• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Even when I was an atheist, I was still pro-life.

weaver2 said:
I'm happy to have you pray. Just don't tell the government that your prayers should be civil laws that force me to honor your beliefs.
Click to expand...

Why not? I'm being forced by the government to honor atheist beliefs.
 
Lursa said:
And yet, God never even claims that. So are you lying or poorly educated in your cult's teachings?

I pray you find the answer.

Then you can stop lying and condemning your soul to eternity with gays and fornicators.
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in the atheist view of abortion.
 
noonereal said:
here is the think, homosexual may well be natural for you (as it is for me) but for a homosexual, heterosexual is unnatural.

If we are all free....

Oh, and what on earth does atheism have to do with abortion?????????????
Click to expand...

I think that there is a general presumption that any moral opposition to aborting a zygote/embryo/fetus must automatically have a religious rationale behind it. That is, if one is a secular atheist, one should either be for the right to choose or at the very least neutral on the issue of abortion.
 
noonereal said:
What on earth does atheism have to do with abortion?
Click to expand...

Well, nearly all atheists think it's fine and dandy. Just like Lursa here. And all practicing Christians oppose it.
 
noonereal said:
I think that is exactly the problem.

It's an ignorant to presume.
Click to expand...

Show me an atheist who opposes abortion, birth control, premarital sex, and masturbation, and I'll show you a three-legged chicken.

Presumptions are made because they are accurate.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Not for abortion... but for what constitutes a person.
Click to expand...

I would argue that this giant debate of personhood is totally irrelevant to the discussion.

These are developing human beings. A nine-month old fetus one minute away from being born is little different from an infant one minute after being born. I think that the need to create a legal fiction of "personhood" to assign which human beings are and are not "people" is to help put a salve on the enormity of the decision for the termination of human life.

I am more than happy to grant that a fetus, perhaps even an embryo, and, at the extreme end, a zygote is a person. As far as I am concerned they are.

None of that matters in weighing the consideration of whether a woman should be forced by law to carry an unwanted and perhaps life-threatening pregnancy to term. The health and wellbeing of the person forced to take on that burden is what should be considered. As by your prior analogy, you cannot be forced to drown carrying the weight of a person who cannot swim.
 
Mashmont said:
Well, nearly all atheists think it's fine and dandy. Just like Lursa here. And all practicing Christians oppose it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and all blacks are the same and all hillbillies are the same and all....
 
Mashmont said:
Show me an atheist who opposes abortion, birth control, premarital sex, and masturbation, and I'll show you a three-legged chicken.

Presumptions are made because they are accurate.
Click to expand...

Yes, entertain your fallacy.

No thanks.

It is moronic to think atheists support abortion because they are atheist.
 
noonereal said:
Yes, entertain your fallacy.

No thanks.

It is moronic to think atheists support abortion because they are atheist.
Click to expand...

Nobody said that, but nice switch. Do you work for Snopes?
 
Mashmont said:
The majority of American WOMEN classify themselves as 'pro-life' and NOT 'pro-choice'.

Ouch.
Click to expand...

Go bark at a wall, 77% of Americans what Roe upheld by SCOTUS.

You always seem to drag people down to your level. I am out.
 
Carrying on

noonereal said:
most all Americans are pro abortion... hello!
Click to expand...

Or @ least pro-choice. See U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade | Pew Research Center

"AUGUST 29, 2019

"U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade

"More agree with Democrats than Republicans on abortion policy

"As debates over abortion continue in states around the country, a majority of Americans (61%) continue to say that abortion should be legal in all (27%) or most (34%) cases. A smaller share of the public (38%) says abortion should be illegal in all (12%) or most cases (26%).

"The new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted July 22-August 4 among 4,175 adults, also finds little support for overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that established a woman’s right to an abortion. Seven-in-ten say they do not want to see the Roe v. Wade decision completely overturned; 28% say they would like to see the Supreme Court completely overturn the 1973 decision.

"Consistent with these views, a majority of Americans say their greater concern is that some states are making it too difficult (59%) rather than too easy (39%) for people to be able to get an abortion.

...

"Among Republicans and Republican leaners, significantly more say abortion should be illegal (62%) than legal (36%) in all or most cases. Republicans are deeply split on this question by ideology: 77% of conservative Republicans say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases; just 22% say it should be legal. By contrast, 57% of moderate and liberal Republicans think abortion should be legal in all or most cases, compared with a smaller share (41%) who say it should be illegal."

(My emphasis - more @ the URL)

There you go - Pew reports the majority of the US public wants abortion to continue to be legal.
 
A no-go zone

Mashmont said:
Why not? I'm being forced by the government to honor atheist beliefs.
Click to expand...

In matters of conscience (religious belief, for instance), the US government is enjoined from promoting religion @ all.

That may be the source of your confusion: The US government doesn't deal in religion @ all, it's forbidden by the US Constitution.
 
Felis Leo said:
I would argue that this giant debate of personhood is totally irrelevant to the discussion.

These are developing human beings. A nine-month old fetus one minute away from being born is little different from an infant one minute after being born.
Click to expand...

Name one instance, where the mother's life was not in jeopardy... where a woman aborted her pregnancy one minute from being born.
 
Mashmont said:
I'm not interested in the atheist view of abortion.
Click to expand...

So then God did mention abortion? Let's see His Word on it. Let's see His View.



This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Click to expand...
 
Mashmont said:
Well, nearly all atheists think it's fine and dandy. Just like Lursa here. And all practicing Christians oppose it.
Click to expand...

Lying about me again? Just racking up the unrepented sins! Good lord, I do think that you are looking forward to eternity with the gays and fornicators! You know, you can get to know them better here, in the present...even indulge your private thoughts...if you want. You dont have to wait.



This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Click to expand...
 
Bodhisattva said:
Name one instance, where the mother's life was not in jeopardy... where a woman aborted her pregnancy one minute from being born.
Click to expand...

I cannot think of a single instance. But even if I were to find such an extraordinarily rare instance of a mother having the life of her fetus terminated moments before being born, would it matter to you if her life was NOT being threatened by the child's birth?

Again, my argument is simply this: Arguments over personhood is a red herring. If the unborn are indeed declared legal persons, abortions would still happen. And that is because what matters is the risk that childbirth holds for the mother.
 
Felis Leo said:
I cannot think of a single instance. But even if I were to find such an extraordinarily rare instance of a mother having the life of her fetus terminated moments before being born, would it matter to you if her life was NOT being threatened by the child's birth?
Click to expand...

Yes. I think that it would be disgusting to kill a child that can live on its own... generally 27 weeks or so?

Again, my argument is simply this: Arguments over personhood is a red herring. If the unborn are indeed declared legal persons, abortions would still happen. And that is because what matters is the risk that childbirth holds for the mother.
Click to expand...

I agree with that...
 
Felis Leo said:
I cannot think of a single instance. But even if I were to find such an extraordinarily rare instance of a mother having the life of her fetus terminated moments before being born, would it matter to you if her life was NOT being threatened by the child's birth?

Again, my argument is simply this: Arguments over personhood is a red herring. If the unborn are indeed declared legal persons, abortions would still happen. And that is because what matters is the risk that childbirth holds for the mother.
Click to expand...

It doesnt happen. And there's no way to force a Dr to perform such an abortion (unless necessary to save the woman's life).

And why would a woman do that at that point when she can get a cool $20,000 for a baby in a private adoption?

Your example is the red herring. It's like demanding laws that prevent riding unicorns when unicorns dont exist :roll:


This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom