Typically, christians don't approve of abortion, citing the 'preciousness of life', among other things.
Do these same christians oppose the death penalty? Should they?
For discussion:
Is it hypocritical to oppose abortion but support the death penalty? Or, like all things christian, you simply ignore one aspect of this faith while holding on tight to another to support your POV?
Is the 'abortion vs. death penalty' thinking (abortion = bad death penalty = good) nothing more than a male dominated religion further suppressing women? Maybe this helps understand why god's considered male and not female?
Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
- The Tanager
- Savant
- Posts: 5256
- Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
- Has thanked: 50 times
- Been thanked: 166 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #51[Replying to Clownboat in post #48]
Thank you for your honesty as well. While there is also suffering caused through abortions, as well as drains on society from those, I do not think amount of suffering is the end-all-be-all in judging morality. If it is, I'm not sure where things would land as it seems a very complex thing to calculate out, but let's assume your calculations are correct. What is your argument for this kind of utilitarianism being how one should morally judge?
Also, for clarification, did you bring up 'schadenfreude' because you think my position exhibits that?
Thank you for your honesty as well. While there is also suffering caused through abortions, as well as drains on society from those, I do not think amount of suffering is the end-all-be-all in judging morality. If it is, I'm not sure where things would land as it seems a very complex thing to calculate out, but let's assume your calculations are correct. What is your argument for this kind of utilitarianism being how one should morally judge?
Also, for clarification, did you bring up 'schadenfreude' because you think my position exhibits that?
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #52Of course, it doesn't become a baby until after birth. Before then, it's a fetus.1213 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 12:45 pmOnly if the baby deserves death penalty. But, if the baby doesn't deserve death penalty, is it ok to sacrifice him anyway so that the parents would get a better life as a reward?nobspeople wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 11:45 am ...
Is it hypocritical to oppose abortion but support the death penalty?...
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6652 times
- Been thanked: 3222 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #53Now I'm a little confused. If billions of conceptions naturally abort, how are any of them precious as human lives in the eyes of God? And, if all those dead fetuses are summoned to the bosom of God for eternity, what's the problem? They avoid a period of possible misery as unwanted human beings and go straight to eternal bliss. That said, for the life of me, I can't understand what eternity would be like for a fetus.The Tanager wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 5:35 pmI've heard of studies positing 10 to 20 percent as the standard numbers, not 75%. Regardless, even 10% is a lot. I'm not following your reasoning here, though. It doesn't seem to take into account the eternal nature of human lives within Christianity or the Creator-creature distinction, where God is ultimately responsible for 100% of people dying, anyway.brunumb wrote: ↑Mon May 02, 2022 7:38 pmUp to three quarters of all conceptions fail to reach term without any human intervention. Many people desperate to have children lose them this way. One would think that if human life was so precious, God would have designed a far more reliable system for reproduction. Can God be regarded as the greatest abortionist of all?
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
- 1213
- Savant
- Posts: 11598
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
- Location: Finland
- Has thanked: 337 times
- Been thanked: 379 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #54What is the meaningful difference between a baby and fetus that makes it ok to kill the fetus?Goat wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 6:10 pmOf course, it doesn't become a baby until after birth. Before then, it's a fetus.1213 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 12:45 pmOnly if the baby deserves death penalty. But, if the baby doesn't deserve death penalty, is it ok to sacrifice him anyway so that the parents would get a better life as a reward?nobspeople wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 11:45 am ...
Is it hypocritical to oppose abortion but support the death penalty?...
- The Tanager
- Savant
- Posts: 5256
- Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
- Has thanked: 50 times
- Been thanked: 166 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #55If this physical life is all there was to a human life, then missing out on it would probably mean the life wasn't precious. However, according to Christian beliefs, this physical life is not all there is to a human life. Thus, what is a "precious" human life will take more into account.brunumb wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 1:17 amNow I'm a little confused. If billions of conceptions naturally abort, how are any of them precious as human lives in the eyes of God? And, if all those dead fetuses are summoned to the bosom of God for eternity, what's the problem? They avoid a period of possible misery as unwanted human beings and go straight to eternal bliss. That said, for the life of me, I can't understand what eternity would be like for a fetus.
The way our natural world is set up will allow for natural miscarriages. A world without that would be a different kind of world. I'm not sure it's a clearly better world, but if you want to have a go at proving it is, I'm reading. Taking the life of another human to 'send them to God's bosom' is a different matter than it being a natural consequence of the world we live in. I also don't think the kind of utilitarian calculus you offer is a valid way to judge morality.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #56[Replying to The Tanager in post #55]
Yet, many flock to it as a means to morality.
Humans are amazing - they can convince themselves even the most evil things are OK when it fits their chosen lifestyle agenda!
Walk me through the logic of those sentences, please. I don't follow.If this physical life is all there was to a human life, then missing out on it would probably mean the life wasn't precious. However, according to Christian beliefs, this physical life is not all there is to a human life. Thus, what is a "precious" human life will take more into account.
But the 'natural world' didn't allow for computers, but some don't seem to have an issue with that.The way our natural world is set up will allow for natural miscarriages.
Are you saying, here, a world without natural miscarriages may not be a better world?A world without that would be a different kind of world. I'm not sure it's a clearly better world, but if you want to have a go at proving it is, I'm reading.
But this would net the same end result, potentially: sending them to heaven. Are we to pick-n-choose what we allow naturally and what we allow unnaturally?Taking the life of another human to 'send them to God's bosom' is a different matter than it being a natural consequence of the world we live in.
Some would say the same about god. I suppose drowning an entire planet is moral, simply because it's 'evil' - an evil god refused to stop up to that point, huh?I also don't think the kind of utilitarian calculus you offer is a valid way to judge morality.
Yet, many flock to it as a means to morality.
Humans are amazing - they can convince themselves even the most evil things are OK when it fits their chosen lifestyle agenda!
Have a great, potentially godless, day!
- Clownboat
- Savant
- Posts: 9407
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
- Has thanked: 931 times
- Been thanked: 1273 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #57The drains are not equal, therefore you should not just ignore the suffering that would be created due to not allowing humans to have abortions currently. You argue for additional unneeded suffering for millions of humans directly and for societies as a whole.The Tanager wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 5:49 pmThank you for your honesty as well. While there is also suffering caused through abortions, as well as drains on society from those,
Do unto others comes to mind.
I argue for doing what is best for societies, not for what is best for a majority.I do not think amount of suffering is the end-all-be-all in judging morality. If it is, I'm not sure where things would land as it seems a very complex thing to calculate out, but let's assume your calculations are correct. What is your argument for this kind of utilitarianism being how one should morally judge?
u·til·i·tar·i·an·ism
/yo͞oˌtiləˈterēəˌnizəm/
noun
the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority.
It is a thing and I submit that there would be humans that would take pleasure with the idea (for example) that a young girl that had sex and got pregnant is now paying/suffering for her immoral choice to have sex before marriage. Harder to assume some would take pleasure in knowing the baby will also suffer, but there would be a demographic for that as well.Also, for clarification, did you bring up 'schadenfreude' because you think my position exhibits that?
I surely did not mean to claim anything about you in this regard and appreciate you allowing me to clarify as I see it was sloppy how I plopped it in without further explanation.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
- Clownboat
- Savant
- Posts: 9407
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
- Has thanked: 931 times
- Been thanked: 1273 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #58Babies have much more value than a fetus. Since their values are not equal, they are treated as such.1213 wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 4:57 amWhat is the meaningful difference between a baby and fetus that makes it ok to kill the fetus?Goat wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 6:10 pmOf course, it doesn't become a baby until after birth. Before then, it's a fetus.1213 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 12:45 pmOnly if the baby deserves death penalty. But, if the baby doesn't deserve death penalty, is it ok to sacrifice him anyway so that the parents would get a better life as a reward?nobspeople wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 11:45 am ...
Is it hypocritical to oppose abortion but support the death penalty?...
Why do you pretend that a fetus has as much value as a baby?
How crazy of a belief it would be to actually think a mother would choose the loss of a 2 year old (for example) over the loss of a fetus that has less then a 50% chance of making it to baby status. The loss of a wanted fetus is sad, the loss of a baby is a travesty. You ignore this and pretend they are equal.
