It's not doctors who should be saying when life begins, it's philosophers.
It's not doctors who should be saying when life begins, it's philosophers.
You're right, I'm just saying that the fear leads to the desperate attempts to control and then to the hate.
Rush Limbaugh: "women who use birth control are either sluts or prostitutes." Women who play college basketball are "nappy-headed ho's."
I've seen the religious posters on this thread and I have to ask have you really and truly looked at what the bible actually says about life?
I posted earlier that the bible doesn't even see a fetus as alive in the real sense, since as the article posted above states that the belief is when the infant is born and takes it's first breath that the Jewish faith believes is when life "begins". They don't quibble with anything before that. Since the old testament is based on the Talmud and earlier Jewish texts doesn't it make more sense to see it from that standpoint? The idea that life begins at conception is a new idea, because before the ultrasound and other medical imaging techniques a lot of the reproductive process was a mystery. Other than a "rabbit died" test many women weren't sure when conception even took place with any exact date to go by.
I believe modern religious ideas on abortion have been sold to churches as a rallying point for fundraising with out the realistic thought of what or how this affects real people in the real world. Nothing is as black as white as god wills life, god wills EVERYTHING if you believe in god, good and bad.
If you believe that god takes care of everything, then those fetuses that are aborted for whatever reason are with your god. Their mothers, whatever choices she made for whatever reason are between her and her god. What makes anyone qualified to control the actions of another of such a personal nature, even if you find it wrong. People do wrong all the time but no one is attempting to outlaw adultery or coveting your neighbors goods. That is left to the person to live their life and face their own judgement (if you believe that) by god. NOT YOU.
And it is exactly "Christians" like you who have solidified my belief that I do not want anything to do with your christ. Oh, I've met actual GOOD Christians, I know they're out there.. they just wisely choose not to throw it in peoples faces.
And isn't your god the ultimate judge? If so... why waste your time judging everyone else? Actually, I would think that taking on the ASPECT of god by judging others would be a sin. It certainly SHOULD be.
But that would be terribly inconvenient for the bible-thumpers ... who are above and beyond the most judgmental people I have ever met.
PS. To stay within the actual thread - yes, I think that a woman has a right to choose. Not the sad grey faced men, or the evangelical christians or anyone else. It's a personal choice. Period. Like everyone else I also believe that the fewer abortions performed the better. Which is why I believe in low cost birth control.
Oh, and BTW, I am a woman AND a republican (stress, non conservative republican). I shall not be voting for Romney, but it has nothing to do with abortion and everything to do he's a man who votes in the direction of the dollar signs and a total tool. Roe vs. Wade isn't going to be overturned. I hate what has become of the GOP, pandering to the evangelical masses and tossing out all common sense.
I am the OP, for Candyapple and the other posters who are pro life what would you legislate in this situation and why.
A woman is raped and becomes pregnant, she does not want to give birth. Would you force this woman by law to carry the child to term? Why? What would you do with the baby after it was born?
"Love your neighbor" doesn't have anything to do with being a judgmental grumpy pants (censored version).
Question – So the moment a cell divides – it is now a baby and Gift from God, (despite the fact that it is not addressed in the bible, because the men writing the words had no knowledge of such a thing).
What about artificial fertilization? Is it the hand of God that causes cells to divide when a scientist injects sperm into an egg? And what about all of those peti dish casts off, oftentimes those scientists (or God? Because only God can create life right) fertilize many eggs at once, and not all can be “stuffed in the oven”.
How is not bringing a divided egg to term any different than an early stage abortion? Shouldn’t we mandate that EVERY divided egg be “stuffed in an oven” and carried to term? Otherwise it is “murdering” babies? Fertilization therapies result in many “murdered babies” if you believe this. Why aren’t the rights of these divided cells being protected? Why aren’t we outlawing fertilization therapies because they very often result in this sort of “murder”.
I know there ARE some groups out there with this view point (well the protect the divided cells part, not outlawing the science that allows for it).
And lastly, how do artificial fertilization methods play into Gods will? God wants many babies from petri dishes, that is why he allowed the eggs to divide? Just like he allowed the raped woman to become pregnant?
Or is this one of the “mysteries of the creator” which we do not understand – but for some reason we totally understand His stance on aborting fetuses before they are viable?
Or am I trying to use logic which has no part in a literal interpretation of the bible? (course again – please point me to the divided cell section of the bible!)
That's why stem cell research was banned for awhile, until Obama changed it.
Yes - stem cells (can’t use the divided eggs to save lives or further science) - but what about fertilization treatments? Shouldn't we force any couple that goes through fertility therapy that results in unused divided (fertilized) eggs to carry ALL of them to term? Otherwise they are murdering many babies, its like having 10 abortions at once!
Shouldn’t they all be forced to carry them all like Octomom?
Or is it ok to murder babies if it is in the process of trying to become pregnant artificially, but its not ok if it is being used to save the lives of those already living.
At first, you appear to be conceited because you assert that YOU KNOW what is true and everyone else is wrong. But, really, I feel bad for you--you aren't strong enough to form your own ideas about things. You have to rely on a book--a book that did not fall out of the sky written in God's penmanship. It was written by MAN.
Personally, I don't need a book to tell me right from wrong (and have you read some of the horrible things in the bible, btw??). MY god gave me these great gifts--a moral compass and a brain and a heart. That is all that *I* need, thankyouverymuch. And I am humble enough to realize that *I* am not god and I do not and can not have all the answers to everything. Afterall, to assume god's role is hubris, is it not? My religion is based on love and compassion and the fact that there is no way I can know everything. And all I do need to know is that I should be as good and kind and considerate as I can, do as much good and little harm as possible, and reserve judgement for god.
So, go ahead and tell me I'm wrong and my god is false. It has no effect on me because I know that you cannot know for sure whether that is true or not. :yes:
My head is starting to hurt.
Is Off Topic day over yet?
But I didn't specifically say that the medical community has a specific, singular policy - only that the perspective that Dr. Paul mentioned isn't the one that is the current collective viewpoint of the medical community.Quote:
However you are incorrect, as we can not clearly state that the medical community has a single policy.
I believe the medical community does not have a consistent policy regarding when life begins, whether pregancy indicates one or two patients, how they personally feel about a woman risking her life to bear a child or abortion.
I would buy the argument that there is no single policy - obviously, it's a controversial topic and there are a variety of perspectives. That doesn't change scientific fact, though.
I don't think all of the victims of rape and incest are women, many are children. Apparently God wants children to give birth to children, even if their father raped them. I cannot understand why anyone would accept this from a politician and vote for both Mourdock and Romney. It makes me sick, they both make me sick, along with Ryan.
When will someone in the republican party stand up to this ?
Back to the OP a bit, and some is history- a lot of the following seems to add up with things I'd already read. The GOP made a deal with ....in order to gain votes. And may have lost control of those they sought to use:
(Where we get to remember who almost quadrupled the deficit while in office- Regan)
The expediency of using the religious right as a voting block and pandering to them. I think this was used for both Bush's.
The need to divert attention from other issues because of the threat to the separation of church and state.
The need to insure a nation of followers and uneducated cannon fodder, who are not taught to think for themselves, to insure a new, third-world work force.
Personally, I think the whole question of when life begins is irrelevant, especially considering how much life we humans end without thinking about it at all. I know this might sound silly initially, but every time we spray against insects, consume plants... we're killing, taking life, yet, to the best of my knowledge, we never consider "when life begins" unless we're discussing individual human lives-- as if human lives were the only ones on the planet worthy of consideration.
Personally, I think this reflects a serious gap in our moral thinking, an assumption that our species is the only one that really counts on this planet, so that we have, for example, created gods which urge us to "go forth and multiply" even as we wipe out other species, endanger the very planet which sustains us, and even subject many of our own to unnecessary suffering because of the supposed mandate to bring every scrap of human life conceived into the world, whether that life will encounter a world prepared to sustain or even endure it or not.
No, I don't have "all due respect" for such notions or religions. The people who hold them cause far too much harm.
I'm basically an Atheist. I'm 37 years old, married to DH for 8 years, and we have NO intention of having children. I don't like kids-- I mean really DO NOT LIKE children, never have. I never played with dolls as a kid, I think babies are ugly and smell bad; I don't find them endearing at all and truly want nothing to do with them, ever.
I've talked with gynos in the past and was basically told that I'm "too young" for a tubal, so I've been stuck with other BC methods. So I am as proactive re: birth control as possible; right now I have an IUD, which is supposed to be the best option after sterilization... But of course no method is 100%, and it IS possible I could get preggers someday, despite my best efforts to the contrary.
So I guess I'm just supposed to not have sex, even though I am in a committed, long-term, monogamous relationship?? That privilege is to be reserved for people who are willing and eager to bring forth new lives to the earth, just in case it might accidentally happen??? "Oh, but you can give it up for adoption," they say. Sure, and put myself through 9 months of pregnancy and all the medical risks THAT entails, not to mention all the missed work and increased costs associated with doctors' visits, maternity clothes, etc., etc., etc. (Aren't we trying to keep health care costs DOWN???)
Rape or no rape, the thought that some politicians believe they have more rights over my body than I do is beyond disgusting, to say the least.
And if IVF is allowed, how about all those frozen ones? Is that child abuse; you can't lock kids in a closet and leave them for years, but is it okay to freeze them until you're ready? Or should parents relying on IVF have to just try one egg at a time, damned the cost?