Wanna talk about abortion?

Making abortion strictly illegal is not an answer - God gave us the freedom to make our own mistakes and the state should not place itself above God's authority.

Having said this, there are very few circumstances when abortion is (IMHO) morally acceptable (the only one I'm aware of is if the mother's life is at risk).

Abortion for financial reasons is not a no-no, and the state should step in to assist in those circumstances - same when the child is handicapped. Life is far more important than any "lifestyle conveniences" and numbers on a bank statement.

Andrew

Mentioned this thread to my wife last Friday - she told me there had recently been reported a study in IIRC New Zealand which showed a significant increase in the incidence of mental illness in women who had had abortions.

I forgot to get her to give me specific info over the weekend - still not got it... but I'll put it up here when I remember

Frank

quote:

doctors are allowed opt out of abortion (feel free to correct me Bruce).

True, not all gynaecologists perform them and a Doctor is not forced to sign a termination request (which needs 2 signatures to be accepted-usually one by GP and one by gynaecologist). The GP's responsibility if they do not personally sanction abortion is to give information to the patient so that they can consult with a doctor who does, ie not to deny or obstruct their access to the service on the basis of their personal beliefs. Of course a Doctor may also refuse to sign the form if they feel the TOP is not indicated, or the patient is not making a free choice etc.

quote:

In that case, why is it illegal to have abortions later in the case of a healthy child? Does this not mean that the state has chosen to value the foetus more when it's older? Or is it more a medical question of harm to the mother? (Asking because I genuinely don't know...)

I think this is a socio-political decision. Late TOPs have some safety issues for the woman but this is not a big factor. I think that many people were arguing the date to be dropped from 24 weeks for all TOPs but it was argued that in some cases of severe foetal abnormality (or severe maternal risk) a very late TOP option needed to be retained. In some of these cases the situation is not really diagnosed or appreciated until later gestation.

Hence we have the stuation where 'social' TOP has one upper limit and cases of severe foetal abnormality or risk to maternal health have a higher one.

It is worth remembering that these very late TOPs are a tiny fraction of the whole

Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by Derek Wright:
Rasher - I can understand your personal view - however the issue is should you view be imposed on every one in the land.

The involved women should be the only person who makes the decision - not a politician, not a religious person - only the female involved - it is her body, it is not the business of any one else.

I agree with you Derek that sounds perfect to me I agree there should be a limit as to when you can change your mind about the abortion but I think it is utter MADNESS for a government in this day and age to say no you cannot have an abortion to anyone who wants one within the agreed limits of the country.

Steph

I have some questions… does the catholic church view the coil as a form of abortion?

Is it axiomatic that those of a religious persuasion think the foetus has rights because it is infused with a transcendental soul at the moment of conception? Is the bible consistent on this?

At what stage does a foetus or baby develop abstract thought? I think the scientists say the third trimester is when cognition develops.

This analogy may well be wrong…but is it murder to terminate, abort the life of a brain dead coma patient who is deemed to have no conscious abstract thought?


Does a foetus have emotional attachment or know what a parent is?

An abortion which is carried out on the grounds of ‘I couldn’t give it a good life’ and that death is better than the child leading a potential sub-optimal life, this is to most people repellant (we’re all pro-life aren’t we?), this is a short hop away from eugenics.

Is there a shortage of people willing to adopt?

Its not for me to say how we should judge such things as a society but, personally, I take an existentialist view of this issue, which holds that the defining characteristic of humanity is the capacity for cognition - which does not develop until the third trimester - so a legal limit of around 24 weeks is entirely reasonable from my point of view as there is no appreciable higher cognitive function before this stage due to the manner in which the brain develops.

Beano

quote:

Originally posted by Beano:
I have some questions… does the catholic church view the coil as a form of abortion?

This analogy may well be wrong…but is it murder to terminate, abort the life of a brain dead coma patient who is deemed to have no conscious abstract thought?

the defining characteristic of humanity is the capacity for cognition - which does not develop until the third trimester - so a legal limit of around 24 weeks is entirely reasonable from my point of view as there is no appreciable higher cognitive function before this stage due to the manner in which the brain develops.

Slippery slope. Learning disabled adults have severely retarded cognition.
The Catholic church would indeed deem ending of life support as murder and is against contraception on the grounds of the 'rights' of the 'unborn child'. Ultimately, religion deems conception and its mechanics as sacred and, therefore, any attempt to arrest or terminate as against god's law. This is why, as I stated earlier, it makes for a heated debate but is highly unlikely to reach any concensus.

quote:

so a legal limit of around 24 weeks is entirely reasonable from my point of view as there is no appreciable higher cognitive function before this stage due to the manner in which the brain develops.

I think (though I'm not sure) that the limit of 24 weeks is was chosen partly because at 25+ weeks some premature babies have been known to survive with intensive care, whereas I suspect below 24 is not possible. Some important physiological changes happen bewteen 24 and 28 weeks approx with regard to the lung.

Bruce

God and abortion.

It has been estimated that 50% of all human conceptions end in spontaneous abortion, usually without the woman even knowing she was pregnant. 20% of all known pregnancies end in miscarriages. Does this mean that God is the most prolific abortionist of all?

The Catholic Church and abortion.

IN El Salvador abortion is now illegal under any circumstances even rape or incest. The moment a woman presents at a hospital with a perforated uterus, indicating she has been the victim of a back street abortionist, she is shackled to her hospital bed and her body is treated as a crime scene. Special forensic doctors are then called for to examine her womb and cervix. There are many women in El Salvador who are serving thirty year jail sentences for terminating their pregnancies.

Imagine this in a country that still stigmatizes the use of contraception as a sin against God. It was the Archbishop of El Salvador that campaigned for this law and it was Pope John Paul the second that assisted him in applying pressure on the government.

I personally find this a difficult subject to articulate as it raises all manner of feelings such as ethics, morals, and rights; do we even have rights to what we might become?

With regard to the 24 week legal limit, could this actually be less because of irregular menstruation in teenagers or genetic defect, thus skewing the date of conception so in effect 24 weeks actually becomes a 20 week gestation?

Do all foetuses have the characteristic of sucking their thumb at seven weeks?

Acad,
Talk about patriarchal oppression and being pro-choice, on what you’ve published, I’d say El Salvador is pro-punishment, if its policy on abortion is as you say it is, then its one of forced child birth, and a policy which I do not agree with. Furthermore, I’ve just been thinking to myself that even our legal 24 week limit is a policy of forced childbirth.

Theism profoundly affects everyone, even atheists. Theism motivates all sorts of actions, like Crusades, Inquisitions, and 9/11 etc; those types of things impact non-believers as well as believers.

Beano’s Pandora’s Box has been opened and his thoughts within have become idiotic allies.

quote:

How about contraception, is that killing the unborn baby?

No. A sperm by itself is only half of the equation.

A young man having a 'nocturnal emission' that he cannot in any way control is not guilty of murder.

The very process of conception excludes all but one sperm (though of course sometimes more get through - I see evidence of this every day with my twins). That is not murder either.

quote:

A foetus has the potential to develop into a baby. It is not a baby.

What is it then if not human? Can two humans produce non-human offspring?

Are you just an overgrown foetus?

Malky,

The Catholic church's position on ending life support on any kind of person (brain dead or otherwise) is that you are not required to provide extraordinary methods to keep a person alive. In other words, if someone is on life support and the machines are switched off and that person dies, this is not murder. If someone is being treated for cancer and the decision is made to stop treatment and the person dies this, too, is not necessarily murder.

Naturally, that immediately brings up intent. If the intention is to kill with malice (e.g. someone finishing the job they started when they shot the patient in the first place), then it does constitute murder. If the intent is to end suffering or promote quality of remaining life, then it's not.

Acad,

God as abortionist. It's true that there are many natural terminations. Such is life. Do we really have to contribute to the statistics? Your comments are just designed to inflame. I leave to God what is his domain. I ask questions but I don't expect answers. I'll just be glad if I get any (none yet).

As to El Salvador, this depends on the definition of the foetus. If the foetus is considered a human being in El Salvador, then abortion is murder and carries an appropriate sentence. It doesn't matter what the circumstances of the creation of that being are. You can't blame the child for the actions of the parent.

quote:

Originally posted by acad tsunami:
God and abortion.

It has been estimated that 50% of all human conceptions end in spontaneous abortion, usually without the woman even knowing she was pregnant. 20% of all known pregnancies end in miscarriages. Does this mean that God is the most prolific abortionist of all?

Now now... if a rock were to land on someone's head, would you blame God for "throwing it"?

quote:

IN El Salvador abortion is now illegal under any circumstances even rape or incest. The moment a woman presents at a hospital with a perforated uterus, indicating she has been the victim of a back street abortionist, she is shackled to her hospital bed and her body is treated as a crime scene. Special forensic doctors are then called for to examine her womb and cervix. There are many women in El Salvador who are serving thirty year jail sentences for terminating their pregnancies.

Oh I could go on about how atheistic policies can bring about one-child policies and systematic abortions, but I won't . Instead, I would point out that it's part of human nature to mess things up, including state law - and I can guarantee we will never ever see a utopian state.

There is no perfect answer on whether a state should make abortion legal or illegal - people are going to do it anyway. The correct approach is "how do I make society less inclined to seek abortion for reasons other than life-threatening circumstances?".

Moving to the handling of general moral issues, many fail to grasp one of the key aspects of religion is to educate a society into being more self-disciplined, less self-centered and more in-tune with God's will. It is therefore up to the state to decide on the best way it can ensure its people to follow its law.

Ideally, the state would have to do nothing to enforce moral conduct (as idealised by Christian Anarchists like Tolstoi). But, like the utopian state, that is unlikely to happen. The closest we can get to a workable ideal is likely to be somewhere between full state intervention and no state intervention, while promoting moral guidance on a personal level through the religion.

Andrew

quote:

Originally posted by Andrew Randle:
[QUOTE]

Now now... if a rock were to land on someone's head, would you blame God for "throwing it"?

'FORASMUCH as it hath pleased Almighty God, in his wise providence, to take out of this world the soul of our deceased brother, we therefore commit his body to the ground; earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust'; etc etc.

It would seem that spontaneous abortions and miscarriages are God's will after all (at least according to the church)

quote:

Moving to the handling of general moral issues, many fail to grasp one of the key aspects of religion is to educate a society into being more self-disciplined, less self-centered and more in-tune with God's will. It is therefore up to the state to decide on the best way it can ensure its people to follow its law.

The belief that religion offers the only solution to moral issues is without evidence of any kind imo. The view that the theistic religions in particular offer a better solution is even less in evidence and the view that Christianity offers the best moral guidance is even harder to demonstrate.

We do not need the church to teach us that Hitler and Stalin were evil or that rape, murder or theft fail to increase the collective happiness of any civilised society.

quote:

Originally posted by Frank Abela:
Malky,
The Catholic church's position on ending life support on any kind of person (brain dead or otherwise) is that you are not required to provide extraordinary methods to keep a person alive.

Fair enough, I am well out of date. Its about 35 years since I studied my Catechism.

quote:

Originally posted by acad tsunami:

quote:

Originally posted by Andrew Randle:
[QUOTE]

Now now... if a rock were to land on someone's head, would you blame God for "throwing it"?

'FORASMUCH as it hath pleased Almighty God, in his wise providence, to take out of this world the soul of our deceased brother, we therefore commit his body to the ground; earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust'; etc etc.

It would seem that spontaneous abortions and miscarriages are God's will after all (at least according to the church)

Well we all play our part on the stage of life - no matter how long or short. Only God knows the final outcome, as he is outside the world and can fast-foward and rewind it like a CD. The CD might not be to his liking, but at least he can keep his favourite tracks...

quote:

We do not need the church to teach us that Hitler and Stalin were evil or that rape, murder or theft fail to increase the collective happiness of any civilised society.

Well someone's got to do it... no point in standing around - or we may see certain elements of society conduct social engineering experiments (like supporting the 'human rights' of the perpetrators instead of those of the victims).

The fact is, Jesus threw away all the old "laws" (designed to mould the Jewish nation into line with God) which no one could keep 100% anyway, and offered the simplest principles anyone could live by - "1: love and respect God and 2: love and respect one another". Of course people will slip up at one point or another and depending on whether they turn away from it, then that is covered by Grace.

