Author Topic: All women should be pregnant all the time...  (Read 2239 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
All women should be pregnant all the time...
« on: January 30, 2009, 08:16:59 PM »
I brought this up in another discussion and thought I'd start a thread on the subject.

The right wing argument against abortion is that it destroys human life. While pro-abortion advocates generally draw the line for being "human" at 3 months, and say that a woman should be free to abort prior to that time (this is a very generic description, I know there are other time frames considered acceptable by others), pro-lifers draw the line at conception, saying that once an egg is fertilized, it is a human being and needs protection.

I think the pro-lifers should go one further. Throw out the line. There is no need to draw it.  All females who have started menstruating should be pregnant all of the time. To not be pregnant all the time is destroying life. Every single egg is a potential human, and it is our responsibility to make sure that it has a chance to grow.

Every female should be pregnant from the first month they are able to start until the become barren. I expect a minimum or 30 kids per woman to be born, and with scientific research, it may be possible to make that number much larger.

Anyone asking how those children could be afforded is being selfish.  Anyone questioning the ability of the medical system to absorb thousands of births per day per hospital is voicing petty and self-centered concerns.  Anyone worried that the earth could not handle that many people, anyone saying there wouldn't be enough food, anyone concerned about housing the additional millions, anyone claiming concerns about the social implications, crime, the burden on the education system or any other "problem" they can imagine is just being a self-serving, uncaring egomaniac who doesn't appreciate that we are all here to serve God and the best way to serve God is to make servants.

Women right now who are against abortion but not pregnant are killing a child just as surely as that doctor in the abortion clinic.  By deciding not to be pregnant for any reason whatsoever that person is selfishly denying an egg a chance to become human. No saying "Its not a human, its just a potential human" is hiding their selfishness. Any woman who supports abortion but who is not pregnant is a hypocrite is she thinks her not being pregnant is different than aborting.  It is exactly the same thing. A life is being thrown away.

Men don't get off easily under my scheme.  Each male must masterbate at least three times a day and collect their semen in bottles for freezing so that their semen can be used along with each woman's husbands donation(if she has one) to assure impregnation each month. With a legally mandated and plentiful supply of semen for each woman, all women capable of pregnancy would probably get pregnant.

Since women generally kick out 12 or 13 eggs a year, they should also probably be imprisoned for only having one kid a year and killing the rest. Just on general principles. Men, of course, would get it worse because they produce so many more potential kiddies. Not only would they have to go to prison, but they would have to watch "The View" over and over and over. But that's God's will.

I don't see how pro-lifers could possibly object to this idea.  Life is sacred, and its not up to us to decide otherwise.

In order to show the rest of us how dedicated they are to life, all pro-lifers should go on this regimen immediately. They would have to drop the "save myself for marriage" excuse, which is obviously a selfish attempt to keep from having babies.  They would also have to resist other subtle excuses ("I, like, wanna finish middle school") and stuff like that. Not enough money? Irrelevant. No more bedrooms? Irrelevant. No more clean air or water? Irrelevant. Wal-Mart out of diapers? Irrelevant.

I'm sure I'm not the first person to come up with this, which means that the right has already come up with a bunch of excuses as to why this is ridiculous. In their minds, its just fine to have excuses and reasons for not doing the right thing, but should a woman want an abortion at two month, she is the bad one, the evil one, the murder.  If Christian women aren't pumping out at least 30-35 kids in their lifetime, they are murders too, and they need to be called on it.

I hear that God didn't cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden because of sin. It was because they only had two kids.
I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline alejo_radical

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2009, 08:49:16 PM »
I actually had a debate about this same concept with someone who was against abortion, and he thought i was crazy. Then I realized he was not a very educated person. HEre is the link:



I made the same claim, that women are aborting every time, since an egg is a form of life. And he said that an unfertilized egg was no life, which doesn't make sense, because having only 1 cell or 2 cells doesn't make something more alive. It's just once humans are past that threshold which is the three months.

But in any case, I realized these people really have no clue as to why they think abortion is bad. They think it is at the same level as murder, which it obviously isn't. It is always up to the women to decide, because they have also the right to live as they desire, they are not really killing anyone, only preventing a life from being formed, but that is the same thing they do when they don't have sex.

In any case, nice post :D glad to see someone thinks the way I do :D

Offline Husky

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1241
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Atheist Dog
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2009, 09:05:56 PM »
I am not against abortions, if they are done for the right reasons. But I find the idea that every egg/sperm is a potential human being a bit of a stretch.

For a start, it's impossible to fertilise every single egg or make sure every sperm gets an egg.

Everyone has different ideas on when does an egg/sperm become a human. Honestly, I don't know nor have a stand on when does life begin. If we were to push back the time to pre fertilisation. Can we stretch it a little and go back to the time before spermatogenesis? Is a spermatogonium (N=46) also a potential human being? Should we research into harvesting spermatogoniums and making sure they are saved?

Not saying you are wrong. But that it's a grey area. And nobody can say for sure which part of the grey zone is the demarcation line located.

I believe that you believe your God is real. It's called a DELUSION.

Offline alejo_radical

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2009, 09:13:28 PM »
I am not against abortions, if they are done for the right reasons. But I find the idea that every egg/sperm is a potential human being a bit of a stretch.

For a start, it's impossible to fertilise every single egg or make sure every sperm gets an egg.

Everyone has different ideas on when does an egg/sperm become a human. Honestly, I don't know nor have a stand on when does life begin. If we were to push back the time to pre fertilisation. Can we stretch it a little and go back to the time before spermatogenesis? Is a spermatogonium (N=46) also a potential human being? Should we research into harvesting spermatogoniums and making sure they are saved?

Not saying you are wrong. But that it's a grey area. And nobody can say for sure which part of the grey zone is the demarcation line located.



Yeah, that is exactly right.
But it seems to me that babies should be born when a couple wants them, or at least the mother wants it. If she doesn't want the baby, she should be able to abort, if it is done early on. Once it's gone over some time, the risk for her is too high to abort, and the fetus is way too developed already, so might as well have the baby. For the most part, women don't abort, that is something I have noticed from most of my friends that get pregnant, and the ones that do abort, well I know they are better off, cause especially in the country where I come from, it is impossible for single mothers to raise a child, and people don't adopt too much either.

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #4 on: January 30, 2009, 09:22:45 PM »
I know what I suggested in the OP is ridiculous, but to me it is just carrying the anti-abortion argument to another level.  If aborting a fetus is murder, then not being pregnant when one could be is also murder. Makes sense to me.

If no excuse for an abortion is considered acceptable, then no excuse for not being pregnant is acceptable. Right?
I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline Husky

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1241
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Atheist Dog
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2009, 09:26:14 PM »
Yeah, that is exactly right.
But it seems to me that babies should be born when a couple wants them, or at least the mother wants it. If she doesn't want the baby, she should be able to abort, if it is done early on. Once it's gone over some time, the risk for her is too high to abort, and the fetus is way too developed already, so might as well have the baby. For the most part, women don't abort, that is something I have noticed from most of my friends that get pregnant, and the ones that do abort, well I know they are better off, cause especially in the country where I come from, it is impossible for single mothers to raise a child, and people don't adopt too much either.

Hmm... Again, it's a grey area. Everyone has their own view on that. It's a very emotional thing. Some women break down after seeing their aborted fetus cos the "see the tiny arms and legs" blah blah.

For me. I am pro abortion if early screening detects some obvious and serious genetic abnormality such as Down's Syndrome. I find that it's actually selfish to even want to deliver the baby. The child will have difficulties that the parents cannot even imagine and face a lifetime of discrimination.

As for whether a couple should be given rights to abort a child if they are not ready. I am a bit uncomfortable with the idea. Well, there are condoms and there's Postinor. On the other hand, I am not sure what I will do if my gf and I have a little accident so to speak. So I do not want to judge others who have been there and made their choices.
I believe that you believe your God is real. It's called a DELUSION.

Offline Husky

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1241
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Atheist Dog
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2009, 09:35:14 PM »
I know what I suggested in the OP is ridiculous, but to me it is just carrying the anti-abortion argument to another level.  If aborting a fetus is murder, then not being pregnant when one could be is also murder. Makes sense to me.

If no excuse for an abortion is considered acceptable, then no excuse for not being pregnant is acceptable. Right?

I wouldn't use the word ridiculous. I would just say it's a bit of a stretch. But that's the whole idea about discussions. Someone floats a radical idea, we discuss. I don't have to agree with you on the ideas. In fact, I disagree on quite a few things. In other posts as well. But you do have some interesting ideas.

Ridiculous is believing in some omnipotent and omnibenevolent being as we watch thousands of people suffering/dying everyday...
I believe that you believe your God is real. It's called a DELUSION.

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2009, 10:41:17 PM »
I brought this up in another discussion and thought I'd start a thread on the subject.

The right wing argument against abortion is that it destroys human life. While pro-abortion advocates generally draw the line for being "human" at 3 months, and say that a woman should be free to abort prior to that time (this is a very generic description, I know there are other time frames considered acceptable by others), pro-lifers draw the line at conception, saying that once an egg is fertilized, it is a human being and needs protection.

I think the pro-lifers should go one further. Throw out the line. There is no need to draw it.  All females who have started menstruating should be pregnant all of the time. To not be pregnant all the time is destroying life. Every single egg is a potential human, and it is our responsibility to make sure that it has a chance to grow.

Every female should be pregnant from the first month they are able to start until the become barren. I expect a minimum or 30 kids per woman to be born, and with scientific research, it may be possible to make that number much larger.

Anyone asking how those children could be afforded is being selfish.  Anyone questioning the ability of the medical system to absorb thousands of births per day per hospital is voicing petty and self-centered concerns.  Anyone worried that the earth could not handle that many people, anyone saying there wouldn't be enough food, anyone concerned about housing the additional millions, anyone claiming concerns about the social implications, crime, the burden on the education system or any other "problem" they can imagine is just being a self-serving, uncaring egomaniac who doesn't appreciate that we are all here to serve God and the best way to serve God is to make servants.

Women right now who are against abortion but not pregnant are killing a child just as surely as that doctor in the abortion clinic.  By deciding not to be pregnant for any reason whatsoever that person is selfishly denying an egg a chance to become human. No saying "Its not a human, its just a potential human" is hiding their selfishness. Any woman who supports abortion but who is not pregnant is a hypocrite is she thinks her not being pregnant is different than aborting.  It is exactly the same thing. A life is being thrown away.

Men don't get off easily under my scheme.  Each male must masterbate at least three times a day and collect their semen in bottles for freezing so that their semen can be used along with each woman's husbands donation(if she has one) to assure impregnation each month. With a legally mandated and plentiful supply of semen for each woman, all women capable of pregnancy would probably get pregnant.

Since women generally kick out 12 or 13 eggs a year, they should also probably be imprisoned for only having one kid a year and killing the rest. Just on general principles. Men, of course, would get it worse because they produce so many more potential kiddies. Not only would they have to go to prison, but they would have to watch "The View" over and over and over. But that's God's will.

I don't see how pro-lifers could possibly object to this idea.  Life is sacred, and its not up to us to decide otherwise.

In order to show the rest of us how dedicated they are to life, all pro-lifers should go on this regimen immediately. They would have to drop the "save myself for marriage" excuse, which is obviously a selfish attempt to keep from having babies.  They would also have to resist other subtle excuses ("I, like, wanna finish middle school") and stuff like that. Not enough money? Irrelevant. No more bedrooms? Irrelevant. No more clean air or water? Irrelevant. Wal-Mart out of diapers? Irrelevant.

I'm sure I'm not the first person to come up with this, which means that the right has already come up with a bunch of excuses as to why this is ridiculous. In their minds, its just fine to have excuses and reasons for not doing the right thing, but should a woman want an abortion at two month, she is the bad one, the evil one, the murder.  If Christian women aren't pumping out at least 30-35 kids in their lifetime, they are murders too, and they need to be called on it.

I hear that God didn't cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden because of sin. It was because they only had two kids.

Sortasuperb,

If that is the extreme of the pro-life position then the extreme of the pro-abortion position is murder all babies.  Why draw the line at 3 months ?   Why not 9 months?  Why not kill them after they are born ?  Why not kill all children ?  They are a burden on the tax system and an inconvenience to parents.

