Take for instance, the morality on abortion from christian Italo and atheist Logicboy;


Case- A WOMAN IS 3 MONTHS PREGNANT. HOWEVER, SHE IS THINKING OF ABORTING THE BABY BECAUSE HER HUSBAND DIED 2 MONTHS INTO THE PREGNANCY. SHE WAS A HOUSEWIFE WITH NO INCOME AND THE HUSBAND JUST BOUGHT A HOUSE ON MORTGAGE (DEBT) BECAUSE OF THE INCOMING BABY. SHE WILL LOSE THE HOUSE AND SHE NOW NEEDS TO GET A JOB TO AFFORD RENTING A PLACE TO STAY. SHE HAS NO CLOSE RELATIVES TO HELP OR EVEN LOOK AFTER THE BABY WHEN/IF IT GETS BORN. SHE WAS AN ORPHAN WHO GREW UP IN AN ORPHANAGE. SHE IS ALSO DEPRESSED WITH THE LOSS OF HER HUSBAND. HER HUSBAND'S RELATIVES LIVE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY AND THEIR SUPPORT HAS BEEN VERY LITTLE- HER MOTHER INLAW (WHOM IS SICK WITH CANCER, BY THE WAY) CAME FOR ONLY A WEEK AND TRAVELLED OUT BACK TO HER NATIVE COUNTRY OF GERMANY. THE FUNERAL WAS CHEAP AND QUICK. CREMATION AND SCATTERING OF THE ASHES- ALL IN ONE DAY. THE INLAW GAVE HER $100 DOLLARS AND LEFT.



[size=14pt]Logicboy's perspective[/size]
-She should abort the baby if she wants to. The choice is in her hands

Reasoning
a) Does it harm the survival a human?
-Yes (if a foetus is a human). The foetus will die

b) Does it harm the survival of others?
-No, abortion wont affect the mother or the doctors or the society

c) Does the action work? Does it have more benefits than negatives?
-Yes

Advantages
-The woman gets to have a chance at working without a burden
-The woman would have a less financial constrain without the baby (all of her income goes to her)
-The woman wont have to share her depression with the baby. A depressed mother is usually a bad mother.
-The state wont have another welfare baby on govt assistance
-The woman would have an easier time dating for another husband without a baby


Disadvantages
-The physical pain during the abortion process
-The mental pain of remembering the abortion
-The feotus dies

*the obvious caveat here is that there has to be counselling before the abortion. The counselling doctor would look at other alternatives before abortion- giving the child to foster care or orphanage etc.

[size=14pt]Italo's perspective[/size]
The woman should not have abortion

Reasoning
Abortion is murder and God said "thou shalt not kill". The woman is looking for an easy way out. Keep the baby.

Logicboy with all due respect why are we recycling arguments that have been discussed regularly on this board for at least 3 years.

GeneralShepherd: Logicboy with all due respect why are we recycling arguments that have been discussed regularly on this board for at least 3 years.

Will you sharrap? This is between Italo and I....not some recycled thread

I would advocate for women to choose for themselves, they would be filled in on the advantages and disadvantages and also put through rehabilitation if the need be...

davien: I would advocate for women to choose for themselves, they would be filled in on the advantages and disadvantages and also put through rehabilitation if the need be...

Well said!!

The choice should be in women's hands........

TheBigUrban2:


Will you sharrap? This is between Italo and I....not some recycled thread

hahahaha see your UK sojourn hasn't thought you any manners at all.

GeneralShepherd:

hahahaha see your UK sojourn hasn't thought you any manners at all.

My reasoning:

Abortion/support for it:

1) deprives another of its fundamental right to life.
2) is an abuse of freedom.
3) encourages the strong to prey on the weak.
4) shows irresponsibility.
5) etc

TheBigUrban2:

[size=14pt]Logicboy's perspective[/size]
-She should abort the baby if she wants to. The choice is in her hands

Reasoning
a) Does it harm the survival a human?
-Yes (if a foetus is a human). The foetus will die

YES it does!

TheBigUrban2:
b) Does it harm the survival of others?
-No, abortion wont affect the mother or the doctors or the society

YES it does! The baby is a member of the society and what affects one member affects all.

TheBigUrban2:
c) Does the action work? Does it have more benefits than negatives?
-Yes

NO it doesn't! A murderer can list out a zillion reasons to commit murder but the zillion reasons cannot supersede one basic reason: the victim has a right to life.

TheBigUrban2:
Advantages
-The woman gets to have a chance at working without a burden
-The woman would have a less financial constrain without the baby (all of her income goes to her)
-The woman wont have to share her depression with the baby. A depressed mother is usually a bad mother.
-The state wont have another welfare baby on govt assistance
-The woman would have an easier time dating for another husband without a baby


Disadvantages
-The physical pain during the abortion process
-The mental pain of remembering the abortion
-The feotus dies

*the obvious caveat here is that there has to be counselling before the abortion. The counselling doctor would look at other alternatives before abortion- giving the child to foster care or orphanage etc.

All your reasons cannot supersede the child's right to life.

striktlymi: My reasoning:

Abortion/support for it:

1) deprives another of its fundamental right to life.
2) is an abuse of freedom.
3) encourages the strong to prey on the weak.
4) shows irresponsibility.
5) etc

1) Right to life applies to human life.
2) How?
3) That is nature (or if you believe in God, that is how God created the world)
4) Can also show responsibility. Family planning
5) etc

striktlymi:

YES it does!



YES it does! The baby is a member of the society and what affects one member affects all.



NO it doesn't! A murderer can list out a zillion reasons to commit murder but the zillion reasons cannot supersede one basic reason: the victim has a right to life.



All your reasons cannot supersede the child's right to life.

You do know that there is a difference between living and surviving?


Let us say that the woman doesnt abort.

-Will you feed the child when the mother is in debt/penury/poverty?
-Will you be there to save the child when the mother is suffering from clinical depression and neglects the baby?
-Will you be there to save the child when the mother collapses under the pressure of motherhood?
-Will you be there when the child is abused in a catholic orphanage. repeatedly?



Having a child is a responsibility. Financial and emotional. A broke and unstable woman might not be able to raise a child.




You only care that the child is born. If it dies of starvation in the next few days, so be it. If it grows in an environment of neglect and abuse, so be it.


May your unaborted descendants never grow in such hazardous conditions

TheBigUrban2:
You do know that there is a difference between living and surviving?


Let us say that the woman doesnt abort.

-Will you feed the child when the mother is in debt/penury/poverty?
-Will you be there to save the child when the mother is suffering from clinical depression and neglects the baby?
-Will you be there to save the child when the mother collapses under the pressure of motherhood?
-Will you be there when the child is abused in a catholic orphanage. repeatedly?

Let's tweak the case you have in the OP. Let's say the husband died immediately the woman was delivered off the baby. Would it then be right by your standards to kill the child in order to avoid all that you have stated up there and help the lady achieve all the 'goodies' you have in the OP?

TheBigUrban2:
Having a child is a responsibility. Financial and emotional. A broke and unstable woman might not be able to raise a child.

I agree with you here completely. Having a child requires thought and a whole lot of planning. One shouldn't just have a child for the sake of having one. Responsible planning requires that the couple put into consideration their financial and emotional status.

The couple did not plan well. A good plan should be such that if either or both of the couple are not around to fend for their child, there should be some life line for the child to hang onto. This was not done hence the difficulties this poor lady is facing.

However, this difficulties not withstanding, it will be very irresponsible for the lady to treat the child as the cause of her woes. If she would not kill the child, irrespective of her difficulties, if the child had been born before the demise of her husband, then she has no moral standing to kill the child now.

TheBigUrban2:
You only care that the child is born. If it dies of starvation in the next few days, so be it. If it grows in an environment of neglect and abuse, so be it.

That is where you get it very wrong. I do care about the quality of life the child would be exposed to when born. I am deeply concerned that the lady would have to go through a hellish experience by having this baby. I am worried about what would become of the child if he is not trained right.

Do we then, as moral beings, go about killing every man, woman and child who are faced with abject poverty just because we believe their burden is too heavy for them to carry? Do we decide to play God with the lives of children because we are not ready to give a dime for their upkeep and their comfort may mean our discomfort?

LB, no matter how long, how hard we look at it or the number of arguments we bring forth, the bottom line will always be: Abortion is Evil and the sooner we kick it out of our world, the better it would be for everyone.

striktlymi:

Let's tweak the case you have in the OP. Let's say the husband died immediately the woman was delivered off the baby. Would it then be right by your standards to kill the child in order to avoid all that you have stated up there and help the lady achieve all the 'goodies' you have in the OP?

Abortion happens in the 9 months of pregnancy. Your question is outside that time frame hence, invalid!!!!!

A foetus is a different case from a baby outside the womb.


The option of abortion is gone. Next thing to do is find out how to take care of the baby

striktlymi:
I agree with you here completely. Having a child requires thought and a whole lot of planning. One shouldn't just have a child for the sake of having one. Responsible planning requires that the couple put into consideration their financial and emotional status.

The couple did not plan well. A good plan should be such that if either or both of the couple are not around to fend for their child, there should be some life line for the child to hang onto. This was not done hence the difficulties this poor lady is facing.

However, this difficulties not withstanding, it will be very irresponsible for the lady to treat the child as the cause of her woes. If she would not kill the child, irrespective of her difficulties, if the child had been born before the demise of her husband, then she has no moral standing to kill the child now.

What do you mean they didnt plan well? What if the father and mother were both poor (unemployment has been high in the USA) and the husband just got a good job. They planned to have a house and savings for the baby. Remember that women's biological clocks start ticking ominously after 30. What if the mother was 34 when married/pregnant? What if the woman was going to be a housewife for a year before geting a job?

They had a plan. A clear plan but death can happen. What if Ebola killed your family business?

Your argument is ridiculous. No one is omniscient.



As for your argument in bold, it is nonsense. The woman isnt using her child as the cause of her woes. She could be taking a decision to ease her burden. The woman is already depressed and feels that she cant cope with putting that depression on the child


A feotus in the womb is different from a child already born.

TheBigUrban2:


1) Right to life applies to human life.
2) How?
3) That is nature (or if you believe in God, that is how God created the world)
4) Can also show responsibility. Family planning
5) etc

1) What is the difference between the life you have and that of a fetus?
2) Right to kill the unborn.
3) Humans are exceptions to that rule.
4) Killing humans indiscriminately does not show responsibility. If abortion is part of family planning, then murder too should be a way to plan for one's family size.

striktlymi:

That is where you get it very wrong. I do care about the quality of life the child would be exposed to when born. I am deeply concerned that the lady would have to go through a hellish experience by having this baby. I am worried about what would become of the child if he is not trained right.

Do we then, as moral beings, go about killing every man, woman and child who are faced with abject poverty just because we believe their burden is too heavy for them to carry? Do we decide to play God with the lives of children because we are not ready to give a dime for their upkeep and their comfort may mean our discomfort?

LB, no matter how long, how hard we look at it or the number of arguments we bring forth, the bottom line will always be: Abortion is Evil and the sooner we kick it out of our world, the better it would be for everyone.

You do not care about the mother after the child is born. Unless you are willing to advocate for federal govt spending on single, broke mothers' income and therapy, please keep Quiet.

You only care if the child is born. If the child dies one month after it is born due to starvation, so be it.

What measures have you put in place to help the depressed mother raise the child? How many orphanages do you know in remote villages or even some cities?


What do you even know about therapy? Do you know how many people are on anti-depressants in UK?




You also keep mixing abortion with killing people who are already born. I hope you stop using this false argument; "if you cant kill a 5 year old child because the parents are too poor to take care of the child, then, you cant kill a child in the womb". Non sequitur. It doesnt follow.

TheBigUrban2:

Abortion happens in the 9 months of pregnancy. Your question is outside that time frame hence, invalid!!!!!

A foetus is a different case from a baby outside the womb.


The option of abortion is gone. Next thing to do is find out how to take care of the baby

Case closed!

Your comment above is enough evidence to show that the lady has no reason whatsoever to kill her child, whether in the womb or outside the womb.

striktlymi:

1) What is the difference between the life you have and that of a fetus?
2) Right to kill the unborn.
3) Humans are exceptions to that rule.
4) Killing humans indiscriminately does not show responsibility. If abortion is part of family planning, then murder too should be a way to plan for one's family size.

1) I am independent of my biological mother, I can represent/appear in court to fight for my human rights, My consciousness is undeniable etc
2) There is no such right to kill the unborn. There is only a choice to abort a pregnancy
3) Survival of the fittest. Nature is always like that.
4) Argument does not follow. Abortion is not killing indiscriminately- it takes counselling and discussions with medical practictioners before the decision is made. Killing does not equate murder. You kill in self defence and no one will claim murder. Same with a woman's choice to have an abortion

striktlymi:

Case closed!

Your comment above is enough evidence to show that the lady has no reason whatsoever to kill her child, whether in the womb or outside the womb.

Common sense will tell you that outside the womb is different from inside the womb, and that we have different rules for different cases.

Religious fanatics are happy or ecstatic to shed the blood of infidels or non believers. But when it comes to abortion "No". Mehn f.uck you and your sense of morality.

She has every right to kill the fetus, fact is it is a part of her and relies explicitly on her for its survival .It is not human because it does not exist independently cause killing an independent creature is termed murder because its organic matter and biological systems are completely independent from the mother after birth.Religious fanatics will still disagree tho.The decision should be as easy as removing a cancerous kidney

1ord: She has every right to kill the fetus, fact is it is a part of her and relies explicitly on her for its survival .It is not human because it does not exist independently cause killing an independent creature is termed murder because its organic matter and biological systems are completely dependent from the mother after birth.Religious fanatics will still disagree tho.The decision should be as easy as removing a cancerous kidney

The decision gets harder as the feotus grows

TheBigUrban2:


The decision gets harder as the feotus grows

This is because the cell slowly starts developing sentience.And the mother slowly starts feeling this other presence This feeling is further bolstered by hormones that she secretes and the child also releases.Just so you know baby's are born blind but know their mother through the imprint of the hormone. Thats why they stop crying immediately they are in her arms albeit blind. That is why the decision has to be made swiftly. Just so you know to me an abortion after 6 months is murder. You had a good 4 months whilst the fetus lacked proper development to do it. What people need is education

1ord: This is because the cell slowly starts developing sentience.And the mother slowly starts feeling this other presence This feeling is further bolstered by hormones that she secretes and the child also releases.Just so you know baby's are born blind but know their mother through the imprint of the hormone. Thats why they stop crying immediately they are in her arms albeit blind. That is why the decision has to be made swiftly. Just so you know to me an abortion after 6 months is murder. You had a good 4 months whilst the fetus lacked proper development to do it. What people need is education

Yep.....but there is no abortion counselling or family planning counselling in majority of Nigeria. Some that do it are the same religiously bigoted tools that would even bring more harm to families/women.

Striktlymi ran away?

TheBigUrban2: Striktlymi ran away?

Thought the case was already closed with the admission you made up there?

striktlymi:

Thought the case was already closed with the admission you made up there?

Does lying come to you naturally?

None of my comments here qualifies as an admission....rather, I see you running away when you're points are being nullified


mtchew

Let's try this again...

Why is a foetus not a human being?

striktlymi: Let's try this again...

Why is a foetus not a human being?

Stop running around the bush like a rat.


How does your question answer this scenario;

Case- A WOMAN IS 3 MONTHS PREGNANT. HOWEVER, SHE IS THINKING OF ABORTING THE BABY BECAUSE HER HUSBAND DIED 2 MONTHS INTO THE PREGNANCY. SHE WAS A HOUSEWIFE WITH NO INCOME AND THE HUSBAND JUST BOUGHT A HOUSE ON MORTGAGE (DEBT) BECAUSE OF THE INCOMING BABY. SHE WILL LOSE THE HOUSE AND SHE NOW NEEDS TO GET A JOB TO AFFORD RENTING A PLACE TO STAY. SHE HAS NO CLOSE RELATIVES TO HELP OR EVEN LOOK AFTER THE BABY WHEN/IF IT GETS BORN. SHE WAS AN ORPHAN WHO GREW UP IN AN ORPHANAGE. SHE IS ALSO DEPRESSED WITH THE LOSS OF HER HUSBAND. HER HUSBAND'S RELATIVES LIVE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY AND THEIR SUPPORT HAS BEEN VERY LITTLE- HER MOTHER INLAW (WHOM IS SICK WITH CANCER, BY THE WAY) CAME FOR ONLY A WEEK AND TRAVELLED OUT BACK TO HER NATIVE COUNTRY OF GERMANY. THE FUNERAL WAS CHEAP AND QUICK. CREMATION AND SCATTERING OF THE ASHES- ALL IN ONE DAY. THE INLAW GAVE HER $100 DOLLARS AND LEFT.

A woman has no means to raise a baby and no access to good orphanage/foster care for her impending baby. She is 3 months pregnant, broke, lonely and depressed.

What is your solution? I am no longer interested in your useless theology. I know many women in this problem.....how do we proceed?

striktlymi: Let's try this again...

Why is a foetus not a human being?

Guy i think your brain is actually dead ohh, are you s.tu.ipd? A fucking fetus is a fusion between a cell and an egg. It is a fucking cell and for some period of months it is still considered a cell because it is not alive and not functional and has no functional developed brain or nervous system so its not considered human. Pls try educating yourself why should we suffer because of your ignorance. Pls kill yourself.At every turn you religious folks act stupid

1ord: Guy i think your brain is actually dead ohh, are you s.tu.ipd? A fucking fetus is a fusion between a cell and an egg. It is a fucking cell and for some period of months it is still considered a cell because it is not alive and not functional and has no functional developed brain or nervous system so its not considered human. Pls try educating yourself why should we suffer because of your ignorance. Pls kill yourself.At every turn you religious folks act stupid

I swear, these people can be annoying. Repeating their nonsense talking points over and over again

I dont know if they are really that foolish or they just act ignorant.