Sure, abortion breaks both the above principles but the REAL Christian message is that God WILL forgive ANYONE who turns to Him and appreciates the sacrifice He made on our behalf (hey, God's getting the raw end of the deal here anyway!).

You know it's not just forgiveness we get, it's eternal acceptance, it's freedom from guilt and in the end God is willing to wipe the slate clean, forget and pour that judgement away and leave us standing.

Looking to God with a sincere heart is the best "feel good" activity anyone can do.

Andrew

.

quote:

Originally posted by Andrew Randle:
[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
Well someone's got to do it... no point in standing around - or we may see certain elements of society conduct social engineering experiments (like supporting the 'human rights' of the perpetrators instead of those of the victims).

Is it the church alone what keeps us from falling into moral chaos?

quote:

The fact is, Jesus threw away all the old "laws" (designed to mould the Jewish nation into line with God) which no one could keep 100% anyway, and offered the simplest principles anyone could live by - "1: love and respect God and 2: love and respect one another".

'The fact is...'??

'For, truly I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not one iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of the commandments and teaches men so, shall he be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.'
- Mathew 5:18.19

Also it is a fact, is it not, (according to the Bible that is)that Jesus took his authority as Messiah by fulfilling Old Testament prophesy - therefore he could hardly dismiss the OT now could he?

As for the 'Golden Rule' of 'Loving thy neighbour' I think you will find several religious teachers beat him to it by er..some hundreds of years.

My point is the church does not have a monopoly on religious and moral teachings and their is no evidence that any society falls apart without religion, in fact, it can be clearly demonstrated that the exact reverse is often the case!! I am happy to illustrate this.

I do not have a strong pro-life or strong pro-choice view on abortion - I think the whole area is impossibly complicated and a truly terrible dilemma - I hope that some leap forward in contraception can be made and thus reduce the awful suffering that unwanted pregnancies bring to so many.

quote:

'The fact is...'??

'For, truly I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not one iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of the commandments and teaches men so, shall he be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.'
- Mathew 5:18.19

You can't "get me" on that one

The 10 Commandments are rolled up into "love God and love one another" (check it - Mt 22:36-38). The Law that Christ did away with was in areas such as tithing, diet, keeping non-Sabbath holy days, etc. etc.

quote:

Also it is a fact, is it not, (according to the Bible that is)that Jesus took his authority as Messiah by fulfilling Old Testament prophesy - therefore he could hardly dismiss the OT now could he?

Out with the Old, in with the New. OT served its purpose and "set the scene" for the NT.

quote:

As for the 'Golden Rule' of 'Loving thy neighbour' I think you will find several religious teachers beat him to it by er..some hundreds of years.

For my reference (and I'm not asking this with the purpose of testing you), can you name them? Particularly those that named "loving God" as a higher 'rule'.

Andrew

Gotta say I have a problem with arguments based on "what God says".

Malky,

Its about 35 years since I studied my Catechism.

Well, it's been almost as long for me. The only reason I remember this is that it was one of 'those' lessons. There was shock and disbelief at the declaration. Kids were indignantly saying 'so are you saying that a doctor doesn't have an obligation to treat a patient?' and all that kind of stuff - one of the few times that we didn't want a Religious Studies lesson to end. I have very few memories of school which come to mind readily, but that is one of them. I believe it's one of the newer things introduced by Vatican II.

quote:

Originally posted by Andrew Randle:
[QUOTE]



[QUOTE] You can't "get me" on that one

LOL - I think I did

quote:

The 10 Commandments are rolled up into "love God and love one another" (check it - Mt 22:36-38). The Law that Christ did away with was in areas such as tithing, diet, keeping non-Sabbath holy days, etc. etc.

As for the Ten Commandments we are told that these words were written by God Himself indeed these are the only words written by God and so we should expect them to be the greatest words ever written! However all we see is that the first four commandments have nothing to do with morality at all. It is difficult to comprehend how these Commandments are vital to the maintenance of civilisation! 5 through to 10 are admonishments found in virtually every culture since history began. In the last commandment we see that God acknowledges but does not admonish the fact that some of us may have servants! I find it bizarre that God’s final written word to mankind should be not to covet our neighbours man-servant!

quote:

Out with the Old, in with the New. OT served its purpose and "set the scene" for the NT.