Which extreme would you choose ?


Offline Iamnotarobot

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2009, 11:06:50 PM »
OK - I realize the facetiousness of this statement, and it made me smile a little, but I figured I'd throw in my two cents. When you're pregnant all the time, breast milk pretty much ceases to be produced. Actually, full-time nursing is a decent, semi-reliable birth control method. So if you give birth, and then get pregnant immediately (and no doctor or WOMAN would recommend that, as it's asinine), your milk supply will suffer and in all likelihood will diminish to the point of non-production. The woman's health would deteriorate because she's trying to support three lives! So, that's all I have to say about that. But I realize you're not serious about your argument.  :)

Oooh! I just thought of something (this is an edit): wouldn't feeding your baby be considered murdering any chance of a new human being coming into existance???  LOL
« Last Edit: January 30, 2009, 11:08:28 PM by Iamnotarobot »

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2009, 11:09:54 PM »

Sortasuperb,

If that is the extreme of the pro-life position then the extreme of the pro-abortion position is murder all babies.  Why draw the line at 3 months ?   Why not 9 months?  Why not kill them after they are born ?  Why not kill all children ?  They are a burden on the tax system and an inconvenience to parents.

Which extreme would you choose ?



A little touchy are we? Is this like a sensitive subject area or something?

I would choose reason. Understand that many (not all) abortions are chosen by women who for any of a number of good reasons feel that it is not a good time to have a child. We have a flaws in our society that make certain undertakings very difficult, and raising children is often one of those difficulties.  To make a blanket statement that no woman may ever get an abortion because God doesn't like it that we are killing children is to a)make up stuff and b)ignore the reality of a desperate woman's situation.

Toss in pregnancies due to rape or incest, and the situation is even more desperate.

Yes, there are legitimate complaints about some abortions.  Some women are having them very nonchalantly, and I can understand being upset about that. But many women have abortions because they can' afford to be pregnant.  They can't afford to have a child when they are already trying to raise a couple of others. Any of a huge number of reasons are legitimate ones when it comes to terminating a pregnancy.

If the Christian right can't accept those reasons and compromise on the issue, then they shouldn't be compromising with themselves either. All women always pregnant is a logical extension of their excuses, and I was just presenting it for your convenience.

I don't like that women feel a need to get abortions.  I also don't like that we imprison people for pot because the cigarette companies started an anti-pot campaign in the 1930's because marijuana, legal at the time, was cutting into their tobacco sales.  I don't like that taxing cigarettes causes an underground and illegal untaxed cigarette trade.  I don't like that illegal prostitution causes there to be an illegal prostitution industry. Nor that making abortions illegal would cause an illegal abortion industry.

If abortions are at the top of your undo list, go out and make this country a better place, with more jobs, better housing, cleaner environment, better educational opportunities, affordable medical care and give it a few more nice people while you're at it.  See what miracles a livable society would do to the decision making process that you are so concerned about.

The link alejo_radical mentioned earlier in this post asks a very good question.  Jesus said nothing about abortion, but he mentioned the poor around 2,000 times. Where were his priorities, and where are the priorities of the predominately republican right wing rich people that do most of the running of this country, business-wise?  Why are their gated communities more important than paying a more than minimum wage? Why is a huge country club more important than affordable housing? Why is the survival of a fetus more important than the life that fetus will have to endure once it is born into poverty?

Go after the cause, not the symptom. Figure it out people.
I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2009, 11:14:47 PM »
OK - I realize the facetiousness of this statement, and it made me smile a little, but I figured I'd throw in my two cents. When you're pregnant all the time, breast milk pretty much ceases to be produced. Actually, full-time nursing is a decent, semi-reliable birth control method. So if you give birth, and then get pregnant immediately (and no doctor or WOMAN would recommend that, as it's asinine), your milk supply will suffer and in all likelihood will diminish to the point of non-production. The woman's health would deteriorate because she's trying to support three lives! So, that's all I have to say about that. But I realize you're not serious about your argument.  :)

Oooh! I just thought of something (this is an edit): wouldn't feeding your baby be considered murdering any chance of a new human being coming into existance???  LOL

I'm glad you realize I wasn't serious.  I am a bit concerned that Ray Comfort or Bennie Hinn will hear about this and think its a good idea though.  Obviously no woman can physically, mentally or socially tolerate whatever she considers too many babies. Nor an society. In the case of the woman who just had octuplets to go along with her previous 6 kids, she needs to be reminded that it's not a clown car.
I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline lost_ti_bon_ange

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2009, 11:22:48 PM »
~~ shudder~~
Can omniscient God, who
Knows the future, find
The omnipotence to
Change His future mind?
   - Karen Owens -

Offline Husky

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1241
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Atheist Dog
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #12 on: January 30, 2009, 11:25:07 PM »
Water that is too clear breeds no fish. In general, extreme measures don't work. Neither do advices that are sweeping statments because life is not always black and white.
I believe that you believe your God is real. It's called a DELUSION.

Offline kevyrat69

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1209
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • oh rats.
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2009, 11:58:36 PM »
Sortasuperb,

 My first wife and I have two kids and they are adults.  We decided to just have two and I wanted less and the idea of abortion never intered my mind at the time. I love my kids and I wanted to have them and we struggled to make it the whole time they were growing up.  I am happy how my kids are and they are struggling now in there lives. I am for abortion for a lot of reasons because the life that we see today with the abuse I see and the way kids have to suffer.  I know that abortion does seem like an awful thing and yet abuse and starvation and much pain in life, why start it before the pain can start?

Keep abortion legal and safe.  Your points actually are pretty good and it seems that the religious would rather see the woman die than the baby and then let the child suffer in life because then they will want to come to God and be saved and think that suffering is what we all should do.

Then again maybe he or she will go into slavery and be sold to someone else for lots of sex and mistreatment.  To me we need abortion to stop all this suffering the Christians seem to want so they can keep producing more human slavery to join them in there circular reasoning about the truth of what the bible says.  I do know of the slavery passage and that's what it seems to teach.

The religous right seems to say that it is murder to have an abortion because of the human that is going to be born if the woman doesn't have an abortion and she is on crack so the baby gets to start life suffering which is okay because then they will save it for God and they have a another slave to make there god to seem more real to have another body to worship this imaginary entity.

Sorry to make this so long and I am here to disprove some entity that wants us to suffer and think we as humans are dog poop and that it wants us to worship him.  Well f**k that!!!!
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

whatever people are experiencing when they experience God, it's not something they're perceiving in the external world. It's something their brains are making up.
Greta Christina

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #14 on: January 31, 2009, 12:11:29 AM »

[...]

The religous right seems to say that it is murder to have an abortion because of the human that is going to be born if the woman doesn't have an abortion and she is on crack so the baby gets to start life suffering which is okay because then they will save it for God and they have a another slave to make there god to seem more real to have another body to worship this imaginary entity.

Sorry to make this so long and I am here to disprove some entity that wants us to suffer and think we as humans are dog poop and that it wants us to worship him.  Well f**k that!!!!

kevy

Would you rather not be born than experience some suffering in your life ?

Would you feel confident in ending another person's life to save them any suffering - shouldn't they have the chance to experience the ups and downs of life and see how it turns out ?

Cannot suffering sometimes be valuable - eg training for a sporting event, putting in the pain now for rewards in the future ?

We've all had suffering in our lives.  What's more, every life will end in death.  And yet the vast majority of people want their lives and they accept that there is rough and smooth and if they had the chance they would do it all again.


Offline jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1791
  • Darwins +93/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2009, 02:08:07 AM »
kevy

Would you rather not be born than experience some suffering in your life ?

Would you feel confident in ending another person's life to save them any suffering - shouldn't they have the chance to experience the ups and downs of life and see how it turns out ?

Cannot suffering sometimes be valuable - eg training for a sporting event, putting in the pain now for rewards in the future ?

We've all had suffering in our lives.  What's more, every life will end in death.  And yet the vast majority of people want their lives and they accept that there is rough and smooth and if they had the chance they would do it all again.



