Are there pro-life atheists here?

297 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nyarlathotep's picture
JoC - ...pro-life would be

JoC - ...pro-life would be someone who is against abortion in all or almost all cases...

Well then I'm pro-life! But of course I'm not willing to use the law to impose this opinion on others, so I'm also pro-choice!

JoC's picture
Alright, then. Why would you

Alright, then. Why would you be pro-life... personally?

Nyarlathotep's picture
Because it's the 21st century

Because it's the 21st century, there are a lot better ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies/children.

JoC's picture
How are your other ways

How are your other ways necessarily better than having an abortion in preventing unwanted pregnancies?

Nyarlathotep's picture
Surely birth control is safer

Surely birth control must be safer and cheaper.

JoC's picture
No doubt about that. But say

No doubt about that. But say the woman is already pregnant. What then?

Nyarlathotep's picture
Well then you have a problem.

Well then you have a problem.

LogicFTW's picture
What is really cool about the

What is really cool about the abortion debate: It has an easy answer.

If a pregnant woman is against having an abortion, she can choose to not have an abortion. Boom. Just about everyone rightly knows that it is the mother's decision to keep her baby and just about everyone will strongly agree to protect that right. Nobody including the biological father could ever say: "you must have an abortion because I said so." As it should be, it is solely up to the pregnant mother.

Taking this right of a mother to have a baby if she wants also should be the same for a mother to not want to have a baby.

If the pregnant woman does want to have an abortion that right should also be guaranteed, it is her body she can do what she wants, the mother is the only person's opinion that matters on her right to her own body versus that of a zygote or fetus growing within her. The only person whose opinions that matter in this very subjective argument of "what is human life" is the mother of the whom the baby is wholly and completely dependent upon her mother body. Once the baby hits the point of decent viability out of the womb (an advanced nicu can do it as early as 20-22 weeks if the funds are available) then the rights that a zygote, fetus, etc to live can be taken into consideration without imposing on the rights of a mother to her own body.

Furthermore inequality rears its ugly head here. With the increasingly difficult access to dwindling abortion facilities in many states in the US, abortion is increasingly getting pushed into the realm of only the rich can easily get abortions, where the poor vulnerable mother working 2 jobs trying to support her other 3 kids, in many parts of the country simply do not get that option only because they are poor. Anyone that cares about equal rights (some pro life folks will scream about the rights of the unborn baby!) Should be enraged by this unfairness where the rich can easily get abortions but the poor cannot.
 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Cognostic's picture
Because an abortion is NOT A

Because an abortion is NOT A TRIP TO THE DENTIST. It is not just removing a tooth. It should be taken seriously. It is a potential human life. I fully agree, it is the woman's body. I fully agree, she gets to make the choice. I fully agree, abortion should be legal and conducted by qualified medical professionals. I fully contend that if a woman is using abortion as a means of birth control, she can not get herself to take pills, use a diaphragm, get a Norplant or IUD or tell the man to use a fucking condom, something is wrong with her. Someone needs to investigate. Someone needs to help this woman out. I can see any excuse at all as being viable for one or two or even three abortions. There is something wrong with a woman who goes to the abortion clinic every six months. Abortion is not "Health care." Abortion should only be paid for by Tax Dollars in the case of rape. Women should not be entitled to free abortions.

I am about as pro life as you get on the atheist side... I think. There is a reality to contend with. A woman has the right to her own body. Abortion is the ending of a potential life even if it is just a bundle of mindless cells. It's serious. It is not like removing a tooth. It should not be used as birth control. I should not have to pay for it.

LogicFTW's picture
@Cognostic

@Cognostic

I agree with you, if a woman is using abortion frequently as a means of: "oops I did not take care of it earlier" is a bad thing and should be minimized as much as possible.

Fortunately as is, it is very likely you will never pay for abortions for anyone. (At least as far as I know in the USA) Even your medical premiums and potentially a spouse of yours medical premium is not increased to cover possible abortions. Abortions at Planned parenthood or other clinics are in no way paid for with federal dollars, PP does get funding from the government, (less lately,) but the funding PP has gotten from tax dollars and continues to get, has strict rules to never support or pay for abortions done at PP. Abortions is all paid for privately via donations and fees at PP.

Also fortunately, women that have multiple abortions, (especially one every 6 months,) is extremely rare. Even planned parenthood will get really frustrated with a woman that shows up at their clinics every 6 months for yet another abortion and they go to great lengths to prevent that from happening by offering counseling, pushing IUD's or other effective birth control methods, even when a woman comes in for an abortion for her first time. PP even has a stated goal to prevent the need for abortions in the future for woman and wants to reduce overall numbers of abortions they do. PP and others just realize they do need to provide this critical medical procedure, especially because much of the established medical industry is too much of a coward to stand up for women's rights.
 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

JoC's picture
Thanks for this. Though I

Thanks for this. Though I have heard of atheists who oppose abortion in all cases, I admit was looking on this thread.

You say it's a potential human life at stake. What makes you say it's a potential human life as opposed to a human life?

LogicFTW's picture
@JoC

@JoC

What makes you say it's a potential human life as opposed to a human life?

Opinion. Just like your human life vs potential of human life is opinion.

It is all opinion, which is my point. When it comes down to opinions, who is right? Well no one. Who then makes the decision?

The one that is sharing their body with this human life/potential for human life. The one person who has a real say in it is the one person whose own body is at stake.

Mrs. Paul Owczarek's picture
National Catholic Reporter

National Catholic Reporter just had an article on 'pro-life' atheists. Just for the record, the Catholic & Evangelical movements are NOT pro-life. Their policies will INCREASE the fetal & maternal death rate. I've got a several page document of statistics from the government health websites. Go down and read my post of a few days ago.

Tin-Man's picture
Simple for me.... Woman's

Simple for me.... Woman's body, woman's choice. Ain't all that complicated... *shrugging shoulders*...

Tin-Man's picture
Soooo.... I just had a

Soooo.... I just had a thought... Just out of curiosity, I wonder what would happen if....

A large number of women law-makers and powerful female religious representatives gathered together and decided, "Ladies, it is time we held the males accountable for their actions. Therefore, I say we pass a law stating that after a male impregnates "x" number of women out of wedlock, it shall be mandatory he has his testicles removed by the respective state government."

Certainly no males would have any problems with that, would they?

Diotrephes's picture
Tin-Man,

Tin-Man,

"Ladies, it is time we held the males accountable for their actions. Therefore, I say we pass a law stating that after a male impregnates "x" number of women out of wedlock, it shall be mandatory he has his testicles removed by the respective state government."

That is the Jesus solution from Matthew 5:28-30 (ERV) = "28 But I tell you that if a man looks at a woman and wants to sin sexually with her, he has already committed that sin with her in his mind. 29 If your right eye makes you sin, take it out and throw it away. It is better to lose one part of your body than to have your whole body thrown into hell. 30 If your right hand makes you sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."

LogicFTW's picture
Only problem I would have

Only problem I would have with that is the "out of wedlock part." I think people that choose not to get married should have same rights as people that do choose to get married.

Maybe more of a: 1 testicle removed for each child a guy gets a girl pregnant for but does not support her and her child. Or if a guy wants to keep his testicles, he can opt for irreversible male birth control (vasectomy.)

Not realistic I know, but would be nice that instead of men telling women what to do with their own bodies, that men actually have more incentive to take responsibility for their part.

AJ777's picture
Why just the males?

Why just the males?

Tin-Man's picture
@AJ777 Re: "Why just the

@AJ777 Re: "Why just the males?"

...*face palm*.... *groooooan*.... Really, dude?

CyberLN's picture
.

.

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
Tin-Man's picture
@AJ777 Re: "Why just the

@AJ777 Re: "Why just the males?" (Part 2)

Because removing the testicles from females is far more risky than removing them from males.... Duh...

Cognostic's picture
WOW ! I agree. Why just

WOW ! I agree. Why just males? We should also include pompous hermaphrodites and asexual cell dividing spineless beings who exist to troll atheist sites with inane questions.

CyberLN's picture
Re: From the OP....it’s pro

Re: From the OP....it’s pro-life month? Who decided that?

JoC's picture
It's pro-life month in the US

It's pro-life month in the US. Pro-life groups (in the US) chose January as it was the month Roe v Wade was decided.

CyberLN's picture
Which groups?

Which groups?

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ the OP

@ the OP

The Bible (Catholic version) specifically sanctifies abortion see the attachment below.
Numbers-5-11-22-New-Revised-Standard-Version-Catholic-Edition

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
JoC's picture
You misunderstand the OP then

You misunderstand the OP then. I'm not here to state the Catholic position on abortion. I'm here to ask a pro-life atheist why they would hold to their stance barring any religious context.

Cognostic's picture
"Barring any religious

"Barring any religious context." Morality is based on "well being.." An abortion is not good for the "well being" of the new life. A woman who uses abortion as a means of birth control is obviously having issues with her own quality of life; prostitute, drug addict, mental deficiency, unlucky enough to be raped over and over and over. Something is happening with her quality of life and well being. This woman needs help.

Diotrephes's picture
Cognostic,

Cognostic,

"A woman who uses abortion as a means of birth control is obviously having issues with her own quality of life; prostitute, drug addict, mental deficiency, unlucky enough to be raped over and over and over."

This source material is several years old but do all of the women who have abortions fit into your criteria?

World Leaders in Abortion: Top 10 Countries
https://lozierinstitute.org/world-leaders-in-abortion-top-10-countries/

Maybe women are more likely to get abortions where they have access to providers and where the procedure is legal.

This link presents the data by geographical areas around the world so each section includes multiple countries = https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/abortion-around-the-world-where-are-rat...

When you compare the information from the two sources you can see that you can get data to support whatever position and agenda you want to push.

More relevant questions might be:

1. Are abortions beneficial to women who have them?
2. What are the effects of abortions upon the couples who experience them?
3. Do abortions have negative or positive benefits on the particular national society?
4. Does the pregnancy belong to the woman or to the nation?
5. If you child grew up and became a mass murderer and even killed some of your own family members would you regret not having aborted him? Of course you have no idea how your rugrat will eventually turn out but it is a good question to ponder. Some guys have said that they would not have aborted Hitler = https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ben-shapiro-anti-abortion-pro-life-... === https://www.cnn.com/2015/11/11/politics/ben-carson-would-not-abort-baby-...

Cognostic's picture
Complete non-sequitur to what

Complete non-sequitur to what I said. "If a woman is using abortion as birth control." It is not health,. Something is wrong.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.