I look at incredibly reasonable atheists and think that the only reason they could have for being pro-choice is to spite religion which is a terrible thing to base your morality on.
This should be required viewing for all atheists who are so ignorant as to suggest that the pro-life movement is just a push for theocracy on the part of the Christian right.
my defunition of a soul would be a mine human or not thay have there own thoughts&feelings&will&even after birth or even adult hood we sare still devoping when it come to life for a life when heath or life of the mother ca,nt we at least be humane do thay have have to tear them part whill or you a saline saltion even animel killed for meat get beter treatment thay either live a full life or can be bread to soffer or and sone we wou,nt even have to kill any one if orens can be grown for scratch
@smartass250 why dot stake&human fetus,es listen to what anti childs righters say we ca,nt yous viblity becaus withc medical inprovments if ceep getiing earlyer&early the reason thay ca,nt survive outside the womb is because of there need food oxigene worth protection from infections i can see away to help fetus,se of any age.
I guess atheists and pro-life religious folks are just as passionate about social justice (i.e. defending the rights of the unborn) as they are about their respective beliefs concerning the existence of God. At least we found common ground in the abortion issue because our own human reason compels us to emphasize the value of human life at ANY stage of development. Thank you, all you pro-life atheists for defending human life. I extend to you my hand in friendship :)
@LatinRiteChristian: Most atheists hardly fall into this catagory. While their might be socially conservative atheists, indeed they are & Michael Novak wrote a wonderful book on the subject. Very few who claim atheism do uphold anykind of traditional moral ethic. That is usually the point of being an atheist. As Dostoevsky said, W/o God all things are permissible. Ultimately the only moral standard an atheist can up hold is one of social convention. That can't endure under pressure.
@VictorLepanto...But the fact that there ARE atheists who believe that abortion is unethical is a breath of fresh air to the Pro-Life movement. What is admirable about atheists is that they argue human existence from a rational perspective. Their greatest virtue is reason. Their greatest ally being scientific evidence. And, scientific evidence tell us that although an embryo might not "look" human to some people it is still carrying the basic foundation of human life...DNA.
You cannot just be pro-life without taking into account all situations. Everyone looks at this issue as some slut went around town banging guys and got pregnant. So therefore she does not deserve to kill that life inside her. I agree. But what about the good girl who has plans to marry and start her own family? Then she is dragged in a alley and raped by gang members. Should she be FORCED to carry that child around? I say NO. Taking a strong stand for either side, is selfish and ignorant.
@JabberCT In any case, the "slut" cant use the rape victim as a justification for her own abortion. There are lots of countries were abortion is illegal, but for rape and incest victims its legal
I think a great misconception is that a pro-life has to immediately be a religious zealot. I'm for gay rights, same sex marriage and am not personally religious, but abortion was always something I had trouble with accepting. I've come to the terms that I believe that life begins at conception and unless a woman was raped, was a victim of incest or unwillingly had sex, she is responsible for the life of the child which exists as an independent entity.
Personally, I think we regard killing as wrong because people in our vicinity who kill others are viewed as a threat to ourselves and because killing people in the in-group weakens the group relative to other groups. Abortion doesn't touch the first of those reasons. It does touch the latter one, but even contraception does that. If we care about such arguments it should probably be illegal for women to not be perpetually pregnant.
"Premise 1: Killing is wrong because it deprives someone of their future
Premise 2: The typical human fetus has a future-like-ours
Conclusion: Abortion deprives a fetus of a future-like-ours and is therefore immoral"
Premise 1 is false because the early fetus/embryo is not a "someone" any more than a sperm is. It can't have a first person perspective before neurogenesis. Again, we're in "Every sperm is sacred" territory. You could even dispute 1 as being the reason killing is regarded as wrong
@Gnomefro The sperm and the fetus are different things. The fetus marks a stage in the human organism's life. A sperm and egg independently are not stages in the life of a human being. They are required yes, but only when they are joined together do they create a human being. Every medical textbook defines life beginning at fertilization; invoking sperm as a comparison doesn't seem proper to me
Nothing wrong with questioning abortion, but arguments like "The fetus is a human, therefore abortion should be equated with murder" are too inane to deserve a response. It's right up there with "Every sperm is sacred".
Any discussion about abortion that does not discuss the fetus ability to suffer vs the mothers needs is simply not engaging the problem.
I look at incredibly reasonable atheists and think that the only reason they could have for being pro-choice is to spite religion which is a terrible thing to base your morality on.
tchapps1 4 days ago
@tchapps1 so true!
