The ethics of anti-abortionists

[Bovril]

I am regularly told by people who oppose abortion that in all or almost all circumstances abortion is the same as killing a person who has been born. Fine, that is a position; amenable to argument, but a real position none the less. The problem I have is with people who claim to belive this, but none the less act like something else entirely is going on. If abortion really is murder then in most countries in the world this is such a massive issue that everything else should be ignorred untill abortion is not only banned but made as rare as murder. So why don't anti-abortion types react to what they claim amounts to the murder of many, many millions every year with the kind of vigour one would hope opponents of vast institutional murder mechanisms would act.

I'll be honest here: I respect more those who blow up abortion clinics than those who only talk about what they suppose to be mass murder but do nothing real about it.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

If we were to go around killing abortion doctors for what they do, we should be no better than they. Indeed, it is doing the exact same thing. I oppose abortion since its murder. But I also oppose killing adults in cold blood. If I didn't, I would be contradicting myself. In America we live under the rule of law, and unless the law outlaws an act, no matter how hideous, we can't do anything against it, unfortunately.

If I had legal authority to do so, I would drag out every abortion doctor I could find and execute him/her for murder. But if I have no authority from the government, killing them would be murder and not justice.

[Fiyenyaa]

If I had legal authority to do so, I would drag out every abortion doctor I could find and execute him/her for murder. But if I have no authority from the government, killing them would be murder and not justice.

So, assuming you had the authority to do so: what punishment would you enforce for those women who choose to have an abortion? Death, as well? Those that willingly decide to have an abortion are more guilty of murder (as you see it) than the doctor who performs it.

[TheXand]

The whole "Abortion is murder" argument has been done to death by anti-abortionists, and the only reason that they aren't literally up in arms about it is because they want to be taken seriously. Making the public hate you and see you as dangerous terrorists generally does not work that well in civilised nations.

[Fiyenyaa]

So, assuming you had the authority to do so: what punishment would you enforce for those women who choose to have an abortion? Death, as well? Those that willingly decide to have an abortion are more guilty of murder (as you see it) than the doctor who performs it.

No-one gonna answer this?

[Sir Winston Churchill]

No-one gonna answer this?

Ok fine I will. It all depends personally on the case.

[Fiyenyaa]

Ok fine I will. It all depends personally on the case.

Care to elaborate?

[Monarchist]

No-one gonna answer this?

Have patience, dear Fiyenyaa! We enlightened theists always answer things in good time. Have a biscuit while you wait.

I am regularly told by people who oppose abortion that in all or almost all circumstances abortion is the same as killing a person who has been born. Fine, that is a position; amenable to argument, but a real position none the less. The problem I have is with people who claim to belive this, but none the less act like something else entirely is going on. If abortion really is murder then in most countries in the world this is such a massive issue that everything else should be ignorred untill abortion is not only banned but made as rare as murder. So why don't anti-abortion types react to what they claim amounts to the murder of many, many millions every year with the kind of vigour one would hope opponents of vast institutional murder mechanisms would act.

I'll be honest here: I respect more those who blow up abortion clinics than those who only talk about what they suppose to be mass murder but do nothing real about it.

If we were to go around killing abortion doctors for what they do, we should be no better than they. Indeed, it is doing the exact same thing. I oppose abortion since its murder. But I also oppose killing adults in cold blood. If I didn't, I would be contradicting myself. In America we live under the rule of law, and unless the law outlaws an act, no matter how hideous, we can't do anything against it, unfortunately.

If I had legal authority to do so, I would drag out every abortion doctor I could find and execute him/her for murder. But if I have no authority from the government, killing them would be murder and not justice.

Well, the amazing CtrlAltDe answered for me. Let me just say that I concur with his opinion. The Rule of Law is generally what conservatives and religious people prefer. We don't like vigilantes taking the law into "their own hands", generally speaking. It's called common sense, oddly enough.

The whole "Abortion is murder" argument has been done to death by anti-abortionists, and the only reason that they aren't literally up in arms about it is because they want to be taken seriously. Making the public hate you and see you as dangerous terrorists generally does not work that well in civilised nations.

Indeed!

So, assuming you had the authority to do so: what punishment would you enforce for those women who choose to have an abortion? Death, as well? Those that willingly decide to have an abortion are more guilty of murder (as you see it) than the doctor who performs it.

The only allowance I personally make for abortion involves the situation wherein a mother and her child will both die if the child is not aborted. To save one life in the face of two deaths is all I can hope for. It isn't ideal, but it is also the furthest I would go in terms of abortion. It's a matter of life or death, not of "choice". Speaking of that...

that . Moar abortionz now!!!1111!!

But honestly, it's the woman's right to choose.

It is also the choice of a man with a gun to shoot the mayor or not to shoot the mayor. It is another choice whether a banker may defraud millions of dollars from his investors and peers. Just because something is a personal choice doesn't mean it's always sacrosanct. Personal choices carry the greatest moral weight of all! I am not a collectivist or socialist, but this is the murder of another person. Perhaps when atheists comprise the majority of Western populations, they can make amoral laws that celebrate abortion. Until then, the majority of human beings define it as vile murder, no matter how much of a "choice" it is.

It's not human until it pops out all fully formed, if a woman wishes to have it scrambled up and scooped out then that really is her choice, because some mistakes can be rectified. Also, think of the (potential) father, if he and the mother both don't want to ruin their lives with a child then foetus be damned, it's gotta go, I wouldn't want my life ruined because of a law that takes away the rights of myself and any (potential) slapper I accidentally get pregnant.

If they don't want their lives ruined by that inconsequential little life, perhaps they shouldn't have ejaculated all inside each other so freely. It is the refusal to defer gratification which has raped our sense of moral duty. People want their fun and games now, and refuse to take the time to put a condom on, let alone to wait until marriage (GASP!) for sex.

I suppose, by the way, that when you say "It's not human until it pops out all fully formed", there should be legal abortions in the 9th month? That sounds monstrous.

So, assuming you had the authority to do so: what punishment would you enforce for those women who choose to have an abortion? Death, as well? Those that willingly decide to have an abortion are more guilty of murder (as you see it) than the doctor who performs it.

If it can't be proved that both the mother and child were in imminent danger of death upon the occasion of the forthcoming birth, it would be firing squad for the murderess. I'd gladly order the three-man squad myself, to be honest.

I bet that little signature user-bar of every atheist that says "anti-fascist" screams out right about now!

[Fiyenyaa]

Have patience, dear Fiyenyaa! We enlightened theists always answer things in good time. Have a biscuit while you wait.

Only if I can choose what kind.

The only allowance I personally make for abortion involves the situation wherein a mother and her child will both die if the child is not aborted. To save one life in the face of two deaths is all I can hope for. It isn't ideal, but it is also the furthest I would go in terms of abortion. It's a matter of life or death, not of "choice".

And therefore - in line with my actual question which I assume you are referring to - if the woman isn't going to die if she gets an abortion, she should be put to death, or suffer the same punishment as someone convicted of murder?

[Monarchist]

Only if I can choose what kind.

I personally prefer digestives with my tea, but we must make allowances for variability.

And therefore - in line with my actual question which I assume you are referring to - if the woman isn't going to die if she gets an abortion, she should be put to death, or suffer the same punishment as someone convicted of murder?

I think you missed my edit. Please see the last thing I posted above. I would gladly pull the trigger in a legal firing squad when it came to a woman who murdered her child in the womb. Just because you can't "see it" doesn't mean it isn't alive. I believe the majority of women who abort for the fun of it don't really imagine there being anything in their womb but a lump of amorphous flesh. When you see the 5-month-old deformed human being with its skull crushed in sitting in a bucket, however, you have second thoughts. They tend not to see the results of their "choice", as it is quickly thrown in the trash.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

So, assuming you had the authority to do so: what punishment would you enforce for those women who choose to have an abortion? Death, as well? Those that willingly decide to have an abortion are more guilty of murder (as you see it) than the doctor who performs it.

I would treat her the same as if she had a baby and took it to be killed by a doctor. Which make a person a murder in my eyes, so I would want the death penalty for them both.

You object to murder - unlawful homicide - but do not seem to uphold any reservations towards homicide if done so in accordance to, and within the confines of, the law.

Moral objections are therefore not held towards homicide, but towards unlawful behaviour.

As it would not violate the moral framework distilled from your post, why not support legislation that enforces the legal status of abortion?


Same question.

Killing an innocent person in cold blood is immoral. Its murder. Everyone knows this. But there are some crimes so hideous that they deserve death as their punishment. Some of my fellow anti-abortionists may disagree with this, but it is my opinion, and I feel it is right. So no, I don't think man-killing is wrong all the time. There are some cases when it is justified--indeed, in some cases, it is your moral imperative. In those situations, it is the duty of the ruler/government to meet out justice, even with the sword if necessary. But if I was to go out without authority from the government and kill someone, even if they were guilty of some crime, I should be likewise guilty, for I would be doing the same thing (killing without legal authority to do so, even if they are guilty).

But punishing hideous crimes is a very different thing than ending the life of an innocent child, whether they be in the womb or no. I do not support the killing of innocents, no matter if they are a 6-month old in the womb, 4 years old, or 90. Its immoral.

[MaryPoppinCaps]

So if you were in charge what would you do, CtrlAltDe1337? I'm curious what your solution is.

[chamaeleo]

So if you were in charge what would you do, CtrlAltDe1337? I'm curious what your solution is.

I cannot guess as to specifics, but I predict that it'd involve thousands...millions?...of women being executed, as their men look on, shaking their heads disapprovingly.

That's the worst part: the woman always pays disproportionately for what is (at best) the result of a mutually acceptable act, and at worst completely out of her control. I have yet to hear an anti-abortionist address masculine responsibilities...it takes two, but somehow punishing one half of each couple satisfies God's thirst for blood.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

So if you were in charge what would you do, CtrlAltDe1337? I'm curious what your solution is.

I would make murder illegal, of course, including babies in the womb. It used to be that way, and I strongly believe that it should be so again.

[Yaga Shu Ra]

If we were to go around killing abortion doctors for what they do, we should be no better than they. Indeed, it is doing the exact same thing. I oppose abortion since its murder. But I also oppose killing adults in cold blood. If I didn't, I would be contradicting myself. In America we live under the rule of law, and unless the law outlaws an act, no matter how hideous, we can't do anything against it, unfortunately.

If I had legal authority to do so, I would drag out every abortion doctor I could find and execute him/her for murder. But if I have no authority from the government, killing them would be murder and not justice.

You object to murder - unlawful homicide - but do not seem to uphold any reservations towards homicide if done so in accordance to, and within the confines of, the law.

Moral objections are therefore not held towards homicide, but towards unlawful behaviour.

As it would not violate the moral framework distilled from your post, why not support legislation that enforces the legal status of abortion?

Well, the amazing CtrlAltDe answered for me. Let me just say that I concur with his opinion.

Same question.

[Banana Jelly]

Well you are actually killing your offspring.

It doesn't matter if it's a baby.

If he/she was older, you would be charged with murder if you tried to kill your daughter/son. Or you wouldn't kill your son/daughter if he/she was older. It's the same as murder. Your killing a life.


So the argument that it's "the mother's decision" is out of the picture.

[TheXand]

Well you are actually killing your offspring.

It doesn't matter if it's a baby.

If he/she was older, you would be charged with murder if you tried to kill your daughter/son. Or you wouldn't kill your son/daughter if he/she was older. It's the same as murder. Your killing a life.


So the argument that it's "the mother's decision" is out of the picture.

It's not human until it pops out all fully formed, if a woman wishes to have it scrambled up and scooped out then that really is her choice, because some mistakes can be rectified. Also, think of the (potential) father, if he and the mother both don't want to ruin their lives with a child then foetus be damned, it's gotta go, I wouldn't want my life ruined because of a law that takes away the rights of myself and any (potential) slapper I accidentally get pregnant.

[ivan_the_terrible]

It's not human until it pops out all fully formed,

So an unborn magically becomes human at the point he leaves the womb? It's ok to terminate a 9 month old unborn just before the woman goes into labour, but it's suddenly murder to terminate when it "pops out", literally a couple of hours later?

[Yosemite]

Well you are actually killing your offspring.

It doesn't matter if it's a baby.

If he/she was older, you would be charged with murder if you tried to kill your daughter/son. Or you wouldn't kill your son/daughter if he/she was older. It's the same as murder. Your killing a life.


So the argument that it's "the mother's decision" is out of the picture.

no you see, it's not human its just cell

its , it has no right for nothing okay?

[SaDeR]

no you see, it's not human its just cell

its , it has no right for nothing okay?

I have to agree sort of to what Yosemite said. The reason is first off we have no right to tell a mother what she can and can't do with her baby. Why? Because up until the certain point where it is illegal to have an abortion in the pregnancy the forming human cannot live by it's self, but it lives off the mother. So why should the mother have to support something that she may not want and theoretically can't exist without her up to a certain point in her pregnancy.

There are two things people have to do in this argument. One is too completely forget about religion for a minute because not everyone believes in God or their religious beliefs. Two is too realize the baby's brain is not developed enough to realize it even exists. Who even remembers when they were a year old?

Two last things I have to say. One you shouldn't get double murder at anytime during a pregnancy until it is the certain time where they declare an abortion illegal. Another is I myself wouldn't want my one day future wife to have an abortion because it just wouldn't sit well with me, because I think it is wrong. But I am not one to say what another woman can do with a developing human.