by tyydyy 99 Replies latest jw friends
There is no magic time when a fetus becomes a human being; it is always a human being.
An interesting concept, to be sure. It makes me wonder how one would define "human being" so that it would encompass both an adult, a child, an infant, a fetus, a zygote, and a single fertilized cell, without any ambiguity. A good definition should do that, so can anyone come up with one for "human being" that unambiguously encompasses all of the above, and nothing else?
I had never thought about it to be honest (yes I'm a bloke to all you femenist types).
I'm not sure what I think but just to muddy the waters:
The time is very close (AND IT WILL HAPPEN) when a baby can be grown entirely outside a womans body.
Consider NOW
1. is it just a womans issue?
2. where is the cut off point at which it becomes a child?
Again...every man and women decide for themselves. No government should intervene, no matter what the decision is. My wife is unable to have children, (her body aborts all fetus') yet I still am a leaner-towards the man and woman coming to a decision on their own future. If it's abortion, so be it. But, it should be as early as possible...anything later is irresponsible and sick. Whether it is murder or not...every man and woman has to decide if it is or not, and live with the consequences, or relief involved.
I myself would never choose abortion; neither would my wife. But never would I presume to tell people what to think, say or do. This is no ones business but the parents'. As for teenage-minor pregnancies, I believe the parents should have the say. It's dangerous to trust someone so young to judge what is best for them.
ashi
It's funny. I would rather advocate government sponsored mandatory sterilization of certain members of society, than have to deal with the abortion issue.
For example, if a man is a convicted rapist, then I would condone the forcible sterilization of such a person. Some reasons are; the person is not fit to be a productive parent or member of society; the person could become a molester; the offspring could become state dependents, and then grow to become dysfunctional and criminalistic.
Then, there are the overly promiscuous and irresponsible charges of the state, still depending on assistance. If a person does not make efforts to improve education, to enroll in helpful programs, or make efforts to control and guide their lives in a well-adjusted and productive manner, then they should qualify for forcible sterilization. Now before any race cards are drawn, remember I said efforts and more than 50% of welfare recipients are white!
Now, I covered criminals and socially irresponsible people. But, what about other cases, like religionists and fanatics (Mormons with 50 children, etc...Muslims with many children, etc..) depending on circumstances, people who insist on having additional children and cannpot support them without assistance and extra support, they too should be forcibly sterilized.
If you want to decrease societies monumental burdens, then responsibility is necessary. It doesn't do much good to debate over symptoms and fixes while ignoring causes.
Abortion is one of very few topics that I am totally hard line on. If a man has sex with a woman, he better be ready to support the woman and the children that he and she may be creating.
I put this responsibility on him and if he is not willing to support his family, he should be put to death. A baby should not be executed because of a man's irresponsibility.
While I believe strongly in freedom of action and belief, I believe just as strongly in taking responsibility for those actions. All actions have consequences. People must be make to take responsibility for those actions.
Abortion is a way of simply discarding responsibility for actions one has taken. It is the destruction of life. It is indefensible. To me it is no different from taking a 10 month old baby that you are tired of caring for and throwing it up against a wall, killing it, then throwing it away.
I know that many of you will disagree with me on this. On this issue, I don't see myself changing my mind. I believe too strongly that this life is all there is and therefore this life is precious.
Peace
Joel
Easy for you to say Joel, you don't ever have to worry about it.
TimB
Anyone want to take up my challenge to define "human being" according to the parameters in my previous response?
Seeker,
The challenge you have posed to this thread makes me think of when one thousand economists forecast the future. One generally gets a thousand different opinions.
Andee
Tim,
I must agree you have a point.
But I do think I know how I would act if I were heterosexual.
I do take responsibility for my actions in my life. I think I would be just as responsible if I were heterosexual.
Joel
The challenge you have posed to this thread makes me think of when one thousand economists forecast the future. One generally gets a thousand different opinions.
I'm not looking for opinions, but facts. If the pro-life crowd insists that abortion is the killing of a human being, I think the least they can do is define "human being" in a scientifically and logically consistent manner. Otherwise, how will they know what they are talking about?