BuecherFuerAlle 22 hours ago
This should be required viewing for all atheists who are so ignorant as to suggest that the pro-life movement is just a push for theocracy on the part of the Christian right.
stallion4life 1 week ago
my defunition of a soul would be a mine human or not thay have there own thoughts&feelings&will&even after birth or even adult hood we sare still devoping when it come to life for a life when heath or life of the mother ca,nt we at least be humane do thay have have to tear them part whill or you a saline saltion even animel killed for meat get beter treatment thay either live a full life or can be bread to soffer or and sone we wou,nt even have to kill any one if orens can be grown for scratch
smartass250 2 weeks ago
@smartass250 why dot stake&human fetus,es listen to what anti childs righters say we ca,nt yous viblity becaus withc medical inprovments if ceep getiing earlyer&early the reason thay ca,nt survive outside the womb is because of there need food oxigene worth protection from infections i can see away to help fetus,se of any age.
smartass250 2 weeks ago
I guess atheists and pro-life religious folks are just as passionate about social justice (i.e. defending the rights of the unborn) as they are about their respective beliefs concerning the existence of God. At least we found common ground in the abortion issue because our own human reason compels us to emphasize the value of human life at ANY stage of development. Thank you, all you pro-life atheists for defending human life. I extend to you my hand in friendship :)
LatinRiteChristian 3 weeks ago 6
@LatinRiteChristian: Most atheists hardly fall into this catagory. While their might be socially conservative atheists, indeed they are & Michael Novak wrote a wonderful book on the subject. Very few who claim atheism do uphold anykind of traditional moral ethic. That is usually the point of being an atheist. As Dostoevsky said, W/o God all things are permissible. Ultimately the only moral standard an atheist can up hold is one of social convention. That can't endure under pressure.
VictorLepanto 3 weeks ago
@VictorLepanto...But the fact that there ARE atheists who believe that abortion is unethical is a breath of fresh air to the Pro-Life movement. What is admirable about atheists is that they argue human existence from a rational perspective. Their greatest virtue is reason. Their greatest ally being scientific evidence. And, scientific evidence tell us that although an embryo might not "look" human to some people it is still carrying the basic foundation of human life...DNA.
LatinRiteChristian 1 week ago
You cannot just be pro-life without taking into account all situations. Everyone looks at this issue as some slut went around town banging guys and got pregnant. So therefore she does not deserve to kill that life inside her. I agree. But what about the good girl who has plans to marry and start her own family? Then she is dragged in a alley and raped by gang members. Should she be FORCED to carry that child around? I say NO. Taking a strong stand for either side, is selfish and ignorant.
JabberCT 1 month ago
@JabberCT In any case, the "slut" cant use the rape victim as a justification for her own abortion. There are lots of countries were abortion is illegal, but for rape and incest victims its legal
Mardal 2 weeks ago
I think a great misconception is that a pro-life has to immediately be a religious zealot. I'm for gay rights, same sex marriage and am not personally religious, but abortion was always something I had trouble with accepting. I've come to the terms that I believe that life begins at conception and unless a woman was raped, was a victim of incest or unwillingly had sex, she is responsible for the life of the child which exists as an independent entity.
sunsetfear 1 month ago
Personally, I think we regard killing as wrong because people in our vicinity who kill others are viewed as a threat to ourselves and because killing people in the in-group weakens the group relative to other groups. Abortion doesn't touch the first of those reasons. It does touch the latter one, but even contraception does that. If we care about such arguments it should probably be illegal for women to not be perpetually pregnant.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
"Premise 1: Killing is wrong because it deprives someone of their future
Premise 2: The typical human fetus has a future-like-ours
Conclusion: Abortion deprives a fetus of a future-like-ours and is therefore immoral"
Premise 1 is false because the early fetus/embryo is not a "someone" any more than a sperm is. It can't have a first person perspective before neurogenesis. Again, we're in "Every sperm is sacred" territory. You could even dispute 1 as being the reason killing is regarded as wrong
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnomefro The sperm and the fetus are different things. The fetus marks a stage in the human organism's life. A sperm and egg independently are not stages in the life of a human being. They are required yes, but only when they are joined together do they create a human being. Every medical textbook defines life beginning at fertilization; invoking sperm as a comparison doesn't seem proper to me
sunsetfear 1 month ago 5
Nothing wrong with questioning abortion, but arguments like "The fetus is a human, therefore abortion should be equated with murder" are too inane to deserve a response. It's right up there with "Every sperm is sacred".
Any discussion about abortion that does not discuss the fetus ability to suffer vs the mothers needs is simply not engaging the problem.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
Good collection of videos but I was disappointed when it wasn't you speaking. I still support your work and I think you do an excellent job.
MrShooter7676 1 month ago