Leading atheist defends aborting babies with Down's syndrome

I agree, Walt. I once got caught up in the tangled jungle of technical questions and realized that the only thing that was solid is if we leave this fertilized cell alone it will continue to develop through time to become a senior citizen. The second we destroy it, or nature itself ends it, it is no longer “living” at whatever stage it’s in and the development process is over.
Makes me wonder what the predestiny believers think about abortion.
 
I agree, Walt. I once got caught up in the tangled jungle of technical questions and realized that the only thing that was solid is if we leave this fertilized cell alone it will continue to develop through time to become a senior citizen. The second we destroy it, or nature itself ends it, it is no longer “living” at whatever stage it’s in and the development process is over.
Yep. If we interfere we do so with no knowledge of the extent of the consequences. Might as well be shooting into a covey rise blindfolded.
 
Thread starter #83
I have no argument against calling a fertilized egg "alive", or "a person". In that sense we are in complete agreement about what it is. My argument is about what kind of rights it has.
Again, right back to the OP. Differentiation of rights based on status, age, sex, race, ethnicity, etc. Either all have EQUAL rights OR rights are decided by those in power.
 
Makes me wonder what the predestiny believers think about abortion.
I’m not real sure but when I hear some predestinary believers.......I am sometimes confused and left wondering if they’re really trying to explain “predestined” or “all knowing”.
 
Yep. If we interfere we do so with no knowledge of the extent of the consequences. Might as well be shooting into a covey rise blindfolded.
Spotlite said:
I agree, Walt. I once got caught up in the tangled jungle of technical questions and realized that the only thing that was solid is if we leave this fertilized cell alone it will continue to develop through time to become a senior citizen. The second we destroy it, or nature itself ends it, it is no longer “living” at whatever stage it’s in and the development process is over.
If there is a good argument against your point...…. I cant think of it.
Bottom line is fertilization is the beginning of the process of "life" (or not).
Then we are back to the age old argument - what does "life" mean? Legally anyway.
 
Thread starter #89
Do you believe that euthanasia under any circumstances is a sin? How about capitol punishment?
That would depend on what you define as euthanasia. I’m fine with capital punishment. Personally I think it should be utilized a lot more than it is.
 
If there is a good argument against your point...…. I cant think of it.
Bottom line is fertilization is the beginning of the process of "life" (or not).
Then we are back to the age old argument - what does "life" mean? Legally anyway.
I think before I answer, I’m going to research a little on those that were charged with the murder of an unborn child.
 
Where did I indicate that I was fine with them? I am predestined not to be fine with them. Even when I was a practicing Atheist, I was not fine with them.

Can you provide an example of when an abortion is not predestined(determined beforehand)?
You didn't indicate that you were fine with them, that is why I asked.
According to your beliefs, yes you would be exactly as you are at every moment.
As a non believer you have that option.

A miscarriage would be natures abortion and a result of the circumstances not determined ahead of time.
 
If there is a good argument against your point...…. I cant think of it.
Bottom line is fertilization is the beginning of the process of "life" (or not).
Then we are back to the age old argument - what does "life" mean? Legally anyway.
I think before I answer, I’m going to research a little on those that were charged with the murder of an unborn child.
Based on the link, legally life begins at fertilization when considering the “at any stage of development” clauses.

Not that I agree with it but - having the right to live? Appears to be based on the “mothers consent” until birth or until a certain stage of pregnancy in states that regulate it by trimester.


http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx
 
Your example confirms my position. Can you see it(deduce logically)?
I have. An instance where something occured such as a fall, accident, or trauma where the sudden action caused a chain of events that triggered the body to abort. Nobody planned for it to happen. It was not determined it was a result.
 
Top