It seems to me that the OT is largely about tribal warfare and demonstrations of God's wrath and Holy firepower (no wonder the Americans love it). One of the things that perhaps everyone on this planet can agree is that slavery is a very bad idea but God was all for it. Then there is the problem of Gods retribution in the forms of plagues and floods etc. If we are to look for a guide in moral issues should we not look to someone who is both truly loving, compassionate and consistently so? This rules out the OT God. Although not quite in the league as his old man Jesus does not have a perfectly clean slate either!

quote:

For my reference (and I'm not asking this with the purpose of testing you), can you name them? Particularly those that named "loving God" as a higher 'rule'.

Zoroaster, Confucius, Buddha and Epictetus to name a few. There are countless scriptures of profound self-transcending love far more articulate than anything Jesus is alleged to have said.


Let us take Mahavira the Jain patriarch for example who effortlessly surpasses the Ten Commandments with ‘Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being’. Buddha said likewise.

Christians have injured, abused, oppressed, enslaved, insulted, tormented, tortured and killed people in the name of God for centuries and all on sound theological grounds! It is impossible to behave in this way by adhering to the principles of Jainism and Buddhism thus it is impossible to claim that either the OT or NT offers superior moral guidelines.

As for ‘Loving God’ as the pinnacle of what mankind might achieve I think it is nothing compared to the realisation of the Bodhisattva ideal in Buddhism. One wonders why God needs to be loved so much – is He lonely? Insecure?

Getting back to problem of abortion – let us look at the Catholic Church again. Recently 30 top theologians from all around the world, met in the Vatican to discuss the question of what happens to babies or the unborn when they die without having first undergone the sacred rite of baptism. How to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS or how to halt the huge rise in the number of orphans in Catholic countries was not on the agenda. Nor was what to do about the concomitant rise is back street abortions and the dreadful suffering that results from mistakes.

Since the middle ages many Catholics have believed that babies go into a state of limbo where they enjoy ‘natural happiness’ forever (Thomas Aquinas). St. Augustine (a well known Christian looney) said the unlucky infant or unborn soul would spend an eternity in hell! (suffer little children to come unto me - suffer for all eternity'?)One wonders how he came by this information?

Pope Pius X said ‘Children (or the unborn) who die without baptism go into limbo where they do not enjoy God, but they do not suffer either’.

This is the hight of Catholic intellectual thinking until this last meeting of the 30 greatest Catholic minds met recently with all their proof of the eternal fate of the unborn – Can you imagine all these bookish, deeply deluded sanctimonious old farts all banging away about something they do not have a single effing clue about? what a hideous waste of time made all the more sinister when one remembers that this very institution has produced and harboured an elite army of child molesters since its earliest days.

No I do not think that the church or Christianity has a monopoly on moral issues either in what it preaches still less in what it practices.

We have thousands of years of eastern and western philosophy to draw on as well as religion, science and psychology and our own inate sense of justice and right and wrong. Forcing everyone to accept a simplistic fiction as a blue print for life which is what is happening in the US and in the Muslim world is not really the answer to human suffering imo.

(some of the above I have pinched from 'Letter to a Christian Nation' by Sam Harris.)

acad

Please do not take this personally but I think it would have been an act of Christian mercy if you had been aborted.

I used to be anti abortion but you are making me change my mind.

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
acad

Please do not take this personally but I think it would have been an act of Christian mercy if you had been aborted.

I used to be anti abortion but you are making me change my mind.

Luckily for me Christian mercy was as thin on the ground while I was in the womb as it is now 48 years later.

Do you wish to contradict any of what I have said above? Please fell free to develop a stunning argument.

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
acad

Please do not take this personally but I think it would have been an act of Christian mercy if you had been aborted.

I used to be anti abortion but you are making me change my mind.

Mick,

You owe me a new keyboard, just spluttered my wine all over it! Howling with laughter (HWL)

Nic

acad

one of the disadvantages of your oh so superior intellect is that you have the ability to make an interesting subject deadly dull.

If you became a politician, I suspect that there would be a record low turnout of voters.