English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-10-12 03:19:45 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

13 answers

I am VERY pro life and I have been in the situation where I can judge. I am NOT religous. I am spiritual but am open to what the "truth" may really be.
Also,there are many many pro choice Christians. Even a priest and a pastor told me God would understand if I terminayted that pregnancy. So,you tell me,whats the moral way?

2006-10-12 03:21:52 · answer #1 · answered by TrofyWife 4 · 1 2

Some I suppose, but they ignore the dynamics of population growth in favor of some emotional baggage when they think that way. Considering that rationality is a necessary pre-requisite for achieving the Atheist mind-set it is surprising they would opt for the forced breeder mentality. Any excuse not to add to world population woes is a valid and necessary reason.

2006-10-12 10:27:27 · answer #2 · answered by iknowtruthismine 7 · 1 0

I am. The science is clear -- from the moment of conception, all the potential of human life is present and left to its devices, the pregnancy will either naturally terminate or will follow through to the birth of a complete human being. There is no moral fault in a natural termination; they happen without interference. Abortion, however, kills. The child is genetically distinct from its mother. It is not an undifferentiated tissue mass (there is no such thing. Tissues are by definition differentiated). Except in extremely rare cases, which constitute medical emergencies, the two being's blood systems never mingle. By the end of the first trimester, the developing child already has functional nerves that are capable of reacting to stimuli.

In short, when it's sperm and egg, there is 0% human. They lack, independantly, the ability to generate human life. Once they join though, things jump to 100% because everything needed is there.

Since the child is genetically distinct from her, it is NOT her body.

The one, ONLY time I would consider abortion to be morally acceptable is if the mother could not, even at the cost of her own life, make it to the medical age of viability. That is, if she could make it to 5 months (the current age of viability) but it would cost her her life, she is morally obligated to give her life to give her child the chance. However, if she's at three months and on her death bed because of the child, then the child is going to die one way or another and it is better to save one than to lose both.

2006-10-12 10:20:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 6 2

Of course there are. I've seen numerous artlces/books explaining secular reasoning to oppose the open abortion policies currently in vogue in the US.
One strong argument seems to be that Western society is basically aborting itself into oblivion. Europe has already fallen below replacement levels. (Obviously, if you feel Western society is the source of all that ills the world, this won't be an issue.)

2006-10-12 10:28:16 · answer #4 · answered by Robert Black 2 · 0 1

Pro-choice does not necessarily mean pro-abortion. Pro-choice simply means respecting the rights of the mother to decide what is best for her. It's her body, and I would never try to take that right from anyone.

Yes, some of us are pro-choice, and pro-life. It's not an all or nothing decision. What's right for one is not necessarily right for another. That is where the choice comes in.

2006-10-12 10:24:10 · answer #5 · answered by . 5 · 5 2

As a atheist - I have my own - clearly formed, thought opinion on everything.

It's great.

A woman has a right to choose.

2006-10-12 10:35:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes, I'm pro-life as well.

2006-10-12 10:36:53 · answer #7 · answered by ♥Mira♥ 5 · 1 0

Of course there are. Im not an athiest but respect and love for human life does not exists and come solely from religion or spirituality.
I think its a silly question.

2006-10-12 10:29:08 · answer #8 · answered by Faz 4 · 1 1

....depends on your definition of atheist: i think that an atheist is someone that is not if the major religions of earth, but he is of a more spiritual one... half of my down is into ancestor worshipping.... and forgeiners call us necromancers, but... we're not!

2006-10-12 10:23:25 · answer #9 · answered by Everlost 2 · 0 0

Atheists are free to have any opinions they desire so of course there are.

2006-10-12 10:21:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers