Abortion and 19th Century Science

[Pointedstick]

For those of you who feel that a woman should have the right to choose an abortion for reasons other than rape or risk to her life, how would you feel about chemical sterilization of that woman (either forced or at least strongly encouraged) for a certain number of years afterward?

After all, the woman clearly doesn't want to have children--at least not right now. Why not help her achieve that goal through chemical sterilization, since more traditional methods of contraception don't seem to be working very well for her?

Perhaps the sterilization could be lifted after a few years, after the woman has had time to (hopefully) develop a bit more maturity and perhaps be in a better situation in her life where she's willing to have a child and be a responsible, loving parent?

To be honest, that sounds rather monstrous to me. Permitting the state to directly determine who can and cannot reproduce--even only temporarily--strikes me as an exceptionally dangerous slope to begin sliding down.

And from a utilitarian perspective, anybody who publicly expresses such an opinion is likely to lose the support of approximately 100% of women who hear it. This is, I believe, one of the problems that the Republican party is having right now. There is a wing composed of people who say things of that nature that make big honkin' alarm bells go off in the mind of any woman who hears it.

[Pointedstick]

And for the record, I reluctantly support the legality of abortion in the first trimester. So you have heard from an "abortion supporter." That term isn't really accurate IMHO. Very few people are in favor of abortion itself; being "pro choice" (I hate that term too) is really more about supporting abortion being legal. There aren't a lot of women who are really excited to kill their in-utero baby. All of the women I know who have had abortions have described it as a wrenching experience and emotionally scarring. Some have even very plainly and frankly said that what they did was murder. It's a hard decision for most women, and that's something that I think it's important to keep in mind. It's not like the common case is some thoughtless bimbo who callously kills her unborn children for the hell of it because she's too stupid to use birth control, which is the position that a lot of pro-life people seem to express.

[Gosso]

Perhaps look at it from the males perspective.  He is needed for only a few seconds.  At this point he is done and the little life will grow on its own (provided the mother eats enough food).  At this point the only way to stop this little life is from a natural death (miscarriage, etc), or if a human being willingly decides that this life should be stopped.  To me this is clearly murder.  The ball has been set into motion at conception, and the willful act of a human to stop this at any point is murder.

There is also the moral compass that pushes down on all of us, if you look to that then you'll quite clearly find the answer - no matter how you try to rationally explain it away.

Gosso, you stated that well.  I agree completely.

Thanks...I stole it from C.S. Lewis.

Now that I got the wheels turning here is another thought.  What is the purpose of sex?  Is it mainly for fun or is to create new life?  If you are participating in the act of sexual intercourse then you need to be held responsible for your actions.  It might be fun to drive 100 miles/hour down the highway, but if you cause an accident and kill someone, you cannot avoid the consequences by saying you just wanted to have some fun.  The woman and man were fully aware of the risks they were taking (unless you consider the act of sex a form of temporary insanity, but even drunk drivers could be considered temporarily insane).  The man is already required to help support the child for the first 18 years of the child’s life, so it is not only the woman that becomes enslaved to the child.

[Tortoise]

To be honest, that sounds rather monstrous to me. Permitting the state to directly determine who can and cannot reproduce--even only temporarily--strikes me as an exceptionally dangerous slope to begin sliding down.

I agree it's a slippery slope. But as for the idea of forced sterilization being "monstrous," I think the ideas of (1) digging a fetus out of a woman's womb and (2) bringing a completely unwanted child into a cruel, harsh world filled with poverty and neglect are even more monstrous. Of those three ideas, I actually find forced sterilization to be the least monstrous.

Do I think it's politically feasible? Absolutely not. I just think it's an interesting idea to discuss.

And by the way, the emotionally-charged adjective "monstrous" probably falls under the category of "more heat than light." So I'll stop using it if you do

[AdamA]

Abortion is something I think about from time to time, but then I think I make an effort to put it out of my mind.  If one believes, as I do, that abortion is murder, then the current state of affairs is horrific.  I feel like the German citizens during WWII that tried not to look at the trains carrying people to the concentration camps.  It's not my problem, I try to convince myself.

Are there any circumstances under which you feel abortion is acceptable?

[Mountaineer]

I don't think you're shedding more light than heat here. Maybe you should follow your own suggestion.

Thank you.  I do  respect your opinion, but I was intending to only speak the truth (except for the Mengele part for which I apologize for bad-mouthing Mengele; he did not kill nearly so many people as Roe vs. Wade - a fact).

Mengele was a sadist who, among other things, injected dye into children's eyes to see what would happen. Abortion may be murder, but even if it is, it's got nothing to do with sadism. I can't accept your apology if you're going to keep making a connection between the two.

Let me try to explain further.

1. Connection between sadist and abortionist: both are evil in God's eyes where ALL sins are the same.  In man's eyes, all evil is not the same, for example stealing a loaf of bread is not the same as murder.  The consequences of sin from God's perspective is death - Jesus came to take on the sin of all from all time, if the gift is not rejected, and came to conquerer death - which He did on the cross.  The consequences of evil from man's perspective are variable, reasonably unpredictable even if the punishment is intended to fit the crime, and subject to the moral compass of the observer/judge.  So, the connection depends on whether one is able to see both God's realm and man's realm concurrently - apparently some can, some cannot.

2. Apology:  I offered the apology (a gift).  The gift is given.  Whether or not you choose to accept it is totally your choice.  I will say that in my experience, those who are unable to forgive become "eaten from within" and suffer far more than those who are able to forgive.  Been there, done that!  Now I try but not always successfully to forgive immediately; everyone, including myself is better for it.  I also now try to tolerate the views of others, even if I disagree with them to my core, unless their view is contrary to God's wishes for a Christian life - then I am compelled to speak the truth even though I am usually persecuted for it (e.g. a Biblical example of that is Jesus in the Temple with the moneychangers); my experience is that those who most loudly preach tolerance are usually the ones most intolerant of those who have a different set of values.

3. Mengele vs. the Abortionist: Desert posted a couple of links dealing with Mengele and Gosnell.  I hope we can all agree that both are horrifying examples of human behavior.  From a Christian perspective, they are both examples that Satan is indeed roaming the world causing many to succumb to his (Satan and man) most evil inner perverted desires.  I expect Satan is laughing the whole time we humans are willfully physically or mentally killing our own species (whether by abortion, war, or hurtful comments) and painting that murder with an "OK label".

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

Are there any circumstances under which you feel abortion is acceptable?

No, I can't think of any.

The following is very dark, but it is how I feel about the topic:

In the case of rape it is not so black and white.  This is because the act of conception was a purely evil act.  If I was aware that I was conceived via rape then I would contemplate suicide, and would not fault my mother for ending my life early on.  If I could sacrifice my life so that she wouldn't have to relive that moment every time she looked at me, then I would do it (although put a knife in my hands and I might have second thoughts).  I doubt the emotional pain from rape ever truly disappears.  Also, could there ever be any love between the mother and child?  I doubt it.

A mother and father can get over their gross negligence and provide for the child, but I doubt a woman could overcome the rape.

[Mountaineer]

Abortion is something I think about from time to time, but then I think I make an effort to put it out of my mind.  If one believes, as I do, that abortion is murder, then the current state of affairs is horrific.  I feel like the German citizens during WWII that tried not to look at the trains carrying people to the concentration camps.  It's not my problem, I try to convince myself.

Are there any circumstances under which you feel abortion is acceptable?

I don't think so. 

My reasoning:  I believe God is in charge.  Thus, if God allows that sperm and egg to produce a human, who am I to say that the resulting person will not grow up to be the person who invents the way to the next medical innovation, the next energy saving mechanism, the next theologian of world renown, the next .......

At the same time, I feel really, really badly for the woman if she did not want the child.  However, the "Theology of the Cross" (vs. the Theology of Glory presented by many TV preachers) says that it is almost assured that we will suffer in this life because of our fallen, sinful condition - but we will suffer nowhere nearly as much as Christ who took on all our sins and conquored death to assure our salvation.

... Mountaineer

[dualstow]

...

Wow, Mountaineer, thank you for the wonderful gift. You compare legal abortion to the behavior of a war criminal and add insult to injury with an "apology" wrapped up in twisted logic. I suppose my expectations were too high. I gave my perspective without substantial debate, and yet I hoped this thread would be a good read. But, it is clear that you never had any intent to do anything but lay out your opinion and then beat it over our heads with hyperbole and poorly chosen metaphors.

I am grateful that I live under man's law and not god's law. I can choose birth control, such as condoms, rather than leaving it to the almighty to decide if I'm going to father the next Charlemagne. If something happens to a loved one, such as disease, I can bring them to a hospital rather than waiting for God's will to sort it out. And if someone needs an abortion in my country, I can rest assured that she can find a safe clean place to get one without shame, rather seek out a criminal in a dirty apartment with a wire hanger.  And, I can sleep soundly knowing that those people who murder abortion doctors will go to prison, because God will not whisk them to safety when authorities come knocking.

Enjoy your thread. I think I'll have to find enlightenment elsewhere.

[Mountaineer]

Enjoy your thread. I think I'll have to find enlightenment elsewhere.

Your quote reminded me of Descartes  "I think, therefore I am"  on the forefront of man becoming his own god.

Peace be with you, there is always hope.  Until we meet again .......

... Mountaineer

[kka]

In the case of rape it is not so black and white.  This is because the act of conception was a purely evil act.  If I was aware that I was conceived via rape then I would contemplate suicide, and would not fault my mother for ending my life early on.  If I could sacrifice my life so that she wouldn't have to relive that moment every time she looked at me, then I would do it (although put a knife in my hands and I might have second thoughts).  I doubt the emotional pain from rape ever truly disappears.  Also, could there ever be any love between the mother and child?  I doubt it.

A mother and father can get over their gross negligence and provide for the child, but I doubt a woman could overcome the rape.

There are quite a few people with first-hand experience who would disagree: http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersc ... nrape.html

[AdamA]

You compare legal abortion to the behavior of a war criminal and add insult to injury with an "apology" wrapped up in twisted logic.

I don't agree with him either, Dualstow, but isn't this (the idea that abortion is never acceptable) the logical conclusion of the "abortion is murder" mentality?

I suspect there are a lot of people who share Mountaineer's opinion.

My reasoning:  I believe God is in charge.  Thus, if God allows that sperm and egg to produce a human, who am I to say that the resulting person will not grow up to be the person who invents the way to the next medical innovation, the next energy saving mechanism, the next theologian of world renown, the next .......

How about in cases where the mother's life is in danger for medical reasons (i.e., a heart condition that may kill her if she carries the pregnancy to term)?

[Gosso]

In the case of rape it is not so black and white.  This is because the act of conception was a purely evil act.  If I was aware that I was conceived via rape then I would contemplate suicide, and would not fault my mother for ending my life early on.  If I could sacrifice my life so that she wouldn't have to relive that moment every time she looked at me, then I would do it (although put a knife in my hands and I might have second thoughts).  I doubt the emotional pain from rape ever truly disappears.  Also, could there ever be any love between the mother and child?  I doubt it.

A mother and father can get over their gross negligence and provide for the child, but I doubt a woman could overcome the rape.

There are quite a few people with first-hand experience who would disagree: http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersc ... nrape.html

Hmmm, perhaps I underestimated the love between a mother and her baby, where the mother can see through the ugly past.  But I'd still be pro-choice in these circumstances, since she did not consent to the act.  If the baby is aborted then the rapist should be charged with murder, since he was the only willing participant in the creation of that life.  The woman is a victim and should bear zero responsibility.  So the rapist is responsible for the creation and eventual death of the life.  But then we get into the fuzzy world of what is and isn't rape, which is something I don't want to think about right now.

[Mountaineer]

.

My reasoning:  I believe God is in charge.  Thus, if God allows that sperm and egg to produce a human, who am I to say that the resulting person will not grow up to be the person who invents the way to the next medical innovation, the next energy saving mechanism, the next theologian of world renown, the next .......

How about in cases where the mother's life is in danger for medical reasons (i.e., a heart condition that may kill her if she carries the pregnancy to term)?

I believe I mentioned this in an earlier post somewhere along the line.  My answer is that I believe the doctors should do everything possible to save both the mother and the baby.  Doctors, in my opinion, should never ethically force a distraught mother/father to choose.

That is a great question however that comes from those of us who are looking for some tiny bit of wiggle room.  In all honesty, I have never been in that situation; I imagine it would be horrible and I hope I would stick with my belief in God as firmly as I do now.  It would be so very difficult, my heart would cry for them.

... Mountaineer

[dualstow]

You compare legal abortion to the behavior of a war criminal and add insult to injury with an "apology" wrapped up in twisted logic.

I don't agree with him either, Dualstow, but isn't this (the idea that abortion is never acceptable) the logical conclusion of the "abortion is murder" mentality?

That's a fair question and one I anticipated. My answer is that if I link "abortion" and "murder' in the same breath, it is only in the context of a kind of sanctioned, acceptable murder. What does *that* mean? First, I should say that I have pro-life friends who come at this from a different angle, and we understand each other. Just because a political organization doesn't prohibit abortion, that doesn't make it acceptable to them. I get that, absolutely, and I respect it. And maybe someday it *will* be outlawed and looked upon the way we view infanticide today.

If it's legal, then why call it murder?  As with the case of vegans referring to the eating of meat as murder, I'm saying, Ok, let's call it murder. If cows could speak, they would call beef production murder and I would understand. And maybe it is. If Christians or other groups share the idea that an unborn fetus of, say, the age of 2 weeks, is still a human life, I also understand how they could call that murder. And maybe it is. Just the same, I think that allowing people to choose abortion is the lesser evil and the world is a better place with legal abortions.

Now let's take the Jewish part of the whole Mengele affair and put it aside, lest anyone think I'm focused on that. I only mean to say that Mengele did what he did to satisfy his sadism. He derived pleasure from it. One could argue that some people derive pleasure from bacon, too, but meat-eating is primarily for sustenance and survival, and hunting or slaughtering livestock has nothing to do with a psychotic Nazi. (There are sadists working in slaughterhouses, but they are not representative of the average person who chooses to eat meat).

You could also argue that Mengele was conducting experiments purely to obtain scientific knowledge. I don't buy that, but if you compared it with modern companies that perform vivisection and experimentation on animals and produce real results, like medicine which saves both humans and animals, that would be a slippery slope and I'd have a tougher time defending my point. (I'm not talking about rubbing toothpaste in rabbits' eyes to see if it irritates them, but the production of real medicine). In any case, while this is trickier, this latter branch is outside the scope of an abortion debate.

[Pointedstick]

If it's legal, then why call it murder?

Maybe it's like how some people think Trayvon Martin was murdered. What the law actually says is secondary to what they feel the law should say.

[Xan]

If it's legal, then why call it murder?

Maybe it's like how some people think Trayvon Martin was murdered. What the law actually says is secondary to what they feel the law should say.

The law certainly said that abortion was murder.  I believe there were 50 state laws against it when the dreadful Roe v Wade decision wrongly threw them all out.

[Pointedstick]

If it's legal, then why call it murder?

Maybe it's like how some people think Trayvon Martin was murdered. What the law actually says is secondary to what they feel the law should say.

The law certainly said that abortion was murder.  I believe there were 50 state laws against it when the dreadful Roe v Wade decision wrongly threw them all out.

Actually, at the time it was legal in four states: Hawaii, Alaska, New York and Washington. Abortion was also legal in certain circumstances. In Texas, for instance, it was legal in cases of rape and incest. It's also noteworthy that the first law criminalizing abortion in the United States was only passed in 1821, and it wasn't until 1900 before all 50 states had outlawed it.

It's actually interesting to me how old this debate is. It's not like abortion is some new moral outrage. It's been done in various (far more barbaric ways) for centuries and people have been fighting over it since forever. Pope Gregory XIV didn't condemn abortion before about 16 weeks (116 days, in fact). But Pope Pius IX declared that anyone who got an abortion had excommunicated themselves. Thomas Aquinas taught that the developing baby received its soul between 40 and 80 days, but taught that it was always wrong even before the baby lacked a soul. The history isn't so black and white.

[dualstow]

How does legal abortion make the world a better place?  And better for whom?

I'm sorry Desert, but I'm trying to extricate myself from this. No offense. I couldn't resist answering AdamA's question, but that's it. My guess is that you're already well-informed about the other side of the debate. Economics, crime, health, etc.

[Mountaineer]

Maybe it's like how some people think Trayvon Martin was murdered. What the law actually says is secondary to what they feel the law should say.

The law certainly said that abortion was murder.  I believe there were 50 state laws against it when the dreadful Roe v Wade decision wrongly threw them all out.

Actually, at the time it was legal in four states: Hawaii, Alaska, New York and Washington. Abortion was also legal in certain circumstances. In Texas, for instance, it was legal in cases of rape and incest. It's also noteworthy that the first law criminalizing abortion in the United States was only passed in 1821, and it wasn't until 1900 before all 50 states had outlawed it.

It's actually interesting to me how old this debate is. It's not like abortion is some new moral outrage. It's been done in various (far more barbaric ways) for centuries and people have been fighting over it since forever. Pope Gregory XIV didn't condemn abortion before about 16 weeks (116 days, in fact). But Pope Pius IX declared that anyone who got an abortion had excommunicated themselves. Thomas Aquinas taught that the developing baby received its soul between 40 and 80 days, but taught that it was always wrong even before the baby lacked a soul. The history isn't so black and white.

It is ironic that as birth control (prevention) measures became more effective, the thirst for birth elimination (abortion) became more prevalent.

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

I had this thought in my mind when I woke up this morning:

Abortion is primarily a male problem.  Turn off your X-Box and marry that woman and provide for her and your baby.  But I suppose this isn’t fashionable anymore, we are more sophisticated than that. 

Maybe this is why women are acting more like men, because men refuse to do so.

We have taken a wrong turn somewhere along the road.

I think the experiment with the worship of sex has failed, we need to return to a worship of the family.  But don't mind me, I'm just the crazy guy in the corner muttering to himself.

[Kshartle]

I had this thought in my mind when I woke up this morning:

Abortion is primarily a male problem.  Turn off your X-Box and marry that woman and provide for her and your baby.  But I suppose this isn’t fashionable anymore, we are more sophisticated than that. 

Maybe this is why women are acting more like men, because men refuse to do so.

We have taken a wrong turn somewhere along the road.

I think the experiment with the worship of sex has failed, we need to return to a worship of the family.  But don't mind me, I'm just the crazy guy in the corner muttering to himself.

Do you think maybe there is more promiscuity on the part of women because of the so-called "safety nets" available to them? 100 years ago a pregnant unmarried woman would have a really really tough time. Due in part to the negative consequences......fewer woman slept around before marriage and they tried to consider mostly put-together....older men with promising careers who were responsible and could be providers.

Now they don't have to worry too much about that and can just sleep around with whoever they like.

Men like to sleep with women. If they don't have to marry them for it or get a good job/career then so much the better. Doing that stuff might hamper you because you're not as available since you're busy studying and working.

Appealing to men to man up......this is totally inconsistent with human behavior. Unmarried women need to close up shop to "motivate" men to be responsible. They won't do that as long as they have the saftey hammock to lay in imo.

[Libertarian666]

I had this thought in my mind when I woke up this morning:

Abortion is primarily a male problem.  Turn off your X-Box and marry that woman and provide for her and your baby.  But I suppose this isn’t fashionable anymore, we are more sophisticated than that. 

Maybe this is why women are acting more like men, because men refuse to do so.

We have taken a wrong turn somewhere along the road.

I think the experiment with the worship of sex has failed, we need to return to a worship of the family.  But don't mind me, I'm just the crazy guy in the corner muttering to himself.

Do you think maybe there is more promiscuity on the part of women because of the so-called "safety nets" available to them? 100 years ago a pregnant unmarried woman would have a really really tough time. Due in part to the negative consequences......fewer woman slept around before marriage and they tried to consider mostly put-together....older men with promising careers who were responsible and could be providers.

Now they don't have to worry too much about that and can just sleep around with whoever they like.

Men like to sleep with women. If they don't have to marry them for it or get a good job/career then so much the better. Doing that stuff might hamper you because you're not as available since you're busy studying and working.

Appealing to men to man up......this is totally inconsistent with human behavior. Unmarried women need to close up shop to "motivate" men to be responsible. They won't do that as long as they have the saftey hammock to lay in imo.

Given the extreme prejudice against men in the current US legal system with respect to divorce and allegations of domestic violence, and the availability of sex outside marriage, I seriously doubt I would marry, at least in this country, if I were a young man.

[Kshartle]

Given the extreme prejudice against men in the current US legal system with respect to divorce and allegations of domestic violence, and the availability of sex outside marriage, I seriously doubt I would marry, at least in this country, if I were a young man.

Another good point....the prospect of having a 3-way with the government where I take 100% of the risk for zero upside, along with the aforementioned availability of wiling partners has contributed to my un-married status. Reading "how I found Freedom" really cemeted my thoughts on the subject.

It's not an attractive prospect for guys and women can always choose to marry the state rather than a guy so....party time.

Moral hazards and regulations contribute to the destruction of the family and many unwanted pregnancies. Of course breeding poverty is a time-tested path to control the population.

It's the growth of poverty and dissencentive for guys to stick around that I think has brought about the major increase in abortion. There is no way it's going to get turned over via legislation. The only way to stem the tide is to support the end of the distortions imo.

[Gosso]

I had this thought in my mind when I woke up this morning:

Abortion is primarily a male problem.  Turn off your X-Box and marry that woman and provide for her and your baby.  But I suppose this isn’t fashionable anymore, we are more sophisticated than that. 

Maybe this is why women are acting more like men, because men refuse to do so.

We have taken a wrong turn somewhere along the road.

I think the experiment with the worship of sex has failed, we need to return to a worship of the family.  But don't mind me, I'm just the crazy guy in the corner muttering to himself.

Do you think maybe there is more promiscuity on the part of women because of the so-called "safety nets" available to them? 100 years ago a pregnant unmarried woman would have a really really tough time. Due in part to the negative consequences......fewer woman slept around before marriage and they tried to consider mostly put-together....older men with promising careers who were responsible and could be providers.

Now they don't have to worry too much about that and can just sleep around with whoever they like.

Men like to sleep with women. If they don't have to marry them for it or get a good job/career then so much the better. Doing that stuff might hamper you because you're not as available since you're busy studying and working.

Appealing to men to man up......this is totally inconsistent with human behavior. Unmarried women need to close up shop to "motivate" men to be responsible. They won't do that as long as they have the saftey hammock to lay in imo.

Given the extreme prejudice against men in the current US legal system with respect to divorce and allegations of domestic violence, and the availability of sex outside marriage, I seriously doubt I would marry, at least in this country, if I were a young man.

I'm not saying it is easy, or even practical (life ain't easy).  What I am saying is that it is the morally correct action to take by the father.  A life shouldn't be terminated because a man and woman were horny and then don't want to deal with the consequences.

Treating abortion as back-up birth control, does likely lead to more promiscuity.  Sex is great when there are no consequences.  Unfortunately when a man and woman have sex they are signing a social contract that they agree to be responsible for the life they potentially create (at least this is what I think an enlightened society would enforce).  I hope people still know where babies come from.

The worship of sex leads to the worship of abortion.

I agree that the situation is pretty much hopeless.  All we can really do is weep and ask for forgiveness.  We have opened Pandora's Box.