I'd say a lot could depend on the person...It's probably hard to imagine wishing you had never been born when your life, even with ups and downs, even with trials and even tragedies to overcome, has been, on the balance, worthwhile.

I actually went through quite a period of wishing I'd never been born when I was younger. I had a twin sister who died a day or two after being born, and from the time I was very young (maybe 7 or 8 ), the knowledge that simply by the virtue of being alive I would inevitably have to deal with death scared the living daylights out of me. I almost envied her sometimes, for never having had to deal with that.

For what its worth, even though I was raised Catholic the doctrine of heaven and hell never held any particular promise or fear....My terror was of the inevitability of the moment that I would cease to sense and think and understand.

Offline alihaymeg

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1363
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #16 on: January 31, 2009, 02:41:54 AM »
Quote
For me. I am pro abortion if early screening detects some obvious and serious genetic abnormality such as Down's Syndrome. I find that it's actually selfish to even want to deliver the baby. The child will have difficulties that the parents cannot even imagine and face a lifetime of discrimination.

I see your point, but I know several Down's children who have grown into happy adults and given their parents great joy.
The danger there is reverting to Hitler's buy-in to "Eugenics" or "good genes". Do we kill everyone who does not fit our picture of "perfection?" If so, who get's to choose the criteria. That is a dangerous train of thought.

There are obviously times when abortion is a viable option. I think it is irresponsible to use it as a form of birth control, and I have talked with many women who feel lasting guilt over having ended the life of their potential child. It is not a simple problem. There are no simple solutions.

I find that extremes are usually not the best positions to take on any subject. All interests and concerns deserve to be addressed.

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12563
  • Darwins +304/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2009, 03:37:39 AM »
If anyone wants to read Dominic get his a$$ handed to him on this subject in the past, read this thread:

http://www.atheistthinktank.net/thinktank/index.php?topic=3604.30

He bails when we refuse to share his preconceptions.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2009, 10:20:48 AM »
Dominic

I assume that since you are against abortion because everybody has a right to life that you agree that all women should be pumping out babies all the time. That not being pregnant means that you are depriving a child of life, as I detailed in the OP. Am I right?
I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2009, 12:41:17 PM »
Dominic

I assume that since you are against abortion because everybody has a right to life that you agree that all women should be pumping out babies all the time. That not being pregnant means that you are depriving a child of life, as I detailed in the OP. Am I right?

Rights are granted/conferred by society/government eg through a constitution or bill of rights.  Rights are not intrinsic - they are decreed.  A government may grant rights that are beneficial to a society or they may grant rights that are harmful to a society. 

For example if a government grants you the right to kill your child because that child is an inconvenience, then that government is harming society and the community should change that government.

Morality, on the other hand is a set of rules which optimises the beneficial functioning of individuals and of society.  Morality is partially instinctive and partially learned/discovered.  For example, it is instinctive for parents to care for and protect their children.  When parents do not do this they act against their own natural instincts.

But additional to instinct, morality also evolves within a society as that society discovers what works beneficially and what causes harm to the society.  So for example, most societies quickly establish that murder must be prevented for the good of that society because allowing murder will quickly harm or destroy a society.

So deliberate killing of a child is instinctively resisted by all humans and is also morally resisted by beneficial societies.  Rights are irrelevant to this.

As for the number of children to have, there is no "right number" for any particular parents.  However to "pump out" children at the maximum possible rate (as in your facetious premise) would not be beneficial to the family or to society for obvious reasons including the ability to house, feed, and take care of that many children effectively.  But of course you knew that.


Offline alejo_radical

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2009, 02:32:12 PM »
Dominic, I am pretty sure you have no idea what true suffering is. I come from one of the most violent countries in the world, and for my friends that have aborted there, I can understand why many of them have done it. If you ever travel to really poor countries where there are lots of conflicts, you would understand the hard choices people have to make.
In North America, even though life is a little easier for many people, not everyone has to live the way you want them to live. Women are very unlikely to abort, especially here in Canada, despite it being so easy to do so. Why? Because when a system protects the children and supports mothers, then women are more likely to take advantage of that same system, to raise a child. After all most women want children, but those who don't want, then they should not be forced to carry them for 9 months if they don't want.

Of course there are many methods to prevent getting pregnant, but accidents do happen.

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2009, 04:12:31 PM »
As for the number of children to have, there is no "right number" for any particular parents.  However to "pump out" children at the maximum possible rate (as in your facetious premise) would not be beneficial to the family or to society for obvious reasons including the ability to house, feed, and take care of that many children effectively.  But of course you knew that.

Obviously we have opposing viewpoints. What I am trying to get at is this:  If life is precious, why don't we make more of it? Those against abortion draw the line at the moment of conception, but why? Isn't an egg  pre-fetus just like a fetus is a pre-child? Can't we logically extend the need to protect the unborn to the unconceived, with ease?

In the paragraph above you admit there are circumstances where an additional child would not be beneicial to the family or society for what I agree would be "obvious reasons". Yet you want to protect the conceived, unborn regardless of those reasons. why ar they suddenly good reasons when conception hasn't occurred yet, but not good reasons once it has?

Again, I wish it were the case that there was no need for abortions anywhere on the planet.  I am not pro-abortion so much as I am pro-choice, feeling that the woman who is going to have to go through the process and live with the child afterwards should be able to decide what to do. She can carry the child to term and keep it, carry it to term and adopt it out or abort it early in the pregnancy. But she is often considering exactly the same reasons you are for not getting pregnant (housing, feeding, caring, etc.) that you are.

Of course I understand your reasoning, and I can't fault you for wanting to save the life of an unborn child. However, life is full of unluxurious moments where hard choices have to be made.

I was talking to my very Christian friend last week while the Israeli incursion into the Gaza strip was taking place.  Reports of hundreds of dead children were flowing in and I had to ask him how he felt about that.  "Its a dirty world..." he responded, his way of saying its too bad but its going to happen.  He is ardently, and I mean ardently, anti-abortion, but like most Christians, he seems to be able to shrug his shoulders at the death of the post-born. He felt it was the right of Israel to do what it did, the the consequences were not the fault of the Israelis, but rather the Palestinians.  I didn't show him the photo of the burned body of a tiny baby because it would have angered him that I made him look, but he clearly didn't care whether Palestinian children, obviously as innocent as the unborn, were being slaughtered.

I've mentioned the issue in relation to the bombings in Iraq and he has always responded "There are always civilian casualties in war..." as if that makes it okay.

Now you specifically may or may not feel similar, but I have, in the course of my life, run into many Christians who seem to care about the unborn but don't seem to give a damn about the born.  They always deny it, but their actions and beliefs say otherwise. I am unable to give priority in that order. That is why I support abortion as an option to those making difficult decisions.

My OP asked why all women shouldn't be pregnant using a logical extension of anti-abortion thinking.  Your answer in the quote above is obviously a logical and rational one that I can't argue against.  The difference is that I am willing to extend it three months into the pregnancy, and you are not. I figure if I extend the same logic backwards to a pre-pregnancy state and get people to tell me why it would be wrong to 'force' pregnancy on a woman then perhaps we can all at least begin to see, if not understand, the reason different people have different opinions and feelings on the issue.

If abortion had been legal in 1946, I suspect my mom would have chosen that option rather than having me.  I would never have known. And more importantly, my father would not have been pressured by the then-current social norm to marry my mother, something she made him regret virtually every day they were together for the next 20 years.  I got to live, my father got to suffer through a patently ridiculous marriage that my mother never wanted. He would have had a chance to be more careful the next time, and he would have known more about shacking up with "b-word" women. I of course don't know how his life would have been different, but at least he would have had a chance not to waste his life away with my mother.  And I would never have known.

So that is not an issue for me.

I prefer quality in life for fewer over an emphasis on the quantity of life for many more. Its that simple.




I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline Iamnotarobot

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #22 on: January 31, 2009, 04:47:11 PM »
I'd say a lot could depend on the person...It's probably hard to imagine wishing you had never been born when your life, even with ups and downs, even with trials and even tragedies to overcome, has been, on the balance, worthwhile.

I have a great life with a wonderful family. I think I'm a pretty happy person, and yet if given the choice to have never started this or any life, I believe I would choose to have never been born. I just don't see the point of living, to be honest. Now - I am NOT suicidal! I am not depressed or morose. I just see life as something I have to do. The interesting and fun parts are far outshadowed by the boring, uncomfortable, and/or painful portions. I'd rather just skip all of it. Yes, I realize then my beautiful daughters would never have been born, but nobody would be the wiser, so they wouldn't be missed. Basically, now that I have children, I live for them, because they make me happy. Unless they're being typical kids, and they drive me crazy.   :)

Offline DebaucheryDivine

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop the Bullsh*t and Love each other already...
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #23 on: January 31, 2009, 05:31:27 PM »
I hear that God didn't cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden because of sin. It was because they only had two kids.
I'm sure the woman who just had 8 babies at once would agree. She now has 14 kids!
If you fill out the Form 666-AD33 you can register early to get your spot on the Lake O Fire Swim Team!

Offline lost_ti_bon_ange

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #24 on: January 31, 2009, 06:53:18 PM »
I hear that God didn't cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden because of sin. It was because they only had two kids.
I'm sure the woman who just had 8 babies at once would agree. She now has 14 kids!

She's probably just trying to have enough kids to get some TV air time; like the 'parents plus 8' or the one that just had her 18th kid.  I'm sure that sounds sarcastic, but why are we being subjected to shows about them?  Yeah, yeah, don't watch.  I don't but it's still all over the various media.  My suspicion is that our societal fascination with large families is a hold over to the primitive belief that a virile man was a Real Man and a fecund woman was a Real Woman; proof the species will continue.

Well, it does seem as if they're willing to try and live out the OP suggestion that every egg and every sperm deserves to be born.
Can omniscient God, who
Knows the future, find
The omnipotence to
Change His future mind?
   - Karen Owens -

Offline lagagnon

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 50
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #25 on: January 31, 2009, 07:16:48 PM »
The right wing argument against abortion is that it destroys human life. While pro-abortion advocates generally draw the line for being "human" at 3 months, and say that a woman should be free to abort prior to that time (this is a very generic description, I know there are other time frames considered acceptable by others), pro-lifers draw the line at conception, saying that once an egg is fertilized, it is a human being and needs protection.

The entire pro-life thing makes no sense to me in the first place because approximately 30% of all successful sperm-egg conceptions/fertilizations spontaneously abort within hours to days or weeks anyways. That means the pro-lifers must admit that either God or almost all fertile women on the planet are mass murderers. 

Offline Ouabache

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Godless heathen
    • ChaoSkeptic
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #26 on: January 31, 2009, 08:14:01 PM »
Dominic

I assume that since you are against abortion because everybody has a right to life that you agree that all women should be pumping out babies all the time. That not being pregnant means that you are depriving a child of life, as I detailed in the OP. Am I right?

Rights are granted/conferred by society/government eg through a constitution or bill of rights.  Rights are not intrinsic - they are decreed.  A government may grant rights that are beneficial to a society or they may grant rights that are harmful to a society. 
The Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights disagree with you. Pay special attention to the 10th amendment. Let us know when you look up "unalienable rights".
"Monkey wants the food pellet, monkey pushes the button." -The Good Reverend Roger

Offline sortasuperb

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 835
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Tomato-based Life Form
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #27 on: January 31, 2009, 08:22:05 PM »
I once met a 94 year old woman that had 107 grandchildren and great-grandchildren. She was a sweet little old lady but she made me sick to my stomach.  Our tiny planet can't take that rate of growth...
I can't think for you. But if I have to I can think against you...

Offline Dominic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +6/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: All women should be pregnant all the time...
« Reply #28 on: February 01, 2009, 03:11:55 AM »
I once met a 94 year old woman that had 107 grandchildren and great-grandchildren. She was a sweet little old lady but she made me sick to my stomach.  Our tiny planet can't take that rate of growth...

Sorta

She made you sick did she ?   You poor thing.

On average 4.5 children will give you that many descendants.

(4.5 children X 4.5 grandchildren each X 4.5 great-grandchildren = total 111 grand and great-grand)

Is that really sickening ?

« Last Edit: February 01, 2009, 04:44:12 AM by Dominic »