Home

S/O Thanksgiving... Pro-Life, Pro-Choice in America
  Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 22, 23, 24
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News -> Politics


View latest: 24h 48h 72h


saw50st8




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Dec 03 2019, 11:13 am
sushilover wrote:
1) Capital punishment is legal. Stopping a prisoner from being killed is not "forcing" him to continue living.
2) Even in pro-life states, there is a welfare system and social network in place. There is also fostering. It may not be ideal, but the child will survive. You cannot claim without evidence that pro-lifers policies kill kids.
3) If these policies don't reduce childhood poverty, then you cannot prove that not having those policies increases it.
4) The thinking is that it is so emotionally damaging that it is a clear risk to the mother. I also am reluctantly in favor of making exceptions in cases of the mother being suicidal or mentally unstable. There are certain emotional risks that are so acute, it can be compared to physical risks.
5) Cheating doesn't harm or end another human life.


I don't understand your first statement. The prisoner wants to live and can do so independently. If you force a woman to continue a pregnancy you are forcing the birth of a child.

You are talking general poverty. I am talking about a child being at risk for dying from lack of food or shelter. These are real risks to many women and the more pro-lief states are always trying to reduce benefits to these women who are the most vulnerable.

I think you need to learn a little bit more about foster care. It isn't always about "not being ideal" - there are many cases of child molestation, child endangerment etc. It is not a very good system.

If rape is so damaging psychologically, why can a regular unplanned pregnancy not have equal damaging consequences to women? How do you decide what legally falls into damaging enough to take a life? Or drastic enough to take a life? These are better formed under medical ethics. There are rape victims who find the birth of a child cathartic. If those women exist, why would you give a blanket ruling in favor of all women who are raped?

Cheating absolutely harms other people and may actually kill another human being if an STD is involved. Many women don't use condoms with their partners because they assume that their partners are monogamous.
Back to top

dancingqueen




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Dec 03 2019, 2:52 pm
sushilover wrote:
I'm not sure what difference it would make to our argument of whether or not a fetus is a human being... but sure.
1) if the fetus were mine and the infant was a stranger, that would change the equation.
2) If the infant was sickly and the fetus healthy, that would change the equation
3) If the fetus wad right in front of me, while I never saw the infant, that would change the equation (as in, if I'd have to witness the fetus being torn apart, but the infant is a far away stranger...)

If all things were 100 percent equal, then yes, I would save the infant. But none of the reasons for saving the infant involve the infant being more of a human than the fetus. Because the fetus is human and humans don't become "more human" with age.
For example, I'd save the infant because I can see him, while realistically, I'd never have to see the fetus dying.
The infant can cry which would break my heart and haunt me forever.
The fetus has a higher chance of dying, so it would impact me less emotionally.
The infant has a higher chance of having a mom who bonded with it. Again, an emotional reason.

I'll admit these are mostly selfish reasons. But I sure will not convince myself that the reason I'd save the infant is because it's somehow more human than the fetus. Biology doesn't work that way.
I have a feeling that if the womb were see-through, and we could hear babies cry as they are ripped apart, there would be far less abortions. Nowadays, we can somehow convince ourselves that the unborn isn't human, is just a blob, etc.
Biology disagrees.


So you would seriously save the an embryo over a live infant, even if the infant was indeed sickly?? That would be immoral and misguided, IMO.

And if a fetus/embryo is truly on the same level as a live person then IVF would be assur.
Back to top

#BestBubby




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Dec 03 2019, 3:03 pm
saw50st8 wrote:
I don't understand your first statement. The prisoner wants to live and can do so independently. If you force a woman to continue a pregnancy you are forcing the birth of a child.

You are talking general poverty. I am talking about a child being at risk for dying from lack of food or shelter. These are real risks to many women and the more pro-lief states are always trying to reduce benefits to these women who are the most vulnerable.

I think you need to learn a little bit more about foster care. It isn't always about "not being ideal" - there are many cases of child molestation, child endangerment etc. It is not a very good system.

If rape is so damaging psychologically, why can a regular unplanned pregnancy not have equal damaging consequences to women? How do you decide what legally falls into damaging enough to take a life? Or drastic enough to take a life? These are better formed under medical ethics. There are rape victims who find the birth of a child cathartic. If those women exist, why would you give a blanket ruling in favor of all women who are raped?

