Forums → WEPR → Abortion
| 1508 | 314952 |
What my peers here think?
I would like to try and avoid a buch of rabid Catholics and Christians falling back only on the religious reasons and what have you. However, I do not see how that can be dodged.
My view? I'm for it. If a woman wants to get one, it is her choice. Some people seem to act like if one woman gets an abortion, it means that all the rest have to. If the child in question is not yours, butt out.
Also, on a lighter note, I say that abortions should be allowed when kids are up to 18 years old. That would solve a lot of headaches, eh?
- 1,508 Replies
I don't see what being married or not married has to do with abortion. Or sex.
If I may jump in here, married people don't have as much of a reason to get an abortion. It's more like "We weren't planning on it, but our lives are together now" whereas teenagers and other unmarried people face a huge decision. No need to state me opinion on it, as I tend to take up too much space on this thread anyways, but just a little clarrification.
I'll use the word murder if it makes you happy. It doesn't change my opinion or stance. It's just a word.
i only have a problem when people replace a word with another word simply to make it sound better to there conscious. The way he uses terminate, it sounds like the fetus, is in it, a variable, a nothing. Its when you use a word to toatally change the meaning of the sentence.
If I may jump in here, married people don't have as much of a reason to get an abortion. It's more like "We weren't planning on it, but our lives are together now" whereas teenagers and other unmarried people face a huge decision. No need to state me opinion on it, as I tend to take up too much space on this thread anyways, but just a little clarrification.
True, but not all married couples want children, and there are married couples who get abortions.
i only have a problem when people replace a word with another word simply to make it sound better to there conscious. The way he uses terminate, it sounds like the fetus, is in it, a variable, a nothing. Its when you use a word to toatally change the meaning of the sentence.
Well then you're just complaining about semantics & not contributing to the discussion. I already call foetuses 'its'. There's a stage of development where there is no sex, so you can't call it a 'he' or a 'she'. "It" is the proper term to use.
i understand that, technically, its an 'it'. what i mean, and i should have explained this, is that what i mean by 'it' is that it it below us. it isnt worthy of being called something else. i understand that it is an 'it'...
i guess its all how you use 'it'...
understand that, technically, its an 'it'. what i mean, and i should have explained this, is that what i mean by 'it' is that it it below us. it isnt worthy of being called something else. i understand that it is an 'it'...
Yes.. but I also mean that, too. I don't regard a foetus on the same level as other humans - I do see it as 'below' us, not as important as children, teenagers, and adults.
i understand that, technically, its an 'it'. what i mean, and i should have explained this, is that what i mean by 'it' is that it it below us. it isnt worthy of being called something else. i understand that it is an 'it'...
A fetus is below a human. It's not sentient, intelligent, human, or even truly humanoid. The fetus is literally a growth in the mother's body, like a benign tumor. In fact, it technically *is* a benign tumor, until it grows to the point where the fetus isn't a fetus anymore and can survive outside the womb. It is part of the mother's body as much as her foot, or her finger, or her arm. . .and she should have equal rights s any man and be able to do with her body completely as she pleases, no restrictions.
i only have a problem when people replace a word with another word simply to make it sound better to there conscious. The way he uses terminate, it sounds like the fetus, is in it, a variable, a nothing. Its when you use a word to toatally change the meaning of the sentence.
'Terminating a pregnancy' is the commonly used, correct terminology. As I've said before, abortion is not murder, no matter how much you want it to be. Even if I did subscribe to the use of the word murder in this context, I don't see how it changes the meaning of my sentence.
Not all abortions are needed, though, which is why the Pope speaks out against them. Besides, you are just as free to speak out in support of abortion. You condemned the Pope for saying "Abortion is bad" but then yourself said "Abortion is good."
I was referring to how the Pope says it is bad. I was saying how it is only needed if you have to get it. If you are just getting an abortion because you don't want a child anymore, then I will go against it. I believe that abortion can be resolved though, if everyone just raises the child, then the world would be a better place. Even though that won't happen, it still is a good thing to have a woman try to raise the child, if she can't then she can give the child to adoption.
I was referring to how the Pope says it is bad. I was saying how it is only needed if you have to get it. If you are just getting an abortion because you don't want a child anymore, then I will go against it. I believe that abortion can be resolved though, if everyone just raises the child, then the world would be a better place. Even though that won't happen, it still is a good thing to have a woman try to raise the child, if she can't then she can give the child to adoption.
In that case, I agree with you. Would you mind getting me a link or something to when the Pope condemned all abortion? If he just said "abortion is murder" or "evil" or something, people have said the same things about killing. But killing to save yourself isn't a bad thing. If he specifically said something against medical abortion or something against EVERY abortion, please send a link, because I didn't think he'd have a problem if it was for a medical reason. Maybe I just missed the memo, though.
Would you mind getting me a link or something to when the Pope condemned all abortion?
Yes, I would love to read about that. If he actually said it.
My Church History teacher actually pulled out the Catechism and read what the Pope and Church believe. This is pretty much the guide book for Catholicism.
You can just take my word for this point, but the Catholic Church condemns all forms of abortion. The Church says that God is the only power to take away life since he gave it.
But killing to save yourself isn't a bad thing. If he specifically said something against medical abortion or something against EVERY abortion
This is another belief of the Catholic Church; if life will end for one of the two whether or not the abortion is performed, than the doctor must try to spare both until the very end. Sure it doesn't sound reasonable to a non-Christian, but that's what we believe.
You can just take my word for this point, but the Catholic Church condemns all forms of abortion. The Church says that God is the only power to take away life since he gave it.
That's true (I'm a Catholic too). But by the same token, I wouldn't consider abortion to save your life a sin. After all, it was done in desperation.
This is another belief of the Catholic Church; if life will end for one of the two whether or not the abortion is performed, than the doctor must try to spare both until the very end. Sure it doesn't sound reasonable to a non-Christian, but that's what we believe.
That's also true, but something women aren't going to want to risk. Again, I'm not sure I could call it a sin to try to save your own life. That's the best course of action, but as I'm not in the position, I'm not one to judge if a woman doesn't want to risk her life for the child. If it's not for that kind of reason, then that's different.
Wow, I've spent so much time on AG I almost forgot Catholic reasoning on abortion! I tend to avoid it since it's too religious for AG. And I was in Church History last semester, too.
If that is the official line of the Catholic chucrh, then let only Catholics abide by these rules. What I object to is the Catholic church using its vast influence to agitate the AIDS epidemic in Africa by condemning condom use. If life is so sacred, why would the church rather let literally millions of people die, than just condone condoms. Surely it's the lesser of two evils. Doesn't the preservation of existing life take precedent over the creation of new lives? Not a rhetorical question, would genuinely like an answer, preferably from a Catholic who knows what they are talking about regarding this issue.
Not a rhetorical question, would genuinely like an answer, preferably from a Catholic who knows what they are talking about regarding this issue.
In my response I tried to make it clear that the Catholic Church can't tell other people not to try save their lives with abortion for medical reasons. Hope I did a good job.
Anyway, to answer your question, it is the lesser of two evils. Catholicism itself just always needs to be perfectly clear on what it defines as evils, and the only way it can do that is to oppose evil. I'm sure every pro-life Catholic would vastly prefer condoms to abortion, as would just about everybody of different religions and standpoints. It just makes sense.
But anyway, it's more or less about habits. The Church feels that if they let people get into the habit of condoms, they will use them even when millions will not die, thus making the Church unhappy. A bit twisted logic, I know, but that's the Church's standpoint for condoms. I stand on their side with issues themselves, but I also have to look at circumstances, the lesser of two evils, as you said.
In my response I tried to make it clear that the Catholic Church can't tell other people not to try save their lives with abortion for medical reasons. Hope I did a good job.
You did make that clear, but that's not how it has turned out in practice with regards to the AIDS crisis. Even if only Catholics adhered to these rules, they are still spreading HIV and AIDS throughout the continent through their sexual relations with non-Catholics. Therein lies the problem. Catholic Church policy, mortally affecting those who don't subscribe to it.
I'm sure every pro-life Catholic would vastly prefer condoms to abortion, as would just about everybody of different religions and standpoints. It just makes sense.
Catholicism is, and has been for some time, the fastest growing religion in the world. I'm pretty sure that's down to 2 reasons.
1) Most of Catholics are pro-life.
2) Most of said pro-lifers are anti contrception.
(Don't make me post the sperm song again).
I'd also like to raise a point. To my inderstanding, there is no scale of sin. No 'lesser' or 'greater' evil in the eyes of God. Therefore, why not just condone condoms, as it is no more 'wrong' in God's eyes than not condoning condoms and letting innocents die?
You must be logged in to post a reply!