the first two months after conception, but that isn't the case.

Religious or not, atheist or not, statist or libertarian, left or right, whatever, the rights of the voiceless innocent must be protected. Once a society turns its back on them, its doom is certain. Karma, the law of nature, or divine judgement, the evil we visit on them, will be returned an hundredfold on us.

The rights of the voiceless innocent must be protected when they are out of the womb, Burn. 12 years later, 17 years later...it never stops. Life is life. Cells are cells and not life. That same Jerry Falwell type of stance is the same one that is first to go pro-war/pro-kill from the age of 18 on.

There are plenty of children to adopt without going to another country, but so many choose not to do that. They don't want to have a child to raise for whatever reasons.

How many children have you adopted?

Karma is part of people's own minds and perspectives. That doesn't make it real.

BurnTheShips

Cells in their earliest stages are not people.

But cells in later stages are? Please explain.

I'm not talking about a breathing, kicking, and/or rolling around in the womb infant who has to finish growing to 7 pounds. I know that's the way you want to think of the first two months after conception, but that isn't the case.

What is the case then? And how does it affect the ethical considerations?

The rights of the voiceless innocent must be protected when they are out of the womb, Burn. 12 years later, 17 years later...it never stops. Life is life. Cells are cells and not life. That same Jerry Falwell type of stance is the same one that is first to go pro-war/pro-kill from the age of 18 on.

Then why can't they be protected in the womb, lostsheep? "Cells are cells and not life". When are they "life" then? And what does pro-war/pro-kill Jerry Fallwell types have to do with it?

There are plenty of children to adopt without going to another country, but so many choose not to do that. They don't want to have a child to raise for whatever reasons.

So lets kill them instead?

How many children have you adopted?

None-yet. But I do not think that this affects the validity of my point of view on the matter.

Karma is part of people's own minds and perspectives. That doesn't make it real.

Leaving karmic metaphysics aside (which was not my point), my point is, that when we inure ourselves to the destruction of our progeny, our ultimate survival comes into doubt.

BurnTheShips

http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html

coolhandluke

here is my beef to the whole thing. i control me and my house. i don't care what you do in your house as long as it doesnt affect mine. that is the bottom line. i don't need the government or anyone else to tell me how to run my affairs. as long as the exercise of my freedoms doesn't compromise yours, more power to me and vice versa.

MissingLink

here is my beef to the whole thing. i control me and my house. i don't care what you do in your house as long as it doesnt affect mine. that is the bottom line. i don't need the government or anyone else to tell me how to run my affairs. as long as the exercise of my freedoms doesn't compromise yours, more power to me and vice versa.

OK - so should you be allowed to do anything you want "in your house"? Can you kill your children who happen to be out of the womb? My points here are that this is a slippery slope. If you allow killing of humans lightly in some cases, then this can be used to justify other things which are still currently considered sinister. Community morality adapts over time. We have to be careful about this. To me - the important part is - WHEN does the baby begin to have feelings? It certainly does in the womb in later months. Any mother can tell you about her unborn baby's feelings - when they're sleeping, or frightened.

lonelysheep

Cells in their earliest stages are not people.
But cells in later stages are? Please explain.

Again, this goes to what you consider a living being. I unfortunately do not have the free time needed to insert information in this post detailing stages of fetal development. Not that it would make a difference.

I'm not trying to get you to change your own mind, yet I do see differing viewpoints on here as a good thing.

I'm not talking about a breathing, kicking, and/or rolling around in the womb infant who has to finish growing to 7 pounds. I know that's the way you want to think of the first two months after conception, but that isn't the case.

What is the case then? And how does it affect the ethical considerations?

Is a fetus 2 months or under a baby? Does that fetus have more rights than the woman who owns that womb and all its contents?

The rights of the voiceless innocent must be protected when they are out of the womb, Burn. 12 years later, 17 years later...it never stops. Life is life. Cells are cells and not life. That same Jerry Falwell type of stance is the same one that is first to go pro-war/pro-kill from the age of 18 on.
Then why can't they be protected in the womb, lostsheep? "Cells are cells and not life". When are they "life" then? And what does pro-war/pro-kill Jerry Fallwell types have to do with it?

First, come at me correctly. There is no need to make jabs with my screenname because there is no need to make personal jabs at all.

I mentioned the "pro war/pro kill tyes" because if you are going to be prolife, then take a humanistic viewpoint torward adults as well. For many who are prolife (for the general population, individually or not) picking and choosing when 'people' have rights seems to start at conception and end after they are born.

It's interesting to see WHY people are prolife.

There are plenty of children to adopt without going to another country, but so many choose not to do that. They don't want to have a child to raise for whatever reasons.
So lets kill them instead?

Unless someone is pregnant, I guess it's not anyone's decision but her's. I did not write of taking out villages and orphanages like that statement subconciously implies.

How many children have you adopted?
None-yet. But I do not think that this affects the validity of my point of view on the matter.

I brought up adoption to point out that unwanted kids are out there and what are you doing about it. I haven't adopted yet, either. They have the right to a home of their own. So, I went from two months conception to 10 years abandoned.

Karma is part of people's own minds and perspectives. That doesn't make it real.
Leaving karmic metaphysics aside (which was not my point), my point is, that when we inure ourselves to the destruction of our progeny, our ultimate survival comes into doubt.

On a message board, perhaps other words should be utilized.

BurnTheShips

Again, this goes to what you consider a living being. I unfortunately do not have the free time needed to insert information in this post detailing stages of fetal development. Not that it would make a difference.

You don't need to detail fetal development to make your point, I think.

Is a fetus 2 months or under a baby? Does that fetus have more rights than the woman who owns that womb and all its contents?

That is the question I am asking YOU. I believe a fetus less than 2 months old is human. As such, it is entitled to LIFE.

First, come at me correctly. There is no need to make jabs with my screenname because there is no need to make personal jabs at all.

That was a complete mistake on my part. Sorry, lonelysheep.

I mentioned the "pro war/pro kill tyes" because if you are going to be prolife, then take a humanistic viewpoint torward adults as well. For many who are prolife (for the general population, individually or not) picking and choosing when 'people' have rights seems to start at conception and end after they are born.

I do not pick and choose, I think I have a logical and consistent view on life.

Unless someone is pregnant, I guess it's not anyone's decision but her's. I did not write of taking out villages and orphanages like that statement subconciously implies.

O.K. So the unborn have no say in their own fate?

On a message board, perhaps other words should be utilized.

I used several words to describe the same idea; what goes around comes around. But mybe it is better to leave that alone.

Being a Pro-Life Atheist

Share this