I have friends that lost their 5 year old (bad flu strain caused brain death due to a lack of oxygen). They lost countless fetuses while trying to conceive the first time around and then years after following the loss of their baby girl. I can only imagine the look on their faces if they were to hear you say such a thing. Losing fetuses for them was a disapointment each time, the tragic loss of their baby girl doesn't even compare. I dare you to look such a person in the eye and tell them a baby has the same value as a fetus. I would imagine you would be seeing the world through one good eye after saying such a thing.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #59What you're responding to is the intentional belittling and discounting people do to others to justify their (often misguided and uninformed) belief. It's running RAMPANT in the USA ever since donny decided to showcase his inbred-status (opinion not a fact - or at least a fact I can show) on a world stage. And they don't care whom else they hurt.Clownboat wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 12:02 pmBabies have much more value than a fetus. Since their values are not equal, they are treated as such.1213 wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 4:57 amWhat is the meaningful difference between a baby and fetus that makes it ok to kill the fetus?Goat wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 6:10 pmOf course, it doesn't become a baby until after birth. Before then, it's a fetus.1213 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 12:45 pmOnly if the baby deserves death penalty. But, if the baby doesn't deserve death penalty, is it ok to sacrifice him anyway so that the parents would get a better life as a reward?nobspeople wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 11:45 am ...
Is it hypocritical to oppose abortion but support the death penalty?...
Why do you pretend that a fetus has as much value as a baby?
How crazy of a belief it would be to actually think a mother would choose the loss of a 2 year old (for example) over the loss of a fetus that has less then a 50% chance of making it to baby status. The loss of a wanted fetus is sad, the loss of a baby is a travesty. You ignore this and pretend they are equal.
I have friends that lost their 5 year old (bad flu strain caused brain death due to a lack of oxygen). They lost countless fetuses while trying to conceive the first time around and then years after following the loss of their baby girl. I can only imagine the look on their faces if they were to hear you say such a thing. Losing fetuses for them was a disapointment each time, the tragic loss of their baby girl doesn't even compare. I dare you to look such a person in the eye and tell them a baby has the same value as a fetus. I would imagine you would be seeing the world through one good eye after saying such a thing.
This intentional discounting is vile, disgusting and down right sinful.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!
- tam
- Savant
- Posts: 6477
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
- Has thanked: 356 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
- Contact:
Re: Right for life - can you have it both ways?
Post #60Peace to you,
I've never had a miscarriage, so my word on the subject would be meaningless, but here are some studies on the subject (including common misconceptions about the grieving process from miscarriage or stillbirth), some psychologists findings, and some experiences by women who had miscarriages:
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/06/miscarriage
Peace again to you and to you all.
I don't think the two should be compared the way Clownboat compared them, because diminishing the severity of the trauma and grief that comes after a miscarriage or stillbirth, as experienced by the mother and the father, can be just as belittling and discounting to those people and their grief. Studies have shown that it is a misconception to think that a mother (and father) do not deeply grieve this traumatic loss, simply because the child was not yet born, or even because it might have happened early in the pregnancy. Those misconceptions can even make the grieving process harder.nobspeople wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 12:08 pmWhat you're responding to is the intentional belittling and discounting people do to others to justify their (often misguided and uninformed) belief. It's running RAMPANT in the USA ever since donny decided to showcase his inbred-status (opinion not a fact - or at least a fact I can show) on a world stage. And they don't care whom else they hurt.Clownboat wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 12:02 pmBabies have much more value than a fetus. Since their values are not equal, they are treated as such.1213 wrote: ↑Wed May 04, 2022 4:57 amWhat is the meaningful difference between a baby and fetus that makes it ok to kill the fetus?Goat wrote: ↑Tue May 03, 2022 6:10 pmOf course, it doesn't become a baby until after birth. Before then, it's a fetus.1213 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 12:45 pmOnly if the baby deserves death penalty. But, if the baby doesn't deserve death penalty, is it ok to sacrifice him anyway so that the parents would get a better life as a reward?nobspeople wrote: ↑Tue Mar 22, 2022 11:45 am ...
Is it hypocritical to oppose abortion but support the death penalty?...
Why do you pretend that a fetus has as much value as a baby?
How crazy of a belief it would be to actually think a mother would choose the loss of a 2 year old (for example) over the loss of a fetus that has less then a 50% chance of making it to baby status. The loss of a wanted fetus is sad, the loss of a baby is a travesty. You ignore this and pretend they are equal.
I have friends that lost their 5 year old (bad flu strain caused brain death due to a lack of oxygen). They lost countless fetuses while trying to conceive the first time around and then years after following the loss of their baby girl. I can only imagine the look on their faces if they were to hear you say such a thing. Losing fetuses for them was a disapointment each time, the tragic loss of their baby girl doesn't even compare. I dare you to look such a person in the eye and tell them a baby has the same value as a fetus. I would imagine you would be seeing the world through one good eye after saying such a thing.
This intentional discounting is vile, disgusting and down right sinful.
I've never had a miscarriage, so my word on the subject would be meaningless, but here are some studies on the subject (including common misconceptions about the grieving process from miscarriage or stillbirth), some psychologists findings, and some experiences by women who had miscarriages:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3384447/Although parents have not built up a relationship with their infant, grief after pregnancy loss does not differ significantly in intensity from other loss scenarios. As has been found in bereavement involving first-degree relatives, grief symptoms usually decrease in intensity over the first 12 months.8,9 Longitudinal studies have demonstrated that in a normal grieving process, grief declines over a period of 2 years after the pregnancy loss.8,10 Perinatal losses have also been shown to have a substantial psychological impact on parents and families, and are associated with post-traumatic stress, depression, anxiety, and sleeping disorders.11,12 Overall, high levels of CG are generally associated with a poorer state of mental health.13
Another common misunderstanding about miscarriage is that a woman will experience less grief if she loses the baby early in her pregnancy. But most researchers have not been able to find an association between the length of gestation and intensity of grief, anxiety or depression (Research in Nursing & Health). A woman who has lost her child at 11 weeks may be as distraught as a woman who has lost her child at 20 weeks, says Jaffe's co-author, Martha Diamond, PhD.
"While the medical experience might vary, it depends on the meaning of the pregnancy to that person," Diamond says. "By labeling it a traumatic loss, we validate the experience."
Still, for women who miscarry early, their grief is less socially acceptable than the anguish of someone who miscarries later in their pregnancy, says Jaffe. "With later losses, people can have a funeral or memorial service. When it's an early miscarriage or even a failed IVF cycle, it is often unacknowledged by others, [yet] these are invisible losses that feel disenfranchised and not validated."
"We've had some very touching emails from older women, even women who are now grandmothers," she says. "It's still very relevant and very sad for many women decades after a loss."
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/06/miscarriage
https://www.seleni.org/advice-support/2 ... ef-is-real"The assumption that women emotionally attach in proportion to the length of the pregnancy is not always true. Eighty percent of pregnancy losses are first trimester miscarriages. Women often don't tell others about their pregnancy during the first trimester and may try to "keep from getting too excited" due to fears about a loss. However, a woman who miscarries at 8 weeks’ gestation may experience it as the loss of a child and grieve it as such, while someone else may have a later loss and experience it with less intensity." –Donna Rothert, PhD, "Attachment in Pregnancy," 2004
"A miscarriage is such a statistically common event (at least one in five pregnancies end in a miscarriage) that it is often overlooked or minimized, but it was 'your' baby that didn’t survive, and the pain you feel is real." –Janet Jaffe, PhD, "Pregnancy Loss and Miscarriage," 2014
When you lose a living person, most people accept that your grief will not follow a prescribed timeline. Not so, I discovered, when you have an early pregnancy loss. When I lost a pregnancy at "only" 8 1/2 weeks, some felt my grief was disproportionate to my loss, and they expected me to "get over it" and "move on."
Miscarriage grief is hard on Mother's Day and other holidays.
"...[Y]ou are not the only one. Somewhere over a silly Mother's Day breakfast, there is a woman faking a smile who feels just like you do. Somewhere in a very silent house with no one to call, there is a woman who is tending the ache of her loss, just like you. Somewhere standing in a shower there is a woman who is feeling it all and letting the tears come, just like you." –Jen, "In Case Mother's Day Is Hard for You," May 12, 2013
Peace again to you and to you all.
- Non-religious Christian spirituality
- For Christ (who is the Spirit)
- For Christ (who is the Spirit)