Abortion is wrong and should be abolished

[AnaisNina]

The Old Testament also says that God commanded his people to take life including women, children and babies so how do you make sense of that in your logic?

 

[JudgeRightly]

The Old Testament also says that God commanded his people to take life including women, children and babies so how do you make sense of that in your logic?

The topic is abortion, not God killing the wicked in the Bible.

Please stay on topic.

 

[WizardofOz]

A Zygote/ Embryo / foetus is by definition a potential human rather than an actual one.

Provide a source saying so. In a misguided attempt to defend abortion, you're failing human biology 101.

Human development is the process of growing to maturity. In biological terms, this entails growth from a one-celled zygote to an adult human being.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_development_(biology)

 

[kiwimacahau]

The topic is abortion, not God killing the wicked in the Bible.

Please stay on topic.

I would argue babes cannot be wicked.

Tihei Mauri ora

 

[kiwimacahau]

Provide a source saying so. In a misguided attempt to defend abortion, you're failing human biology 101.

Human development is the process of growing to maturity. In biological terms, this entails growth from a one-celled zygote to an adult human being.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_development_(biology)

A ZEF is a potential human being because it is not yet ex utero. We do not give full human rights to those in utero because we recognise that there are any number of reasons why they might not even be born. But to return to my original point "thou shalt do no murder" never applied to foetuses because the Hebrews did not accept 'ensoulment' at conception; it is, after all, a Christian belief.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I would argue babes cannot be wicked.

Tihei Mauri ora

Red herring/rabbit trail. Please stay on topic.

A ZEF is a potential human being because it is not yet ex utero. We do not give full human rights to those in utero because we recognise that there are any number of reasons why they might not even be born.

So you're saying that they're not human because they could die? Using that logic, no one is human, because we could all die.

But to return to my original point "thou shalt do no murder" never applied to foetuses because the Hebrews did not accept 'ensoulment' at conception; it is, after all, a Christian belief.

First of all, that's an appeal to tradition, an informal fallacy.

Second, multiple times in the Bible scripture calls the baby in the womb a child, shows that the child is alive, has emotions, and more.

http://americanrtl.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-abortion

Third, I'm still waiting for my questions to be answered, Kiwi. Please answer them.

Kiwi, there's a difference between the question your answering and the question I'm asking.

You keep answering "is the fetus a human", but I'm asking "is the fetus human?"

As in, the fetus is not a pig fetus, right? it's not a dog fetus? it's human?

Is the fetus alive?

Not saying it isn't alive isn't the same as saying it is alive. So is the fetus alive? yes or no

Here are my two questions:

1. I'm asking "is the fetus human?" As in, the fetus is not a pig fetus, right? it's not a dog fetus? it's human?
2. Is the fetus alive? yes or no
And a third question:
3. Did God make man in His Image and likeness?

 

[john w]

A ZEF is a potential human being because it is not yet ex utero. We do not give full human rights to those in utero because we recognise that there are any number of reasons why they might not even be born. But to return to my original point "thou shalt do no murder" never applied to foetuses because the Hebrews did not accept 'ensoulment' at conception; it is, after all, a Christian belief.

What’s the difference between an "actual human," and a "human person?" You "argue" that there are human beings that can be killed with impunity,because they are not persons=only "potential"-ites. What are your reasons for this view? What’s the difference between a born human, and an unborn one that justifies killing the latter?

 

[john w]

Red herring/rabbit trail. Please stay on topic.



So you're saying that they're not human because they could die? Using that logic, no one is human, because we could all die.



First of all, that's an appeal to tradition, an informal fallacy.

Second, multiple times in the Bible scripture calls the baby in the womb a child, shows that the child is alive, has emotions, and more.

http://americanrtl.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-abortion

Third, I'm still waiting for my questions to be answered, Kiwi. Please answer them.





Here are my two questions:

1. I'm asking "is the fetus human?" As in, the fetus is not a pig fetus, right? it's not a dog fetus? it's human?
2. Is the fetus alive? yes or no
And a third question:
3. Did God make man in His Image and likeness?

Nailed it-"is the fetus human?" Not "potential human"-is it human?

 

[john w]

A ZEF is a potential human being...

No, that is a scam. You either potentially create a life, or you create a life, with potential. You never create a potential human being.

You: "I just had a potential thought." Huh?You either had a thought, or you didn't-no other option. And your thought, has some "potential" for the future, or it doe not. But there is no such thing as a "a potential thought."


Similarly, pregnancy doesn't create a "potential life." If that were the case, then the enigma/puzzle of that "potential life" could be resolved by simply having a "potential" abortion. Thus, a "real," not a theoretical/"potential" abortion is needed to end a pregnancy, a real life, person, must be involved, not a "potential" one.

 

[marhig]

No, it doesn't and never did.

Tihei Mauri ora

Yes it does, babies in the womb are living, they move, they have a heart beat really early, they respond to their mother. They are living and it's wrong to kill them at any time. God gives life, and only God should take life away.

 

[kiwimacahau]

Yes it does, babies in the womb are living, they move, they have a heart beat really early, they respond to their mother. They are living and it's wrong to kill them at any time. God gives life, and only God should take life away.

You are conflating modern, Christian theology with commandments given to Jews long before the Christian era. Try to learn a little history.

 

[marhig]

You are conflating modern, Christian theology with commandments given to Jews long before the Christian era. Try to learn a little history.

You need to understand the Bible. And where does it say in the Bible that God said it's ok to have an abortion?

 

[JudgeRightly]

You are conflating modern, Christian theology with commandments given to Jews long before the Christian era. Try to learn a little history.

Try to learn what the Bible says about life in the womb:

http://americanrtl.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-abortion

 

[WizardofOz]

Yes abortion is wrong, it's wrong to take a life. Thou shalt not kill, includes babies in the womb.

No, it doesn't and never did.

It doesn't take a life? That's simply incorrect. It certainly ends the life of a living human.

No one is arguing it is not alive.

Yet, you did argue that it was not alive. See above ^

A Zygote/ Embryo / foetus is by definition a potential human rather than an actual one.

It is a potential human which becomes an actual human at birth, given that fully 50% of fertilised ovum self-abort before the first trimester it cannot be any other way. Otherwise every miscarriage is an abortion.

I answered your question. The foetus is a potential human being.

A ZEF is a potential human being because it is not yet ex utero. We do not give full human rights to those in utero because we recognise that there are any number of reasons why they might not even be born.

You are conflating 'human' with 'human being'. What is human is biologically objective. What is a 'human being' is philosophical and subjective.

You are clearly objectively wrong about what is a human.

But to return to my original point "thou shalt do no murder" never applied to foetuses because the Hebrews did not accept 'ensoulment' at conception; it is, after all, a Christian belief.

It's not like you care about this anyway...as you stated earlier in another thread:

I am not bound in my understanding by the words and worldviews of folk two millenia ago.

 

[JudgeRightly]

You are conflating modern, Christian theology with commandments given to Jews long before the Christian era. Try to learn a little history.

You seem to have so much to say about this topic, but when pressed to answer simple questions, you can't seem to answer them.

I have three questions that you have not answered yet. Could you please answer them?

 

[kiwimacahau]

You need to understand the Bible. And where does it say in the Bible that God said it's ok to have an abortion?

The Bible deals with abortion only once and it is noted as a finable offense not a capital one.

 

[kiwimacahau]

You seem to have so much to say about this topic, but when pressed to answer simple questions, you can't seem to answer them.

I have three questions that you have not answered yet. Could you please answer them?

I have answered them, you simply did not like the answers given.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I have answered them, you simply did not like the answers given.

No, you didn't. The two answers you gave were not answers to questions I asked, but to questions I didn't ask.

Please answer the questions I asked.

 

[JudgeRightly]

The Bible deals with abortion only once and it is noted as a finable offense not a capital one.

Here is what the Bible says, that the crime of killing the unborn is murder:

“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. - Exodus 21:22-25 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus21:22-25&version=NKJV

If the baby is harmed, then life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

 

[Tambora]

Here is what the Bible says, that the crime of killing the unborn is murder:

“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. - Exodus 21:22-25 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus21:22-25&version=NKJV

If the baby is harmed, then life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.