Predicto Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I used to think that the abortion debate was primarily a liberal/conservative divide, but as I read the other abortion thread, it occurred to me that there appeared to be an almost 100 percent correlation between views on that wrenching issue and views on another deep philosophical issue. The existence of God, and more specifically, the firm belief in the existence of an immortal soul. As far as I can tell, if you are religiously devout, and you believe that we are imbued with greater significance than as just exceptionally intelligent and evolved individual animals and members of human society, then it becomes almost impossible to be pro-choice. If the soul exists, it makes no sense that it would attach to a fetus at the time of birth. There is no reasonable philospohical "bright line" prior to birth other than the moment of conception. Thus, abortion feels little different than cold-blooded murder of a complete human being with a soul, and the personal body autonomy of the mother who carries the fetus, while important, must give way to the right simply to live of the other "person" she carries. If, on the other hand, you are not devout, and you do not believe in the soul, then you view the issue entirely differently. You see that zygote/fetus as a collection of cells with the potential to become a human being someday. Until it emerges (or at least until it is viable outside of the womb), it does not seem to have "personhood." No memories, no fears, no decisionmaking ability. However, the woman who carries those rapidly dividing cells within her definitely is a person, and whether or not society can tell her what she can do with her own body becomes the paramount issue in your mind. I myself noticed that I had a strong belief in God and the soul until I was nearly finished with high school, and I remember being sympathetic to the pro-life position back then (although I had not considered the issue deeply). When I lost my faith and became agnostic as an adult, it seems I suddenly became pro-choice along the way. I wonder if that is the reason why. Does this hold true for the rest of you? I will put up a poll, and I would be curious what it shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 It's not vital to me as the basic logical premises and the more emotional feelings attached to my (conflicted) stance have the same form either way. But I do expect that for many, the distinction is key, or at least they believe it is key even if the (often complex) more active drivers lie elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I'm about as non religious as it gets, and I find the idea of abortion to be highly uncomfortable. I'm not sure you can consider me pro-life though, because it doesn't sway my political vote. You can basically say that it's not as big of an issue for me as it is for people on the right or left. Whatever the laws of this country are in regards to this issue, I wouldn't have a major opinion either way. (probably because I'm neither religious nor a female) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share Posted February 17, 2012 Poll is up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I'd say that my faith is pretty secure and strong and I'm about 2/3s pro-choice. For me, the battle is a confusion of ethics, pragmatics, fairness, spirtuality, and science. Because there are answers I can't know I don't think it's right for me to force my opinion on others, thus pro-choice. I don't know that I wold call myself deeply religious though. I'm certainly not a religious scholar or fervent practitioner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I would be unhappy if I were to get a woman pregnant and she decided she wanted an abortion. I would be unhappy, but I wouldn't dream of telling her what she has to do with her own self, so I would have to accept it. My hopes have always been that I was too sensible (or is it celibate?) to be with the sort of woman who wouldn't take my feelings on the matter into consideration. As an agnostic I don't think I'll be any too decisive on the impact on the souls involved, thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Good post Predicto (as always!) That probably was also true for me, up until about 6 or so years ago when I had the epiphany that you all have witnessed since. For me, a devout Christian the issue moved from one of my views on faith, soul, theology, and even biblical rules on life to a firm line in the sand around equal respect for all human individuals. So abortion went from something theology based in opinion to a principle based opinion. I dont think faith or religion should have any place in the government (a different opinion that I always held as a neo-con) beyond respecting it as an individual's belief system. I am against abortion now solely due to the harm it causes an individual. (edit: I just saw the poll and there isnt an answer that fits except the "deeply religious and pro life", and that would mislead a reader in my thinking. I believe everyone should have the right to engage in just about any activity, right up to the point that it harms another individual. Thant when the right ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Re-read OP... first time just looked at poll. In a weird way, the belief in an immortal soul makes me more sympathetic towards abortion. I figure if our souls are immortal than an abortion is only killing the stuff that doesn't matter. It's shuffling off some mortal coil, but that part that matters that is important is unharmed, undamaged, and is still awaiting for its chance to glimmer, shine, or do its damage when it gets its turn within this mortal life. If we really only got one shot and there was no other chance of life... than abortion would be more monstrous, but because I do believe there' s a God, a Heaven, a soul, and that the importance of this life is transient as to our whole story... well then, an abortion just makes one sit longer in line before birth. Is it really a cruelty to sentence a life to more time in Heaven or to send him or her to an unwanted existance? Playing cards with God doesn't seem like such a bad secondary option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Religious and pro-life,but I don't oppose abortion much from the religious side(mainly just on the defining of innocence,and devout is not a word I would use) I oppose it because if their lives are not worth saving everyone is subject to justifying their continued existence. breathing air doesn't impress me much as a justification for deserving to continue doing it. Bur, your thinking would get me in a lot of trouble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 As the first (and thus far only) person to vote "Religious/Pro-life" I'll throw my opinion out there. Personally, I'm a devout Protestant and I am extremely pro-life. Unless my wife was going to die or have severe health consequences from a pregnancy, I could never support or advice an abortion. Thankfully she feels the same way, and that's one of the many reasons we get along so well: we share similar views in a lot of major areas. If her pregnancy would kill her or cause severe health issues, I would support her if she decided to abort, but it would still be extremely hard for me to convince her to do so if she needed that pushing. If she came home one day and told me "Yeah, so about that bill you're going to receive from the doctor in a few days....I got pregnant a few weeks ago, didn't tell you, and had an abortion, sorry," then that would be a major problem for me. My step-fathers' first wife did that to him when they were younger, and their marriage fell apart soon after. But I know that's rare and an unfair emotional appeal, so I don't try to lecture people on it, other than "Hey, maybe if you get serious with somebody, you should make sure that they share similar values to you on important life issues." If my little sister, or cousin, or somebody close to me came to me for advice, I'd give them my POV and why they should consider having the kid, but ultimately I would not force my decision on them. I mean if I'll let my own wife make the ultimate decision, how am I going to let anybody else do otherwise? Politically though? I'm more agnostic on the issue. I realize it's impossible to stay neutral on abortion, and I do fall on the pro-life side of the argument, but I try my best to avoid it in public discussions because of the emotional attachment each side has to it. I'm obviously not a fan of abortion, especially when it's not medically necessary. But I'm also not going to be attending any pro-life rallies, picking PP, or telling random strangers that they're wrong or going to hell for having an abortion. It's none of my business, and I'll respect your right to live your life how you see fit. (And I picked a hell of a time to wade into this issue, as I'm about to go work a night shift and get to leave this alone for 8 hours to see how others respond, so hooray for me! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I was raised a Lutheran but have far too many questions to consider myself full fledged Christian plus I'm just the Christmas/Easter make mom happy church goer. I suppose I am agnostic. I'm pro-choice for the group but am not sure if I could go through with an abortion myself. I have two boys, both basically "accidents' with two different women (yes I'm married to the second but we weren't at conception. The decision to have them wasn't difficult, though the first one was a bit of a debate since I was only 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Hm, theology...I was trying the other day to come up with how I would explain my faith to my kids if/when they are older. The closest I got was: "What if all of us are "god?" What if we are but a part of a larger system, and that system is "god?" Yes, we progress, get stronger. However, much like cells in an immune system, occasionally there are bad apples that destroy far more than they protect. Our immune system gets stronger as it survives exposure (up to a point). Maybe our destiny or purpose as a race is to preserve some part of god be it physical, intellectual or other? The "god" may simply be existence or reality. Perhaps the correct question is not "Is there a god?" but rather "If there was a viewing glass where we could see God in entirety would we be able to see us and our role?" Over the eons, man has constantly looked to the divine to explain or comfort him in the face of uncertainty be it storms, death or women. We always looked outward using the divine to explain what we saw. Maybe that blinded us to a bigger picture and our part in it. How often is the Holy Spirit really thought of when thinking about God? To my mind that always seemed the most likely/most closely approximating my thoughts on the likely existence of god/gods. " Now how that goes with being pro-choice I don't know. I guess I am just willing to sacrifice some part of the possible lived divine so that other parts may be brought forth/lived? Maybe, abortion is fate acting as an immune system barring those lives never meant to be, though I loathe the thought of predetermination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Im a heathen that believes in family and community first. The further out you get the less people really care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drtdrums Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I believe in an objective morality, and that as part of that objective morality, ending an innocent life is wrong. Our code of laws is based on the idea of objective morality, and we are not faint-hearted about it in any case I can think of except abortion. The fact of the matter is that we must define life, one way or another, or we are hypocrites. Abortion is either ending a life or it