16 November 2004

An interesting response to the pro-life/pro-choice thing, didn't change my mind from pro-life, but it is a good read. Personally my stance that there wouldn't be an abortion problem if people didn't have unprotected sex out of marriage. If you happen to get knocked up, its your own damn fault and you should deal with the consequences.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nick here again,

I went through a read a few of this guy's posts. While he did have a few good points, his argument had the same amount or less defensive qualities than the anti-abortion sections used of the Bible. These would obviously be first, that in God's divine purpose, only those chosen as prophets would have self awareness while still developing in the mother. If we add in the text used that basically stated being miscarried or having died at birth would be preferable to the miserable life, we can come up with pretty odd conclusion.

Since we have no notion of what the future holds, and what the individuals plan for the future are as being laid out by God, or by their own choices, we would have to be able to determine that this person would have a miserable life, and has no purpose serving God before we can justify an abortion.

Since this person also uses the Bible as reference for their argument, it would not then be out of the question to bring up issues of other people. Such as Saul who was called later in life by God for a servant. Since we do not know the future or what plans if any God has for folk, I do not think it is up to us mere humans to make that call.

Looking at the verse from Exodus where the mother's forced miscarriage is not considered killing another human the author is pretty close to contradicting themselves. As stated having a low survival rate from conception to one year of age would mean that human life at that point is taken for granted. Several cultures around the world do not name children until they are at least one year in order to prevent to much emotional attachment to the child in the event of the child's death. It would seem that a law such as in Exodus would be meant to protect people (which is what laws are for) psychologically as well as seeking justice for the crime. (It was still a crime right?) In today's world, I think this law would have been altered to reflect the higher survival rates of children.

In either case, these arguments do not cover having an abortion due to the child not being wanted or not being convenient for the family. Both of which appear to be non-justified reasons.

3:34 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home