One of the most prominent arguments that pro-life people advocate comes from the old testament in the form of one of the commandments givens to moses, "Thou Shall Not Kill." It is argued as a hard and fast rule that we should not have abortions because abortions are killing.
People who use this argument and refer to it as hard and fast are taking it out of context or ignoring the surrounding texts of the old testament.
For example Evil Bible saved the the trouble of compiling my own list where killing is actually encouraged.
Here are a few of my my top ordained massacres in the old testament.
1.) For the right to purchase his wife(the price is 200 human foreskins), King David kills 200 Philistines. (I Samuel)
2.) Elijah with gods help of course burns 102 religious leaders to death. (2 Kings)
3.) 42 kids made fun of Elishas baldness so he convinces God to send two bears to kill them. (2 Kings)
So as you can see thou shall not kill isn't really a hard and fast rule...more of a general guideline you should follow until the voices in your head tell you something different.
So next time a pro-lifer tells you that though shall not kill, tell them to go back and read a little bit more.
If they tell you that the new testament overwrites the old testament tell them to point you to the section in the new testimate were it says do not kill.
11 comments:
Or inform them that when a fetus is aborted, it goes straight to heaven, so where is the harm? Isn't heaven where we all want to end up? Heaven is eternal so this 78 year life/existence humans have on Earth is inconseqeuntial in comparison. Abortion is not doing anyharm at all... unless these wacko anti-choice people REALLY don't beleive that we go to heaven or at least are unsure.
auto-email follow up comment trigger
By saying that a fetus automatically goes right to heaven, you give credence to that fetus, you give it a soul, which feeds into their argument that aborting a fetus is killing. Is that your intention, Rocketstar?
aunt katherine, based on Christina teachings, fetus' that never are birthed (misscarried, aborted, still born etc...) go to heaven. As far as humanity knows, there is no evidence that proves that souls exists. Fetus' are not seperate from thier host (the mother) untilt hey are 100% viable without the life of the mother.
YO Bri just sayin hi and shit :)
The bible is basically a mess of conradictions throughout, on pretty much anything. It was written to control people.....
Also, Rocket star... I dont think you are a whacko if you think an unborn fetus is a living person and therefore should not be killed/ aborted.
-
How can you argue they are not living? Just because they are at a point in their lives where they are dependent on the mother in order to live, does not mean they are not alive themselves? --- Truthfully, I believe this is one of the hardest moral issues to deal with and you can call me wishy washy but this is not an easy concept for me to embrace on either side of the coin, but luckily for me anyways it has zero to do with the bible. It is strictly a moral issue that is weighted by the rights of the mother and the rights of the unborn fetus/ person. So in terms of rape, health of the mother, etc I lean towards allowing for abortion, in terms of a last chance method of birth control? not so much. use a condom ...
Bill,
I dont think you are a whacko if you think an unborn fetus is a living person and therefore should not be killed/ aborted.
--- I agree 100%, I do think that the people who think killing abortion doctors is moral, think that women and doctors should be imprisoned or even killed for abortions etc…. are wackos.
-
How can you argue they are not living? Just because they are at a point in their lives where they are dependent on the mother in order to live, does not mean they are not alive themselves?
-- Just to clarify, I am referring to viability. They are not dependent on the mother as anyone can care for the baby. What I am referring to is the fact that they are 100% part of the mother (mother dies, they die) until they are viable without the mother being alive. Until that point, they are a part of the host and it is the hosts decision on what the host does with that part of their body.
I think your stance is what most would agree with. Nobody wants abortion used as birth control but do agree that it is a personal decision. My take is this, until every single abused, starving, enslaved, homeless child in this country and the planet for that mater is taken care of, the anti-choice folks have no case. Let’s take care of the living children then move onto the unborn. That will never happen because that takes work, unlike holding signs and killing abortion doctors.
Okay, you're right, there is so such thing as a "soul", and there is also no such thing as heaven (or hell, unless you count Duluth in February). Just supersticious stuff made up to to control people, aka "Christian teachings." A fetus is not a human being and that's what defines killing of not killing. Aborting a fetus is NOT KILLING.
~~Abortion is a perfectly acceptable form of birth control. (Most men hate hearing that.) A woman can be in a situation where 1) her male partner refuses her any birth control, 2) she can't afford it, 3) it's not available to her. Yes, it's cheaper to have an abortion than to get birth control in some places. Welcome to reality.
~ While I agree that, in an ideal world and in Disneyland, all children wanted or unplanned should be taken care of, but that ain't happening. But let's pretend for a moment that it does happen. It's still not a valid argument for the anti-choice side. "Let's have all unplanned pregnancies to full term knowing that the child will be taken care of." Besides, maybe the woman doesn't want an unplanned pregnancy, even if her child is guaranteed a good life. That's HER CHOICE. (If men got pregnant...)
So, Rocket, I don't know what your point is....are you for women making their own medical choices like men get to do, or not? Doesn't matter about heaven/hell, fetus viability, christian nonsense, or every child on the planet fed and clothed. It's about women having full access to medical care.
Aunt Katherine,
~~Abortion is a perfectly acceptable form of birth control. (Most men hate hearing that.) A woman can be in a situation where 1) her male partner refuses her any birth control, 2) she can't afford it, 3) it's not available to her. Yes, it's cheaper to have an abortion than to get birth control in some places. Welcome to reality.
--- Good point, I can see how it can be a valid form of birth control.
So, Rocket, I don't know what your point is....are you for women making their own medical choices like men get to do, or not? Doesn't matter about heaven/hell, fetus viability, christian nonsense, or every child on the planet fed and clothed. It's about women having full access to medical care.
-- We are on the same exact page ;o) I am for a woman doing anything she feels is the right thing to do. I am for personal rights 100%. I am a free thinking atheist libertarian who wants nothing but personal freedom.
Thanks, Rocket.
Post a Comment