|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 7:33 pm
Just a thought.
pro-lifers, especially your christians, place a value on a fetus. they say it is "an innocent life". But are they really innocent?
(Lol, pro-choicers, back down with the parasite comments for a minute while I reveal the following~!) xd
So, where is this term "innocent" based off on?
None other than from the realm of Christianity.
Christianity's ideas that all people in the world are sinners, and as such there is a need of a savior to "cleanse" the sins away. So at the base, Christianity already has placed condemnation to people. That is, human beings are inherently bad. But back to "innocent" babies- hell, it's even disputed among some sects whether babies and small children are "innocent" before they are capable of making a decision for Christ (for spiritual salvation). Catholics baptize babies, afterall. There is absolutely no verse in the bible specifically mentioning the spiritual condition of very small children (nor non-children fetuses, for that matter), which is why there is much confusion in that area. It's as disputable as the topic of masterbation is.
so, are small children and babies *really* innocent, or is it more accurate to say they are assumed to be? wink
Remember that the bible has been used to justify a myraid of other beliefs/interpretations, backed up with bible verses and/or passages.
But still, the Christian right, a strong voting block in the USA, unianimously considers fetuses "innocent". Some Christians (maybe your fundamental and your messianic jews), due to the bible's silence on the matter, probably base those convictions on Jewish texts that espouse a child's inability to decide to follow their god until age 13 (And my dear Veled, please correct me if I'm wrong in that matter about your beliefs).
Also, if the term "innocent" is emphasized to babies or fetuses, then... it implies that adults arn't innocent in comparison! Isn't that in insulting epithet? Aside from the Christian view about being sinners, many adults are law-abiding citizens (or at least sincerely conform to the more serious social mores of their society.) Abortion is still legal. ...So how are adults "guilty"? Concluding this point, the beliefs that fetuses are "innocent" elates the status of the fetus ABOVE that of a fully developed human being.
"Hey Grippy, you satan-indwelled child-hater, how could you say fetuses arn't innocent, they haven't done anything!" *gasp*
Well, aside from leeching the wholistic health from the woman and other assets, nope, the fetus certainly hasn't done a flip of a thing. I mean, it doesn't think, it doesn't feel, or anything! xd wink *high fives the rest of the pro-choicers*
Here's my upfront beliefs on the matter: I wouldn't neccessarily classify babies or fetuses as "innocent", but it doesn't mean I think they're evil or anything. Same with all other humans, generally speaking. People arn't, as a group, inherently *insert your value here*. I don't agree with the Christian paradigm of all people being inherently "bad", so please, can we drop using such dualistic terms? Let's refuse to acknowledge that fetuses are "innocent", as it would give credit to a belief system that not everybody believes in.
my next post will acknowledge that it could be argued that fetuses/babies are selfish, which is sinful, which means that babies/fetuses arn't so innocent.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 8:10 pm
go you!
that was great!
I'm a Luthern so since I belive in the bible and all that some would expect me to be pro-life. But i can't be. That's just who I am! If someone want to have an abortion let them! So think ythat you are absolutly right!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 8:21 pm
Are babies/fetuses innocent? This post could argue against innocence by claiming that babies/fetuses are... guilty as charged by Christianity! the horrors! fetuses don't care about anyone... (hell, they don't even care about themselves since they don't think, LOL. xd , but i digress!) unborn kids get conceived, whether or not the woman wants to get conceived. unborn kids leech up all the nutrients which will permanently affect the woman... regardless of her wishes. unborn kids mishape the woman's body, and make her sick regardless of her wishes. unborn kids hog up a woman's body for a whopping portion of a year... and then rip open her v****a. babys? newborns? newborns don't give a rat's a** about their parents. they'll upset parent's sleep, drain finances, force the mother considering giving up her career and life-long dream wishes for the care of it, make nasty messes, ruin people's outings, and so on. They don't care about nobody but themselves. The kid wants to be warm, the kid wants to be held, the kid wants to be burped, the kid wants to be fed, the kid wants to be wiped of excrement, urine, and puke, the kid wants to be stimulated, the kid wants this and that and buddy you BETTER GIVE IT! That kid don't give a rat's a** about your needs. fetuses... and babies.. are selfish! (not to mention gluttonous!) Isn't selfishness a sin in the bible? So are fetuses/babies so "innocent"? Guilty as charged, worthy of hellfire in the arms of El Diablo! mmuaaaahahahaha twisted  Ohhh. You're saying I don't have any bible quotes that support the sinful and fallen nature of folk in their infancy? I'll pull some out of my butt here, but ~ Quote: Romans 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" Quote: Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Quote: 1John 5:17 "All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death." HOLD ON a minute, whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa WHOA. Before you bother writing rebuttals exposing the utter ridiculousness of this argument... I meant it to be that way. I'm mirroring the ridiculousness about how fetuses are "innocent" and "pure" and other doey-eyed, hallmark-occassion idealistic junk, therefore abortion=injustice=wrong. Those are just beliefs, ok? No scientific proof is out there claiming the scientific purity of a newborn or fetus soul. *shakes head*. Just ain't there, folks. ..In reality, babies have to be "selfish" in order to survive. If they didn't wail at 3 am in the forbidden morning, they might be missing out on some important nutrition, or eliminated from the foreign bodies that is their filth. *shrugs*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 8:39 pm
Akina L. go you! that was great! I'm a Luthern so since I belive in the bible and all that some would expect me to be pro-life. But i can't be. That's just who I am! If someone want to have an abortion let them! So think ythat you are absolutly right! /off topic discussion Thank you! I feel so *loved*! whee And sweetheart, I'm not against Christians themselves or anything. I know there are brilliant, open-minded, open-hearted Christians out there. (Sorry if I scared ya with my posts here, lol!) I am against, however, beliefs that oppress and repress other people. Beliefs which result in the destruction of our world. I am...horrified most by the extremely-conservative fundamentalist sub-cultures. They not only attempt to destroy outsiders through intolerance/bigotry/etc... but those sects destroys their own adherents. It's really sad at the core. /whoo hoo, end rant But yea.. One of the more enticing things about being pro-choice is that someone could be personally be convicted to be pro-life, and yet not impose their own views on other people. 3nodding . . . . OH, and if anyone is interested, I have an obviously biased website that shows an argument where the bible CAN be used to defend abortion! http://www.elroy.net/ehr/abortion.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 9:16 pm
.. I always wondered what would happen if I told the pro-lifers that I didn't believe that innocence was necessarily good or worthy of special privilage, or that selfishness was bad and worthy of condemnation. It drives me crazy how people go "hm, how selfish" and expect that to be taken as an argument.
[insert rant here about how selflessness was encouraged because it partially ensured the survival of "the hive" and benefitted current authority and still does]
Innocence is, in its most extreme form, naivete, and therefore selfishness. Selfishness is, in its most extreme form, complete self-absorbtion and denial of others.
Of course, selfishness is, in one of its best forms, self perservation. And innocence.. well, it benefitted others. Tales of dowries, anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2005 12:59 pm
And people wonder why I'm an Aetheist rolleyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:22 pm
Embyr Arrikanez .. I always wondered what would happen if I told the pro-lifers that I didn't believe that innocence was necessarily good or worthy of special privilage, or that selfishness was bad and worthy of condemnation. It drives me crazy how people go "hm, how selfish" and expect that to be taken as an argument. [insert rant here about how selflessness was encouraged because it partially ensured the survival of "the hive" and benefitted current authority and still does] Innocence is, in its most extreme form, naivete, and therefore selfishness. Selfishness is, in its most extreme form, complete self-absorbtion and denial of others. Of course, selfishness is, in one of its best forms, self perservation. And innocence.. well, it benefitted others. Tales of dowries, anyone? Exactly! It's that belief that fetuses = innocent = therefore, fetuses are special, that makes some people want to fight for their "rights" even more. a woman's innocence (sexual purity) benefitted others = dowries = biblical days = women are property. hmmm.. interesting connections. cool
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:16 am
Before a fetus can survive on its own outside the womb, it can technically be called a paracite, becuase it lives off the mother without benefiting her in any way, and since the general view on paracites is bad, how can a fetus be called innocent.
This is just a possible arguement and not my actual opinion, I believe innocence is an abstract idea in these circumstances and should not be used to describe an unborn lifeform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:50 am
Know what I always wondered?
How something can be innocent if it's incapable of guilt or being guilty (being that it can't to anything).
And how it was anyless selfish to live with a parasite than kill it.
So I agree with Grippy. *hugs*
In fact, I think I'll just go with the Vampire Chronicles definition of innocence. *looks up passage where Lestat and Marius are talking about innocence*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:36 am
sybex Shark Know what I always wondered?
How something can be innocent if it's incapable of guilt or being guilty (being that it can't to anything).
And how it was anyless selfish to live with a parasite than kill it.
So I agree with Grippy. *hugs*
In fact, I think I'll just go with the Vampire Chronicles definition of innocence. *looks up passage where Lestat and Marius are talking about innocence* not only that but fetuses make women unable to perform their function, MORE CHILDREN! *gasp* imagine it, nine months without being able to conceive! off topic, I hate those books. prefer legacy of kain games, more brutal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:23 am
Been meaning to post here for a while...All I have to say is go Grippy. Anything I wanted to add wound up being said as I read on. *glomp* You did a great job of sticking it to the Pro-Lifers. domokun
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 4:30 pm
Fabulous arguments! xd *hi-fives Grippy*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:24 pm
Fetuses are fetuses, Babies are babies..... "innocence" is all in the perspective
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 11:36 pm
I'm an agnostic leaning towards atheism, so I have no real religious perspective on this issue. I have only my own philosophy to render, and that is that it simply isn't a loaf of bread until it's cooked and pulled out of the oven. Until then, it's dough.
For the purpose of compromise, however, I deeply hope for a day when it's possible to remove a fetus from the womb (perhaps surgically) and place it into some form of suspended animation (perhaps cryogenically) and then later implanted into a willing surrogate mother. This would bring an end to the controversy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:27 am
Ryoma Kusaragi I'm an agnostic leaning towards atheism, so I have no real religious perspective on this issue. I have only my own philosophy to render, and that is that it simply isn't a loaf of bread until it's cooked and pulled out of the oven. Until then, it's dough. For the purpose of compromise, however, I deeply hope for a day when it's possible to remove a fetus from the womb (perhaps surgically) and place it into some form of suspended animation (perhaps cryogenically) and then later implanted into a willing surrogate mother. This would bring an end to the controversy. I think that doing that would only stir more controversy, people would see it as turning human life into an industry, selling human beings to people for a profit. I don't think doing that would satisfy anti-abortionists anyways, because I think that many of them are not as concerned about the "babies" than they are about punishing women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