isn't. Saying, "It's above my paygrade," is a copout. "I don't know" is not an acceptable basis for a law that decides whether or not there will be one more human on the planet. The crux of the issue is, of course, "When does life begin?" I believe there is no rational argument to be made for any other point than conception. At conception, cellular division and growth begins to take place that does not end until life ceases. Any process that hijacks this train and runs it off the tracks is ending the life, whether 1 month after the fact or 100 years. The abhorrent violence that is "abortion" is evil. If you have never seen videos of an abortion, do so. They are readily obtainable and should be required viewing for everyone. I do not believe that our humanity is tied to the existence of our organs, but even if you do hold this very untenable position, there is this to get around: Almost all abortions end a beating heart and brain activity. I believe the "beating heart" law doesn't go far enough, but I would rejoice if it became federal law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 This issue is one that's always conflicted me. Like Ghost, I'm Protestant. I was brought up in the C of E, let my faith badly lapse for a long time; but have rediscovered that faith over recent years and I'm very happy where I currently am at in my relationship with God and the church. So from a religious and moralistic stand-point, I'm anti-abortion and pro-life. Even more so with so many childless couples out there so desperate for a child they'd happily adopt and give a child a fantastic home. But then when I weigh all that up with a basic human right to able to decide what you do with your own body, which, and call me contradictory if you like as that goes against bible teachings; I ultimately fall down on the side of whatever woman in question having the right to decide what happens with her own body, regardless of what lead upto that point. But the idea of ending a life before it's had a chance to begin still conflicts the living piss out of me. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forehead Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 My wife and I are both Episcopal and pro-choice by default. Meaning that we fall into what some constitute as a cop-out opinion, we are pro-choice but not pro-abortion. I'd prefer to see these unwanted kids born and then put up for adoption rather than terminated, but I won't instruct a woman on how and what to do with her body. This does not apply to rape/incest/life threatening situations, I have no problems with abortions in those cases. I had to choose the last option because we aren't deeply religious. We believe in God, we enjoy going to church, but we rarely do so, so I classified us as confused due to our lack of commitment, rather than our belief in God. On another note, the amount of man-hating in that other thread has me shaking my head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I would put myself somewhere between confused and deep religious faith (I guess that makes me confused?), and my opinions on abortion have definitely shifted back and forth over the years. I actually think that conversations in the Tailgate have shaped my views significantly, as of course have conversations in church, and personal experience (I think there's no substitute for the thoughts that run through your head when a girl tells you she has missed a period). I have settled on a position of anti-abortion but pro-choice. I think the spiritual question is relatively easy, but the legal question is relatively hard. I will not personally advocate for anyone to have an abortion, and if I personally knew someone considering an abortion, I would most likely try to argue against it. I believe in a God-given soul, and I believe that an abortion is killing that soul. But I understand that while our laws have some relationship to what is written in the Bible, their authority does not come from the Bible, but from the Constitution and from compromises decided by democratically-elected legislatures. Murder is not illegal because it was written in the Ten Commandments; it is illegal because our representatives have deemed it so, and courts have ruled it to be consistent with the Constitution (and even today, the precise bounds of murder are changing not only with respect to abortion, but also in the context of self-defense and assisted suicide). Biblical murder is not governed by the same standards as statutory murder, just like Biblical marriage is not governed by the same standards as common law marriage. No matter how strongly held my beliefs (and I know that mine are not as strong as some others), I understand that many others in this country have different beliefs, and as a matter of religious freedom and individual rights, I do not believe that abortion should be against the law. I am skeptical about the government drawing hard lines on what a woman can do with her body, and I understand that there would be many negative practical consequences to doing so (e.g. encouraging abortions to go underground). "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." Matthew 22:21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurseReversed Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 There are a lot of really good responses in this thread. But I did not vote because I think the poll is way too vague. Just speaking hypothetically, if someone believed a woman has 3 days after conception to decide to have an abortion but not after that, is that pro-choice? There are too many degrees of what is or is not morally right or wrong in any one persons eyes to distribute them all fairly into two groups IMO. Personally I am not very religious and if pressed could try to make a guess about what is morally justifiable from a balanced perspective of the woman and the childs life. But I could not justify lobbying for a law for others to live under my personal