Cheating absolutely harms other people and may actually kill another human being if an STD is involved. Many women don't use condoms with their partners because they assume that their partners are monogamous.


Nothing you state justifies literally ripping an unborn baby apart limb by limb!

You don't murder a fetus to save it from starvation. That is a false argument because one can give up the baby for adoption. And there IS welfare, food stamps and WIC so nobody is dying from starvation.

If a woman chooses to have relations she is choosing the risk of pregnancy - even with bc. Therefore, there is no justification to murder just because woman does not want inconvenience of pregnancy. This is why some Pro-Life will make an exception for rape - because woman did not choose to risk pregnancy. I support abortion for rape - but it should be done within 8 weeks - before Halachah considers it murder.
Back to top

sushilover




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Dec 03 2019, 7:26 pm
dancingqueen wrote:
So you would seriously save the an embryo over a live infant, even if the infant was indeed sickly?? That would be immoral and misguided, IMO.

And if a fetus/embryo is truly on the same level as a live person then IVF would be assur.

What I was saying was that if the infant was extremely unhealthy , perhaps dying or suffering from some sort of terrible, hopeless condition, while the fetus was healthy...I might make the decision to save the fetus first. That doesn't in any way mean that the infant is less human than a fetus.
I'll admit it isn't the strongest of my examples, the others are better imo...
(This is a weird thought experiment, but someone asked me about it specifically. )

How would ivf be wrong? No one kills embryos. Even ones that are so called "destroyed" are simply left to defrost. Withholding care and ending a life are very different- according to halacha and ethics.
Back to top

shyshira




 
 
 
 

Post  Tue, Dec 03 2019, 7:40 pm
sushilover wrote:
What I was saying was that if the infant was extremely unhealthy , perhaps dying or suffering from some sort of terrible, hopeless condition, while the fetus was healthy...I might make the decision to save the fetus first. That doesn't in any way mean that the infant is less human than a fetus.
I'll admit it isn't the strongest of my examples, the others are better imo...
(This is a weird thought experiment, but someone asked me about it specifically. )

How would ivf be wrong? No one kills embryos. Even ones that are so called "destroyed" are simply left to defrost. Withholding care and ending a life are very different- according to halacha and ethics.


Halacha doesn't consider that life starts at fertilization. Have you changed your view?

Human beings are regularly terminated in the IVF lab.
Back to top

saw50st8




 
 
 
 

Post  Wed, Dec 04 2019, 9:06 am
#BestBubby wrote:
Nothing you state justifies literally ripping an unborn baby apart limb by limb!

You don't murder a fetus to save it from starvation. That is a false argument because one can give up the baby for adoption. And there IS welfare, food stamps and WIC so nobody is dying from starvation.

If a woman chooses to have relations she is choosing the risk of pregnancy - even with bc. Therefore, there is no justification to murder just because woman does not want inconvenience of pregnancy. This is why some Pro-Life will make an exception for rape - because woman did not choose to risk pregnancy. I support abortion for rape - but it should be done within 8 weeks - before Halachah considers it murder.


You are sensationalizing many things.

Welfare, food stamps and WIC are programs that many people in pro-life states are trying to limit and cut out. So yes, if you cut these services, you may literally be starving babies. It is interesting that "pro-life" states want to cut these out and take away the safety net from the very babies they say they want to protect. Which is why I don't think that pro-life people are actually pro-life. Their actions say otherwise.

As to the rape exemption - if it is murder, it shouldn't matter that it is rape. According to you, there is no justification for "murder." You are also asking to legislate to halacha. Considering we are a minority, you are more likely to get it legislated the Catholic way, which basically eliminates abortion even for the health of the mother.
Back to top

imorethanamother




 
 
 
 

Post  Thu, Dec 05 2019, 3:36 pm
saw50st8 wrote:
You are sensationalizing many things.

Welfare, food stamps and WIC are programs that many people in pro-life states are trying to limit and cut out. So yes, if you cut these services, you may literally be starving babies. It is interesting that "pro-life" states want to cut these out and take away the safety net from the very babies they say they want to protect. Which is why I don't think that pro-life people are actually pro-life. Their actions say otherwise.

As to the rape exemption - if it is murder, it shouldn't matter that it is rape. According to you, there is no justification for "murder." You are also asking to legislate to halacha. Considering we are a minority, you are more likely to get it legislated the Catholic way, which basically eliminates abortion even for the health of the mother.


Exactly. This is a Christian country, and the Christian pro-lifers want abortion outlawed even in cases where Halacha would permit it.

I remember Fox once saying that her husband told her to stay out of these types of threads, because you have people walking around as if they know halacha l'maaseh. We don't. Unless there are some Ravs here masquerading as women.

There's a lot of "thought experiments" and "I feel" being tossed about. There's little to no actual source in Torah given for these thoughts and feelings. Embryos and coma patients and puppies - these are all distracting from the main point.

If 100 women in the United States had a predicament that necessitated a halachicly sanctioned abortion, how does that resolve with your worldview that all abortion is murder? How can you make the government listen to the strict orthodox version of halacha, and not with the strict Christian version of their laws? And if you side with the extremist view, aren't you then ANTI-TORAH because of these women who should get an abortion from their Rav but now can't?

Because this issue is too tricky, perhaps it's best to let it be loosely legislated than to over-legislate. And we can all admit we are in galus and our government has never dealt with any crime and punishment as halacha would mandate.

And lastly, I ask that perhaps we refrain from the zealous language. Calling all women who get abortion murderers is a bit extreme, considering that some women actually have on this site, and they said their Rav told them too. A little sensitivity might be prudent here.
Back to top

marina




 
 
 
 

Post  Thu, Dec 05 2019, 4:07 pm
#BestBubby wrote:
Nothing you state justifies literally ripping an unborn baby apart limb by limb!

You don't murder a fetus to save it from starvation. That is a false argument because one can give up the baby for adoption. And there IS welfare, food stamps and WIC so nobody is dying from starvation.

If a woman chooses to have relations she is choosing the risk of pregnancy - even with bc. Therefore, there is no justification to murder just because woman does not want inconvenience of pregnancy. This is why some Pro-Life will make an exception for rape - because woman did not choose to risk pregnancy. I support abortion for rape - but it should be done within 8 weeks - before Halachah considers it murder.


Halacha considers abortion murder if the woman is in labor but not before. Please stop posting the same mistakes over and over. Some gullible people may believe you.

** interesting neutral fact : I love musicals! Last one I saw was Hamilton
Back to top

sushilover




 
 
 
 

Post  Sun, Dec 08 2019, 11:43 am
marina wrote:
Halacha considers abortion murder if the woman is in labor but not before. Please stop posting the same mistakes over and over. Some gullible people may believe you.

** interesting neutral fact : I love musicals! Last one I saw was Hamilton


Does Halacha consider involuntary manslaughter murder? Does that mean we should decriminalize those homicides? Does that mean a grieving child is somehow a liar trying to trick gullible people if she calls a criminally negligent doctor a murderer?

Elective abortions are immoral and violent acts. I am hurt by the implication that I am somehow not Jewish enough if I don't support it.

Agudath Israel says this:
"Agudath Israel of America is long on record in opposing Roe v. Wade .

Jewish tradition teaches that a human fetus has status and dignity, and that abortion is prohibited in the vast majority of pregnancies. But even beyond that tradition, it should be apparent to all that termination of pregnancy raises profound moral concerns.

In line with its support for religious freedom, Agudath Israel opposes initiatives that would make abortion unlawful even in situations where termination of pregnancy is mandated by religious law – as it is, for example, under Jewish law when the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother. However, it is not necessary to make all abortions permissible in order to protect the rare instance when abortion is truly indicated.”
Back to top
  Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 22, 23, 24 Recent Topics

Page 24 of 24 View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News -> Politics

Related Topics Replies Last Post
Does trump care about America’s best interests
by sky
44 Wed, Feb 12 2020, 10:02 pm View last post
Get these anti-America traitors out of our govt!
by Cheiny
0 Thu, Dec 19 2019, 5:20 pm View last post
Could Samoa happen in contiguous America? 66 Wed, Dec 11 2019, 3:26 pm View last post
by nchr
Poor and middle class attitudes in America
by amother
393 Sun, Dec 01 2019, 4:20 pm View last post
Thanksgiving 26 Fri, Nov 29 2019, 2:11 pm View last post

Jump to: