• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Pro Life / Pro Choice Debate

I am not sure if you meant that the way it reads, but that is a very dangerous way to decide something like abortion. If we just look at a cost benefit analysis on whether society benefits should those potential lives be allowed. There was some really ugly pre-WWII thinking that went along those lines. We could certainly solve social security using that line of thought.

Regardless of which side you are on there should be a fundamental moral equation that guides your convictions regardless of the cost or benefit to society. If not, olds like me better start watching our backs.

Well this is where democratic choice comes in. We all get to vote.
 
Those dumbfucks put all their chips on waving that flag as "freedom" while they vote against their own financial self-interests over and over and over. It would be comical if it weren't so pathetic.

To be fair, most of my friends and I vote against our own financial self-interests as well. Just for a different reason.
 
Honestly, fuck you. And your hypocritical bible thumping bullshit.

Read the goddamn good book. It's easier for a camel to squeeze through the eye of a needle than a rich person to go to heaven. Right?

Now look at your life. Do you live amongst the poor? Have you donated ever excessive dollar to helping your fellow man? Especially the unwanted children you so wish to be born.

Because if not, then you are completely full of shit and according to Christ's words you are doomed to damnation.


Read it again so you don't seem like such a fool.
 
To be fair, most of my friends and I vote against our own financial self-interests as well. Just for a different reason.

Right, you know it is not in your direct financial best-interest short term, but in the best interest of the US economy long-term - which is indirectly in your best-interest long term.
 
True that. Good thing we live in a constitutional republic where majority rule is tempered.

Haha this made me laugh because I think we both wholeheartedly agree with this statement but for completely different reasons.
 
Coming late to the thread, I can't find a post in which Wrangor cited either scripture specifically or his religion in general as a basis for his position. All I've read is that he believes abortion is the taking of innocent life and therefore wrong. You can debate that if you wish, but you are the one introducing religion into the argument.

This is the basis for every major argument in America today, IMO. The religious are going to take whatever side those that they think are "opressing" them won't take and the non-religious are going to take whatever side pisses off the religious. I honestly do not believe anyone thinks killing an unborn baby is ok and morally right but they choose to accept it so it doesn't align themselves with the other side that they think have been on the wrong side of history (and rightfully so) in many cases dating back thousands of years.

To me, the "abortion" argument is the religious vs. non-religious argument of our lifetime and I don't see it ending anytime soon
 
The non religious don't take the side to piss off the religious they normally just calculate their viewpoints without having a guiding diety and tenet of codes which generally leads to a different vantage point since the religious lens provides a different sort of moral guidance.
 
Fwiw. I don't view abortion as a religious argument. Murder doesn't have to be religious. I see abortion as the forceful taking of lives without permission. It is the powerful taking life from the weak.

Of course my faith permeates every thought process I have but I don't see this as a religious argument. I think our country is conflicted on this issue and is intentionally avoiding reality. You can see that in the conflict of laws between the double homicide of a pregnant woman. Warning labels on smoking. I believe there is a moral code hat exists in people who don't share my faith. That moral code should never be determined by the viability of a life or even worse the socio economic impact of that life. That is a horrific road to travel down. Life is only valuable if it produces an immediate positive impact on society? Might as well kill every 13 year old.

Life should be valuable because it is life. Because of that person's potential. That is it. Once you have life it should be protected and revered. Certainly not forcibly removed simply because the child has no way to defend itself.

Is it just "life" that should be defended at all cost or does it need to be "human life"? Obviously, its not a cow that is growing, but is it not important to distinguish whether or not this is human life and at what point it becomes so? Are a dozen fertilized eggs in a petri dish 12 lives that deserve the same protection? If not, when does that protection begin? Are these questions not relevant in your view?
 
I understand the non religious argument against abortion but feel like the religious argument gets cranked up a notch due to the concept of a soul.

FTR I'm fairly liberal, not really religious, and solidly pro life.
 
The reason why I support abortion being legal is my belief that a great number of society's problems can be traced back to people having children that they are unable or unwilling to take care of and raise well. Many of these children then go on to have children of their own that aren't born into good environments, and the cycle continues. If the mother wants to avoid sending her unborn child into that, I think society should be ok with that.

It's easy to forget the harsh life that poor people live in America; it's easy to preach that life should be protected at all costs when our lives are pretty good. I'm not sure that I categorically believe that life in environments of abuse, neglect, abject poverty, etc. is better than having been spared that by abortion.
 
People overlook/underestimate the cynical pandering both parties play to their bases: GOP (social conservatives) and Dems (labor). No abortions under any circumstances will be the GOP's official position for the foreseeable future, but the GOP House had to pull a 20 week abortion ban earlier this year because it didn't include rape and incest exceptions. They knew there was no chance of Obamacare repeal and it didn't take 40 votes to figure that out. The House won't vote on a constitutional abortion ban amendment because they don't have the required 67% and don't want to demonstrate that. Same thing with same-sex amendment bans.

Dems voted for card check before Obamacare and didn't have the votes. Obama and Biden didn't lift a finger for WI during the protests and held their convention in CLT. Both parties talk a good game for fundraising but can't and won't deliver for their most loyal bases because they're not true believers and don't pay a political price for not delivering.
 
Did he say there is no morality without religion or no morlality without God?

Either viewpoint is illogical. Socrates already blew the nonsensical argument that morality comes for God/Allah/the gods/religion out of the water thousands of years ago.
 
Back
Top