Absolute Prohibition of Abortion

[Diogenes]

One question for debate is whether Islam and the Roman Catholic church prohibit abortion in all cases.* They both appear to, even to save the mother's life. The RC view is nuanced, perhaps using disingenuous logic.#

Assuming these two major religions DO prohibit abortion even to save the life of the mother, as well as in the cases of rape and incest, how can this prohibition be morally justified?


_________________
*

"Never and in no case has the Church taught that the life of the child must be preferred to that of the mother. It is erroneous to put the question with this alternative: either the life of the child or that of the mother. No, neither the life of the mother nor that of the child can be subjected to direct suppression. In the one case as in the other, there can be but one obligation: to make every effort to save the lives of both, of the mother and the child." (Pope Pius XII, Allocution to the Association of Large Families, AAS (1951), XLIII, p. 855.)

#

The only ethically justified understanding of this much-celebrated exception shows that it is not an exception at all! The classical example of an ectopic pregnancy or the example of the cancerous uterus, which allow the surgeon, ethically, to remove the woman's damaged reproductive organs in order to save her life, should not be used as examples of abortion, even though a baby's life is terminated in the progress.

https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/librar ... ther-12052

[Miles]

.

................................God: The Great Abortionist

Survival Probability of Human Conceptions from Fertilization to Term

November 1989 International Journal of Fertility 35(2):75, 79-80, 81-94

SourcePubMed


Abstract

Preterm death of the human conceptus is common. A consistent biphasic pattern in the rate of loss from biochemical pregnancy detection to term suggests that most wastage occurs prior to clinical recognition. After simple adjustments for varying methods, existing data show that at least 73% of natural single conceptions have no real chance of surviving 6 weeks of gestation. Of the remainder, about 90% will survive to term. IVF conceptions do nearly as well as natural pregnancies after clinical recognition, but poorly before, despite selecting apparently normal embryos for transfer. Reasons may lie in the uterus more than the embryo itself. Multiple pregnancies may constitute more than 12% of all natural conceptions, of which number about 2% survive to term as twins and about 12% result in single births. In all of these situations, simple equations for exponential decay in a mixture of two populations can accurately describe the distribution of those deaths in time.
source

That's 73.0% (the % of natural single conceptions that have no real chance of surviving 6 weeks of gestation.)
+.........2.7% (the 10% of the surviving 27%)
____________
Or......75.7% of natural single conceptions that have no real chance of surviving.


God has seen fit that 75.7% of all conceptions end in the death of the "baby."

[Bust Nak]

I cannot think of a real life situation where an unborn child would force one into Sophie's choice ; you have already dismissed finances or potential loss of income as justifiable reason to kill a child.

I wasn't trying to present a Sophie choice since the fetus dies in both options. It's not supposed to be a Sophie choice because it's supposed to be an easy choice, at least secularly speaking, one option is clearly better than the other. You are not picking between two children, you are picking between obeying God, saving souls or whatever, vs prioritizing one's own welfare as well as that of a child. I understand if you still prefer the former rather than the latter, but the addition of an existing child should at least nudge the decision a bit towards the latter, even if it's not enough to tip the balance? I ask because you said you would not choose an abortion to save yourself, I am offering a scenario where you are not just saving yourself.

If one does not have the means to raise a child there are usually agencies (or in developing countries extended family), that facilitate giving it to someone that does.

That's fine. I wasn't suggesting that the existing child would just die, it's just less ideal than being looked after by mum.

[JehovahsWitness]

...prioritizing one's own welfare as well as that of a child.

I have already said I would never put my personal welfare above the life of any child, born or unborn. If I could not keep alive without killing my unborn child then I would not keep alive. And what of my surviving family? Martin Luther King had family, Mahatma Gandhi had family, most of the people we admire in history that died for a higher cause had children. I would hopefully leave my children in good hands with the knowledge we must all be willing to pay the ultimate price for what we believe to be right and moral conduct.

[Bust Nak]

And what of my surviving family? Martin Luther King had family, Mahatma Gandhi had family, most of the people we admire in history that died for a higher cause had children. I would hopefully leave my children in good hands with the knowledge we must all be willing to pay the ultimate price for what we believe to be right and moral conduct.

Two things to note here: 1) the price is not that "ultimate" if you are right about an afterlife. 2) The people we admire in history were not compelled by law to make their sacrifices. Should they be allowed to choose their family over what some (may or may not include themselves) believe to be right and moral conduct?

[JehovahsWitness]

The people we admire in history were not compelled by law to make their sacrifices.

This is true, they were willing to die because they believed certain things are right and certain things are wrong; we all have lines in the sand beyond which we will not cross.



JW

[Clownboat]

Readers, if you were anti abortion/anti choice and religious, would you want to deal with:
God has seen fit that 75.7% of all conceptions end in the death of the "baby."

How can we take a person seriously if they don't seem to care or acknowlede all the wanted babies that naturally abort, yet would like to force women to attempt to carry unwanted fetuses to term.

Ask yourself, how many unwanted fetuses should we strive to have each year? Personally, I think we should focus our attention on the wanted, not the unwanted.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #68]

I love my wife and my children. I would abort a baby (I feel slimy for using this word) to save the life of my wife if she were pregnant. I wouldn't even 2nd guess it and would do it over and over and over again.
There is in fact reason, your empty assertion is therefore wrong.

Are you saying that you would not try to save both your wife and your child?

I would think anyone in the situation above the goal would be to save both. If the goal is to save both the mother and the baby pro-lifers would not call that abortion.

Now there are times when the baby is not going to live no matter what. Like when the baby attaches to the fallopian tube. But that would not be considered abortion to pro-lifers.

I would hate to do it, but I would have my baby aborted at 9 months in order to save the life of my wife. Any fact that a fetus can live outside a womb at anytime in this process is meaningless to this decision.

What would society do with all these unwanted babies we have now have (living outside the womb)? How many unwanted babies should society strive to have each year? Surely you realize that the more the better is illogical in this case.

Wow, I have heard that there were people that think like you think but wow.

Why stop at killing baby? The mentally retarded cannot defend themselves either why don't we just kill them off also. Why stop there why don't we just kill anyone that does not agree with our way of thinking? Like they do in communist states. Why don't you tell a person that was adopted that they are unwanted? Wait you are telling that to a person that was adopted. No, why would I think that more is not better? How many scientists have we killed by abortion? How many artists have we killed?

I guess we just have a difference of opinion on the potential that each person that is born possesses.

Why should people have a choice on whether another person lives or dies?

What it should not be is your choice unless you are the potential mother. If you disagree, please explain why it should be your choice over the mothers.

it is not my choice over the mothers. It is the law that states that murder is wrong. In every other situation if someone killed a baby they would be sentenced to prison. The only exception is when the baby is in the mother's womb. if a mother killed a 1-year-old baby by chopping them up they would go to jail and/or be put away for having mental issues.

And abortion does cause mental issues.
Abortion causes depression. Post-abortion depression is incredibly common among women and can last for years. Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy and women mourn like any other loss.

Abortion causes Anxiety. They worry about whether they can conceive again. These fears can become all-consuming and can result in dysfunctional behaviors and anxiety disorders surrounding sexuality and pregnancy.

Abortion Causes Post-Traumatic Flashbacks: Women will have nightmares about the procedure and see the blood of their baby in their dreams. These nightmares will continue around the anniversary of the abortion.

Why you would want your wife or anyone else to go through all of that is beyond me. To me, it simply shows a lack of compassion for both women and babies. Why you would want your wife to go through all of that is beyond me.

[brunumb]

Why stop at killing baby? The mentally retarded cannot defend themselves either why don't we just kill them off also. Why stop there why don't we just kill anyone that does not agree with our way of thinking? Like they do in communist states. Why don't you tell a person that was adopted that they are unwanted? Wait you are telling that to a person that was adopted. No, why would I think that more is not better? How many scientists have we killed by abortion? How many artists have we killed?

I guess we just have a difference of opinion on the potential that each person that is born possesses.

Wow. Out comes all of the irrelevant diversions in an attempt to boost the emotive weight of the argument. Abortion is not about killing babies, or the mentally retarded, or people with contrary opinions, or telling people they are unwanted, or killing potential geniuses (and serial killers by the way). We could just as easily ask why God aborts around three quarters of all conceptions. Oh, wait. For some reason that doesn't count because people are bad, God is good.

Abortion surely does take its toll on people, but then so does the burden of trying to raise a child that is the product of rape or incest. Poverty and unemployment can add incredible stress to people forced to raise an extra child that they are in no position to support. I suppose they can line up at the soup kitchen and get a free meal from a smiling well-off volunteer. Or maybe visit an anti-abortion protest group with cup in hand seeking a few donations to help them get by. Let's face it, most of the concern for the unborn ends once they leave the womb. "You're on your own now kid, we've got more important issues to deal with".

[Clownboat]

Are you saying that you would not try to save both your wife and your child?

No. Clearly I said your empty assertion was wrong and I showed you why. How can you read my words and get them so wrong?

I would think anyone in the situation above the goal would be to save both.

Think what you want, I care not. Your empty assertion ("There is still no reason to abort a BABY") was wrong and what is obvious is that you do not plan to take responsibility for it. Instead, you ask me if I'm saying things that I'm not saying. I think you are trying to drag me down to your level to beat me with experience. No thanks.

If the goal is to save both the mother and the baby pro-lifers would not call that abortion.

Then they are being dumb as the removal of a fetus is an abortion.
Words have meaning, please learn them.
a·bor·tion
the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.

Now there are times when the baby is not going to live no matter what. Like when the baby attaches to the fallopian tube. But that would not be considered abortion to pro-lifers.

Couldn't care less and it does nothing to defend your false statement: "There is still no reason to abort a BABY"

Wow, I have heard that there were people that think like you think but wow.

And now I laugh at you!
"I would hate to do it, but I would have my baby aborted at 9 months in order to save the life of my wife." = Clownboat.
Ya, people like me that would seek to save the life of their wife. How horrid!

Why stop at killing baby? The mentally retarded cannot defend themselves either why don't we just kill them off also.

Make your best argument for why we should kill the mentally retarted. Are you still trying to distract from your false statement that there would never be a reason to abort a baby?

Why stop there why don't we just kill anyone that does not agree with our way of thinking?

Again, make your best argument and we can see how people respond.

Why don't you tell a person that was adopted that they are unwanted?

You make another mistake. They were unwanted. Past tense. You fail when you pretend that the past is the present.
Either way, there would be no point as they should know already (outside of parent deaths obviously).
Mother: "I really want this baby, so I'm going to give it up for adoption".
Earthguy, you are silly. It is mothers that don't want their babies that give them up for adoption.

No, why would I think that more is not better?

This statement is nonsensical.

How many scientists have we killed by abortion?

You really haven't given this any thought, have you? There is no way to know how many scientist have been aborted. Why do you ask such a silly question?

How many artists have we killed?

Same as above.

I guess we just have a difference of opinion on the potential that each person that is born possesses.

Perhaps, but lets stick with abortion. You are already all over the place here.

Why should people have a choice on whether another person lives or dies?

Please be more specific. I have no choice as to whether you live or die, so what are you even on about? This topic is about abortions, something specific. You truly are all over the place.

What it should not be is your choice unless you are the potential mother. If you disagree, please explain why it should be your choice over the mothers.

it is not my choice over the mothers.

Finally! Thank you for joining the pro-choice movement. You can still despise abortions.

And abortion does cause mental issues.

So does being forced to attempt to carry to term a fetus that is unwanted. Such short sited thinking from you.

Abortion causes depression.

So does being forced to attempt to carry to term a fetus that is unwanted. Such short sited thinking from you.

Abortion causes Anxiety.

So does being forced to attempt to carry to term a fetus that is unwanted. Such short sited thinking from you.

I think you are done here...

Why you would want your wife or anyone else to go through all of that is beyond me.

Readers, Earthscienceguy seems to think that I want my wife to have mental health issues, depression and anxiety.

To me, it simply shows a lack of compassion for both women and babies.

That's because you think I want my wife to have mental health issues, depression and anxiety.

Why you would want your wife to go through all of that is beyond me.

Yup, trying to drag me down to your level and beat me with experience. Sir, I laugh at you and your ridiculousness.
Nothing you have said would justify the absolute prohibition of abortion nor the idea that the potential mother is in the best position to make such a decision.

[Bust Nak]

This is true, they were willing to die because they believed certain things are right and certain things are wrong; we all have lines in the sand beyond which we will not cross.

But what of the lines in the sand beyond which you would not allow others to cross? You spoke at length about what choices you would make, not so much on when it comes to what choices others are allowed to make.