Hello Tom, thanks for an interesting post. Some comments:
me, previously:
This "debate" is most likely going to be completely non productive because the fact is, scientists themselves do not know for sure when life begins and as such, for those who believe life does *not* begin at conception, naturally they will not see themselves as murderers. To be honest, all differences of opinion aside, I think that *this* is the crux of the matter and that many people who have abortions are not "bad" or even immoral people, they simply disagree that life begins at conception.
Tom (quoting Dr G):
[<<I think that we can now also say that the question of the beginning of life---when life begins---is no longer a question for theological or philosophical dispute. It is an established scientific fact. Theologians and philosophers may go on to debate the meaning of life or purpose of life, but it is an established fact that all life, including human life, begins at the moment of conception. >>
Do you agree with Dr. Gordon? I'm pretty sure he's a better authority on the subject than either of use wouldn't you agree?]
Well, not really - I can't agree with that quote this point. Unfortunately, quotes like these do not solve the problem imo - all I have to do is get quotes from other doctors who disagree with Gordon and it could go on ad nauseum (this also applies to the website citing deaths that resulted from abortion). And in fact, in my initial statement, rather than saying "scientists don't know for sure" I should have said "scientists cannot even agree amongst themselves" - that would expressed my thoughts more accurately. It would be one thing if it was a minor contention and an overwhelming majority (or not.. heck, any majority will do lol) of scientists had come to the same conclusion, but it really seems evenly split at best.
me prev:
Also, just out of curiosity, what is your (and anyone else who cares to comment) opinion on young girls who are just barely old enough to bear children yet end up pregnant as a result of rape, incest or any combination of atrocities? They *themselves* are children, and often the act of giving birth puts their own life at stake. Do we sacrifice one child for the other, and if so, how do we pick which one? And whose decision is it anyway, should it be up to someone else to choose when it's the child whose life is at stake?
Tom:
[One of my cousins is the product of a date rape, and he turned out to be a fantastic guy(and a great Christian might I add).]
That is wonderful, but still begs the question - should we be willing to sacrifice the life of the pregnant child (since I was using children in my example) because the child being born will possibly grow up to be a great guy or girl? It still seems that you are disregarding the threat to the life of the older (pregnant) child in favor of the unborn life. I realize that death in *adult* childbirth is very rare, but death still occurs when it's children giving birth - their bodies simply aren't designed for that kind of strain. I don't understand the logic that one child should martyr itself for another. I am not saying that a young girl should not carry the baby to term *if she can*, I am just saying I think we need to consider both sides very carefully and I really think each individual case has to be examined fully before making an across-the-board judgement. And btw, I am well aware that there are potential dangers of the abortion procedure but in many cases the risks of aborting would be far less than the risk of giving birth. Which is why again, I think each case is individual.
Tom:
{This question comes up in every discussion, and the answer never changes. The severity of the situation will often prevent people from seeing the big picture. Killing the child doesn't make the situation any better, but let's just say, for the sake of argument, that we'll allow abortions in cases of rape. A study by the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology(1971) pinned a figure of 0.6% pregnancies in cases of rape.]
Do have any stats more recent than those? (I'll look for some also and we can compare).
Tom:
[I don't care about the margin of error, because that figure PROVES that people aren't using abortion as a result of being raped. They're using it as birth control! That's just a disgusting thought isn't it?]
For those who *do* use abortion as b.c., yes, I find it deplorable. But I'm not sure how those stats bear out in the present - I'd like to look for more recent stats and see if that has changed.
Tom:
[As for incest. What can I say? Don't kick the boots with your cousin and that's it for that case!]
Sorry Tom, but I am not referring to consentual sex, but *abusive* incest - a father, uncle or older sibling committing sexual abuse on a young girl.
Tom: [A danger to the mother is not an abortion support point, it's an anti-pro-creation support point.]
I am probably being redundant here lol but again, your point above doesn't address *child* pregnancies that result from forced, *NON* consentual sex. Procreation is not (or *should* not) even be an issue for young children so no, this has nothing to do with procreation - it is about children who are [a] pregnant through no fault of their own, and
are forced with the choice of possible or even likely death in childbirth or aborting. HOnestly, I don't see how this can be reduced to a simple yes or no. Btw, girls as young as nine are sometimes able to bear children, and the risk of death for a nine yr old in childbirth is considerable.
me prev:
[..... I have known women who wanted to carry their pregnancies to term but were pressured by their husbands/boyfriends/fiances to have an abortion. So, though I agree that the man should be part of the decision, his being a part of the decision-making process does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that there will be fewer abortions. .....]
Tom:
[Which is why premarital sex is a dangerous thing. At least when you're married there will be a far greater chance of commitment from both parties.On the same note, suggesting that it's possible one parant may not support the child is a supporting for abortion is also a premis for abolishing pro-creation entirely. which I'm certain is not the result you're looking for.]
First let me say that I agree that premarital sex is neither wise nor practical. Second, I was not suggesting that not being able to support a child is a valid reason for abortion. My statements re: supporting the child were in reference to other comments made about how the man should have more clout in the decision whether or not to have an abortion. The point I was making was that, I agree that men should have part of the decision making process but that it will not necessarily lower the number of abortions because many men are the ones pressuring their significant other to have them.
Really, I am not particularly in favor of abortion, but nor am I willing to make a flat-rate judgement on comlicated situations that deserve more consideration than a yes or no.
Just my .02
Take care,
-Saint J