judgement on the matter, because I know its just an educated guess. Its an issue I still cannot wholly make my mind up about. I used to support giving the woman a lot more leeway to choose, but have recently given back a little ground to the unborn in their right to life. I still believe in choices, but when and what im not sure. I really hope that we can one day give up on the idea that this is some science problem that can be "figured out" and realize that while we do have to protect life and uphold the law that their are just some things people will have deep moral differences about, while not necessarily being right or wrong about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeaconTheVillain Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Will say that the results are pretty interesting so far. Maybe this issue isn't really as much of a religious one as most think. (sample size lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I really hope that we can one day give up on the idea that this is some science problem that can be "figured out" and realize that while we do have to protect life and uphold the law that their are just some things people will have deep moral differences about, while not necessarily being right or wrong about it.I think Larry mentioned it in the other thread, but I do believe there are scientific/technological solutions for this issue.If we had 100%-effective female-controlled contraception, then I think it would become much more difficult to argue that abortion should be legal. Basically, we would need technology that would place women in a default state of not being able to get pregnant, but being able to explicitly choose when they want to be pregnant. Like if there were a shot we could give all women once they reach puberty that would prevent them from getting pregnant, but then they could take a simple pill that would last a few days whenever they wanted to be able to get pregnant. An alternative technological solution would be a relatively inexpensive artificial womb, so that when an abortion is performed, the embryo or fetus could be placed into the womb, carried to term, and then given up for adoption. Abortion clinics would then just become adoption clinics where women could give up their babies during pregnancy rather than waiting until after the babies are born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drtdrums Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I think Larry mentioned it in the other thread, but I do believe there are scientific/technological solutions for this issue.If we had 100%-effective female-controlled contraception, then I think it would become much more difficult to argue that abortion should be legal. Basically, we would need technology that would place women in a default state of not being able to get pregnant, but being able to explicitly choose when they want to be pregnant. Like if there were a shot we could give all women once they reach puberty that would prevent them from getting pregnant, but then they could take a simple pill that would last a few days whenever they wanted to be able to get pregnant. An alternative technological solution would be a relatively inexpensive artificial womb, so that when an abortion is performed, the embryo or fetus could be placed into the womb, carried to term, and then given up for adoption. Abortion clinics would then just become adoption clinics where women could give up their babies during pregnancy rather than waiting until after the babies are born. Here's my problem with this: The state should have absolutely no control over a human being's reproductive capabilities, ever. Forced sterilization, even temporary, is flat-out wrong. For those getting ready to say, "The same argument can be used FOR abortion: Abortion is not associated with reproduction -- the human life is already "produced". It ENDS the human life -- it doesn't prevent it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Brown #43 Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I selected "Deep religious faith and pro-life," although I suspect that if I were to ever lose my faith, I'd still be pro-life. As a father, having witnessed the development of my son-- his heartbeat, etc.-- in his mother's belly, I don't see how anyone could view it as anything other than a human life to be protected. I still remember when my wife was pregnant, without fail, whenever she would lay on her back, my son would start kicking hard and fast. For some reason he didn't like it when she would lay on her back. And the moment my wife changed positions, he would immediately stop kicking. He made his preference clear, and this was so cute and funny to us. It makes no sense to me how that child could just be considered part of a woman's body to be discarded. My wife wanted to lay on her back. My son protested until she changed positions. Two different opinions on the same issue. Two different people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Direction Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 They're sick of me in the other thread, so I'll do everyone a favor and stay out of this one. My vote will probably surprise some. Also, why not have a choice for those confused about the issue? I bet a lot of people have misgivings on both sides of this issue. I know I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 They're sick of me in the other thread, so I'll do everyone a favor and stay out of this one. My vote will probably surprise some. Also, why not have a choice for those confused about the issue? I bet a lot of people have misgivings on both sides of this issue. I know I do. me too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 me too +1 I chose pro-life yet support a right to kill,balancing freedom and govt responsibility to life(as I believe drtrums explained well) is not really something you can do with labels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.