Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Alabama Abortion Ban:

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I didn't say anything about 'allowing'. If a Medical Doctor can certify that the fetus presents a threat to the life of the mother, she can get an abortion under the current exception. If that medical doctor is a psychiatrist and the threat is PTSD and/or clinical depression with suicidal tendencies, that that would meet the current exceptions criteria as far as I know.
    I was asking YOU what YOUR view was. Not what was legal.




    You really are just out to degrade and demean here aren't you. Is the any possibility for civil discussion?



    Jim
    No Jim, I am trying to distill your argument down to it's core. At it's core you don't care about the woman's suffering. You just admitted it with your example about just her "putting her life on hold" and being inconvenienced for a year. Your only criteria for allowing an abortion or not seems to be "was she raped?"

    At least admit that. We can all read what you have written and implied.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
      You already allow an exception.
      No I don't.

      If the mothers life is in danger. I guess all is lost then.
      Depends on what you mean "in danger". Please list one instance where a mother's life would be in danger at a point in the pregnancy that is pre-survivable by the fetus. And "I am mentally stressed so I will kill myself" isn't a good justification for killing another human being. Ectopic implantations don't count either because they always result in either a miscarriage or the death of both mother and child.
      That's what
      - She

      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
      - Stephen R. Donaldson

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        No Jim, I am trying to distill your argument down to it's core. At it's core you don't care about the woman's suffering. You just admitted it with your example about just her "putting her life on hold" and being inconvenienced for a year. Your only criteria for allowing an abortion or not seems to be "was she raped?"
        Not only that, he has no "compassion" for the woman who got pregnant from consensual sex but is now suffering from similar mental anguish. His response to her is, essentially, "Suck it up, babe."
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
          Jim, MM is asking some very good questions here. Your reasoning simply doesn't make sense on this subject. There are plenty of women who are extremely overwhelmed when they become pregnant no matter how the child was conceived. It's terribly distressing to them no matter what, to the point that they too could end up enduring "psychological and physical distress which can produce mental and physical illness" (though, in my experience, it isn't the pregnancy itself that's the cause of these symptoms).
          I just was taking a break. I agree that MM was asking good questions and I had intended to get to them. I was even going to thank you MM for doing just that rather than just ragging on me

          I don't think one can compare distress that comes from regret to distress that comes from an actual even like rape in terms of mitigation related to a lack of personal responsibility. When the state mandates the women carry the baby put there by the rapist, we are not talking about distress that comes from regret or moral irresponsibility, we are talking about distress that comes from being made a victim - and by those that ostensibly should be defending her (i.e. psychologically it becomes betrayal). And yes - I believe that makes a difference as I've already said. Being the object of a violent crime and having a pregnancy imposed as part of that is a very different moral situation than choosing to have sex, knowing it can get you pregnant, and then regretting it after the fact.

          In the case where the mother's life is in real physical risk, people usually choose between the mother or the child depending on who can be saved rather than letting both die. It's an alternative no one wants to face, but it's one made so that at least one of the lives can live. Framing it as a matter of self-defence is...peculiar...to say the least, and brings to my mind Carpe's really strange notion that mothers are slaves to their pregnancy.
          Usually the baby is aborted unlesss there is no way the mother can survive, then the focus in on saving the baby, and that second option can only apply late in the pregnancy when we have a fetus old enough to survive outside the womb. so if the fetus isn't viable and the mother will not survive until the fetus become viable, the fetus is aborted. The reason it is ok to have the abortion in that case is because self-defense is justification to kill. What other justification is there? I think the reason it seems odd is that the fetus isn't attacking her, has no malice - but she has a right not to be killed by it - which is self defense by definition. Perhaps there is a synonym that seems more appropriate?

          But even supposing that only rape victims endure "psychological and physical distress which can produce mental and physical illness" (which is not guaranteed, and in my limited experience isn't the norm), isn't that better than killing a person? Isn't it better that two people live, even if one is broken, than that one innocent person lives, and you risk that the rape victim doesn't become more broken?
          Maybe, maybe not. The issue for me, in this SPECIFIC case, is that it is the women who should have the authority to make that decision. Otherwise she is betrayed by the state and the people around her that should be protecting her, not indicting her (metaphorically).

          The only way that I can see you being logically consistent is if you believe that all abortion is wrong unless it's to save one or the other's life, or if you don't believe that a life begins at conception (which as I pointed out, I don't believe you have Biblical backing on), then abortion for anyone who requests it should be legal until the fetus is developed to the point you think it's a person. That seems to be the general consensus opinion of the Christians on the board, and I think you'll like find it to be the general consensus among Christians everywhere.
          In the first case, there is a case that can be made that the rapist stole her life. But absent something like PTSD and suicide, it would not be her physical life that is in danger. In the second case, as I tried to say earlier, 'life begins' is not a specific enough statement. Human life begins at conception. But until the brain activity begins, there is nothing animate there. It is human life, but not yet a person. This still means there is immense value there, more than sufficient value to say such life can't be taken for convenience. But in the case of rape, we add to it the fact this was imposed upon her, she had no say in it, and the event will create a circumstance, against her will, she may not be able to cope with. And that - as I see it, changes the morality and the circumstance in such a way that a rape exception must be allowed.

          And again, as a Christian, the goal would be to attend to her mental and physical needs in such a way that the use of that exception would not be necessary. The goal should always be to preserve both lives. I am not recommending an abortion in this case. I just don't believe it is right to FORCE the victim to suffer the imposition of a pregnancy against her will.

          Out of curiosity, you do know that your view is idiosyncratic, not just here, but amongst Christians at large, right? Did you hear this view that you hold espoused by someone else, or is it wholly your own invention?
          In my circles, Accepting evolution is also idiosyncratic. And crazy as it seems, accepting AGW and our responsibility as stewards of this planet is ALSO idiosyncratic. I try to follow what presents itself as right over and against what is tradition or the current crowd mentality. It is hard to do that, and one can't be guaranteed one will not make mistakes. That is why I am willing to put my thoughts on these matters up for criticism in a forum like this. Even in the most hostile cases, one is still forced to consider other thoughts and opinions than one's own. However, thoughtful conversation like this with you is very beneficial as it makes it easier to avoid missing an important point due to the need for self-defense. But it is also quite rare, and so I do thank you. You are making me think without attacking me personally, and I appreciate that.

          As for where the ideas come from - mostly my own study. I've long ascribed to the brain theory of life (see here) as a consistent secular model for understanding when a human life as a person begins and ends. But as a Christian I also believe in the soul and its eternity, and so I don't see the brain-theory of life as necessarily defining what it is that makes us spiritual beings or as defining the actual end of who we are. From the first time I read the verses in Exodus I saw them as rendering a difference in the punishment for killing a fetus verses a baby, but later study as to how the Hellenistic Jews understood the passage and translated it into Greek have reinforced that understanding. My view that an exception for rape needs to be part of abortion law is the logical consequence of all the above taken together.


          Jim
          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 05-20-2019, 10:18 AM.
          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

          Comment


          • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
            Being the object of a violent crime and having a pregnancy imposed as part of that is a very different moral situation than choosing to have sex, knowing it can get you pregnant, and then regretting it after the fact.
            This smacks of special pleading because the value of an innocent human life can not be logically tied to the manner of its conception. Otherwise, you're stuck with the implication that an adult person who's mother was raped is inherently less valuable than one who was the result of consensual intercourse.

            Another a key issue you have to address before you can even get your argument off the ground is to support and defend your premise that moral obligation can not be imposed.
            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
            Than a fool in the eyes of God


            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

            Comment


            • While I don't think you guys are going to move the needle at all regarding Ox, I'm actually enjoying the exchange, and appreciating the reasoning.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                I don't think one can compare distress that comes from regret to distress that comes from an actual even like rape in terms of mitigation related to a lack of personal responsibility. When the state mandates the women carry the baby put there by the rapist, we are not talking about distress that comes from regret or moral irresponsibility, we are talking about distress that comes from being made a victim - and by those that ostensibly should be defending her (i.e. psychologically it becomes betrayal). And yes - I believe that makes a difference as I've already said. Being the object of a violent crime and having a pregnancy imposed as part of that is a very different moral situation than choosing to have sex, knowing it can get you pregnant, and then regretting it after the fact.
                Unless you're a psychiatrist (and even then I'd question the validity), I'm not sure how you can be so certain that the consensual person is not going through the same sort of distress as the rape victim. Furthermore the consensual person could have heaps more distress on them than just regret and a desire to evade moral responsibility. They could also be feeling the pressure of cultural taboos (getting pregnant after sex with someone from another culture, or from a different caste), familial pressures, and/or other pre-existing psychological anxieties.


                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                Usually the baby is aborted unlesss there is no way the mother can survive, then the focus in on saving the baby, and that second option can only apply late in the pregnancy when we have a fetus old enough to survive outside the womb. so if the fetus isn't viable and the mother will not survive until the fetus become viable, the fetus is aborted. The reason it is ok to have the abortion in that case is because self-defense is justification to kill. What other justification is there? I think the reason it seems odd is that the fetus isn't attacking her, has no malice - but she has a right not to be killed by it - which is self defense by definition. Perhaps there is a synonym that seems more appropriate?
                You're definitely using the wrong word, or using the right word wrongly (again, I'm reminded of Carpe). Typically when one talks of "self-defense" they are referring to malicious intent from the one causing harm. The justification for the destruction of the one life over the other is so that life is preserved. It's better to save one life than to lose both. Maybe a better word for what you're looking for is "preservation". While "preservation" can be synonymous with "self-defense" they're not exactly the same thing, and they evoke different concepts in the minds of readers.


                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                Maybe, maybe not. The issue for me, in this SPECIFIC case, is that it is the women who should have the authority to make that decision. Otherwise she is betrayed by the state and the people around her that should be protecting her, not indicting her (metaphorically).
                Again, the same can be argued (and certainly is argued by pro-choicers) for the one who has given consent to have sex.

                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                In the first case, there is a case that can be made that the rapist stole her life. But absent something like PTSD and suicide, it would not be her physical life that is in danger. In the second case, as I tried to say earlier, 'life begins' is not a specific enough statement. Human life begins at conception. But until the brain activity begins, there is nothing animate there. It is human life, but not yet a person. This still means there is immense value there, sufficient value to say such life can't be taken for convenience. But in the case of rape, we add to it the fact this was imposed upon her, she had no say in it, and the event will create a circumstance, against her will, she may not be able to cope with. And that - as I see it, changes to morality and the circumstance in such a way that a rape exception must be allowed.
                Again, when a life is on the line, as tragic as it may be for the rape victim, if you revoke abortion, lives are saved. I think that's more important than the alternative. Hedging your bets that the psychological trauma caused by allowing an abortion does not exceed that of disallowing it is not worth it. Again, especially when you could have saved a life.

                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                And again, as a Christian, the goal would be to attend to her mental and physical needs in such a way that the use of that exception would not be necessary. The goal should always be to preserve both lives. I am not recommending an abortion in this case. I just don't believe it is right to FORCE the victim to suffer the imposition of a pregnancy against her will.
                I understand that you don't think you're recommending an abortion, but in this hypothetical world you've created where abortion is an alternative to those who will be forced to be victims, you've set yourself up for Carpe's crazy dilemma where a person has become a slave to their body if forced to have a child. You might not think this works as a pro-choice argument for those who become pregnant through consensual sex, but it is. People are advocating for this right this very minute. You can't get around that.

                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                In my circles, Accepting evolution is also idiosyncratic.
                Maybe among your close acquaintances, but within Christianity at large, it isn't. Even within Evangelical circles, far more people accept evolution than have even heard of an abortion proposal like the one you're pushing (at least from someone who claims to be pro-choice). Your view is very very...unique.


                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                I try to follow what presents itself as right over and against what is tradition or the current crowd mentality. It is hard to do that, and one can't be guaranteed one will not make mistakes. That is why I am willing to put my thoughts on these matters up for criticism in a forum like this. Thoughtful conversation like this with you is very beneficial as it makes it easier to avoid missing an important point due to the need for self-defense. But it is also quite rare, and so I do thank you. You are making me think without attacking me personally, and I appreciate that.
                I think it's often good that you attempt to forge your own path than following the crowd. That you attempt to critically think these things over, and ask why you believe what you believe. However, that needs to be tempered. Sometimes when we find ourselves being the lone voice, then we need to ask ourselves, "Have I got this wrong?" "Why aren't others seeing this the same way I am, am I missing something?"

                At this point, we've probably said all that we can on the matter. Your view seems to make sense to you, and you're good with it, while I look at it and think it's self-contradictory and just illogical. But I don't know what more I can say. From the looks of it, it doesn't look like I'm adding much more than others have already said. And having read enough of your posts on this forum, I notice that you tend to hold to your ideas pretty tenaciously. I don't mean that in a negative way. That can be a very good thing, especially if you're in the right. I honestly just don't have the patience or desire to debate people endlessly like I once might have on this forum.

                And yeah, I don't want you to feel denigrated or attacked or anything like that. I don't think that's helpful in these sorts of discussions. All they end up doing is making people more defensive. I know that your heart is in the right place even if I don't agree with your stance. I guess all I can do is hope you reflect on the discussions here, and just mull it over a bit.

                Talk to you later.
                Last edited by Adrift; 05-20-2019, 10:47 AM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                  At this point, we've probably said all that we can on the matter. Your view seems to make sense to you, and you're good with it, while I look at it and think it's self-contradictory and just illogical.
                  The fact that he has conspicuously failed to address certain objections to his arguments suggests to me that he has his suspicions.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • I don't know if Jim missed my earlier post, but my view about when a human being gets a soul is

                    "I would rather err on the side of life instead of standing before Jesus one day and him telling me that my support of abortion before I thought a soul was attached was wrong and my ideas contributed to the deaths of countless lives."

                    There is no way we can know when a soul/spirit becomes part of a body. The logical point is when the body begins, the soul begins. And that is the safest "bet" - on the side of good, and of life. As human beings, it is easy for us to rationalize our views and convince ourselves that our view is the correct one, but when an innocent life is on the line, doesn't it make sense to choose the view that ensures that life is saved instead of risking it being murdered?

                    So that is the point of view I am taking.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                      I don't know if Jim missed my earlier post, but my view about when a human being gets a soul is

                      "I would rather err on the side of life instead of standing before Jesus one day and him telling me that my support of abortion before I thought a soul was attached was wrong and my ideas contributed to the deaths of countless lives."

                      There is no way we can know when a soul/spirit becomes part of a body. The logical point is when the body begins, the soul begins. And that is the safest "bet" - on the side of good, and of life. As human beings, it is easy for us to rationalize our views and convince ourselves that our view is the correct one, but when an innocent life is on the line, doesn't it make sense to choose the view that ensures that life is saved instead of risking it being murdered?

                      So that is the point of view I am taking.
                      I understand that. It's a valid point.

                      Jim
                      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        I don't know if Jim missed my earlier post, but my view about when a human being gets a soul is

                        "I would rather err on the side of life instead of standing before Jesus one day and him telling me that my support of abortion before I thought a soul was attached was wrong and my ideas contributed to the deaths of countless lives."

                        There is no way we can know when a soul/spirit becomes part of a body. The logical point is when the body begins, the soul begins. And that is the safest "bet" - on the side of good, and of life. As human beings, it is easy for us to rationalize our views and convince ourselves that our view is the correct one, but when an innocent life is on the line, doesn't it make sense to choose the view that ensures that life is saved instead of risking it being murdered?

                        So that is the point of view I am taking.
                        That was my point earlier when I wrote:

                        "When making any moral evaluation that has unkown factors (such as the precise moment an eternal soul is bound to our physical being), yet those factors make the difference between an action being good, and an action being evil, we ought always to err on the side of good."
                        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                        Than a fool in the eyes of God


                        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          That was my point earlier when I wrote:

                          "When making any moral evaluation that has unkown factors (such as the precise moment an eternal soul is bound to our physical being), yet those factors make the difference between an action being good, and an action being evil, we ought always to err on the side of good."
                          Yep. A bit like Pascal's wager, but with someone else's life.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                            Might be interesting to compare percentage statistics. What percentage of abortions is occupied by people who have been raped, incestuous relationships, danger to the mother, financial restraints, just because the pregnancy is inconvenient. At a guess, less than 8 percent for the first three combined ... maybe 12% for the first four combined.
                            https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/u...on_statistics/

                            Turns out it's much lower than that. The top of the page I linked to explains how they got their numbers.
                            Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by QuantaFille View Post
                              https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/u...on_statistics/

                              Turns out it's much lower than that. The top of the page I linked to explains how they got their numbers.
                              From that link, (for Florida, but I bet the percentages are the same elsewhere)

                              ScreenHunter_.jpg

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                From that link, (for Florida, but I bet the percentages are the same elsewhere)

                                [ATTACH=CONFIG]37130[/ATTACH]
                                Actually, the numbers were different. They have charts with numbers from most of the rest of the US combined.
                                Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                119 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                319 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                111 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                196 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                360 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X