So basically, looking at the chicken and egg example, a chick is not a chick until it pecks through the eggshell? Or is it after it completely exits the eggshell that it magically becomes a chicken? Obviuosly, we're dealing with a continuum here. It's a chicken before it hatches, and quite possibly from shortly after conception.
2007-09-27 17:23:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First. the obvious answer: the difference between an infant and a fetus it simply location. By definition, a fetus has not been born; an infant has. The umbilical cord is irrelevant. Once the fetus exits the mother's body, it is a person under the law. Cutting the cord does not increase its legal status as a person one iota.
A fetus is alive. A 9-month fetus is more mature than a 7-month old pre-mature infant. That's not really the issue.
Your question is more religious than definitional. You assume that a person who is pro-choice does not believe that a fetus is alive. This is an invalid assumption.
When all you are dealing with in the womb is completely non-viable mass of cells, there is an interesting question of whether that mass IS or IS NOT a "human life." Most people, looking at that mass of cells and not being told that it is human tissue, would probably react that it is not a human life.
But, when dealing with a mature fetus, the question for many pro-choice people is not whether the fetus is alive but what can and should be done about it.
The fact of the matter is that if a woman doesn't want to give birth to a child, there is very little government can do to force her to do so. And, if it tries to force the issue, there is a good chance she will take action to end her life or the baby's anyway.
So, assume the mother decides to kill the fetus. And assume she will succeed. What should be done?
Should she be sent to prison? What will that do to the kids she has at home? Usually, we reserve prison for people who pose a danger to society. She doesn't. She isn't going to rob, rape, or kill anyone after she has her abortion. So, what does imprisoning her accomplish? Nothing.
So I am pro-choice. I see no point in criminalizing a behavior that cannot be deterred by a criminal statute.
And I think it would be a bigger sin to put abortions back into back alleys and have both the mothers and the fetuses die.
I have a strong faith that the Lord will pass judgment on the woman and punish her or grant her mercy as only he can do. I see no point in punishing her further here on earth. No woman takes that step lightly, and having seen abortion procedures performed first hand, I can tell you they are painful nasty procedures.
Read the Adventures of Augie March by Saul Bellow for a great description of what obtaining an abortion was like in the pre-Roe days, and you might appreciate the wisdom of letting the Lord be the judge of women who have abortions rather than us, here on earth, throwing stone upon them.
2007-09-27 17:46:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by Pops 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
I am personally pro-life, and politically pro-choice. I could never have an abortion but I don't believe we have the right to take that option away from other people. I believe that a fetus has a soul from the moment of conception. However, I don't believe that having a soul is a good reason to look down on abortion. Since the soul is a religious concept, and the ultimate goal of most religions is the achieve some version of heaven, than an abortion would guarantee a swift entrance into heaven since the soul would be pure. Therefore, having a soul would actually be a reason to support abortion.
2007-09-27 17:53:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by lkydragn 4
·
4⤊
1⤋
Yes, I believe that humans have a soul. In fact, I believe that the soul is present from the moment of conception, if not before. I believe that animals and plants, all life have souls. The presence or absence of a soul is a topic that is very subjective, elusive, and based on faith and personal belief. One cannot prove the existence of souls, nor is their any "concrete proof" that there is a God. I choose to believe. It is also my belief that there are questions that we have about life and death that cannot be answered by science alone. I believe that our Creator has these answers. I could never have an abortion myself. I've been faced with this decision before, and could not do it. However, it is not for me to judge someone else. If you believe in a soul, you likely believe in God (or "Creator"), and if you believe in God, then it's really not hard to imagine that only He has the authority and true ability to judge someone else. I believe it is inherent in the nature of mankind to be so arrogant as to think that we are the "best" moral authority and that we have all the answers. I am pro-choice.
2007-09-27 17:24:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by It's Ms. Fusion if you're Nasty! 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
In my opinion it's definitely before birth. Not at conception but sometime in the child's development pretty much around the time it gains brain function. However this is my personal belief it's not like i have evidence backing this up no one does.
Oops fetus's development as you can see I consider a fetus a child which is why I am against abortion except for certain cases.
2007-09-27 17:19:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by nobody 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Honestly, this topic is getting reallllllly tiresome.
Jackal is right...it's the chicken or it's the egg. Which would have a soul, a chicken or an egg, or maybe both, or maybe neither? These endless ramblings about when life begins or doesn't begin do nothing but go in circles. The way I see it, people are pretty adamant about things and unshakeable in their beliefs on an issue--until it happens to them or to someone they love. It's amazing how quickly the tables can turn.
2007-09-27 17:27:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by teeleecee 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
I do not support abortion, I hate it, but its a necessity. I dont believe humans have a soul, but I think a would-be human has the right to become one, unless the mother could die or had serious health issues if she gives birth.
2007-09-28 09:21:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
wait up ok if the U. S. says abortion isn't unlawful and homicide is prohibited what are the alterations i mean come on ur getting somewhat one it rather is coronary heart is thrashing and reducing it ur getting Gods artwork and reducing it ur getting somewhat toddler which's coronary heart is thrashing and has existence yet ur reducing it in my faith ISLAM its Haram / forbidden i mean shall we are saying a woman gets pr ego by way of her bf properly now EX because of the fact he found out she is prego it rather is been 8 months and he or she cant cope with the toddler so she needs abortion . shall we ingredient i became born no longer 9 months yet 7 and im alive and unquestionably sturdy im 14 now and so they get that toddler which is crying and has eighty 5% existence you get that knife and shrink it i mean heavily the human beings are going to far with this ppl could plan to get pregnet no longer circulate out have exciting oh ur pregnet then what you do..?don'tdont understand what to do its 5-6 months you circulate out get abortion what a shame
2016-10-05 11:38:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe humans have souls in general, I think it's possible for someone to be born soulless, you know these people when you meet them.
At the very least, they get a soul when they are physically born.
2007-09-28 03:54:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by Manny 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
i don't have to believe in a soul in order to be a moral, ethical humanist. i don't have to be religious in order to justify my beliefs. i can care for human life as much as anyone that believes in a "God" and a "soul," maybe, in fact, I care even more for human beings than many of the religious right-wingers. after all, i am interested in the child AFTER they are out of the womb, not just before they are born. i believe that children should not be born into the world if they are unwanted. i believe that women MUST have the right to abortion, as they do in every civilized country in the world. i believe that religion should not enter into lawmaking in our country. religion was supposed to stay out of the law books. "FREEDOM OF RELIGION" essentially means "FREEDOM FROM RELIGIOUS TYRANNY." If you're against abortion, don't have one. i'm not a Christian, whether or not I believe in souls is nobodies business, and I, as a woman, have a right to control my body.
2007-09-27 18:25:41
·
answer #10
·
answered by Kinz 4
·
2⤊
1⤋