Thread: ABORTION: Where do you stand?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Sure. And just because you believe it doesn't mean it's right either.

He isn't believing anything.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

This is really very simple. If you have no soul, you were not created with purpose, and were simply born to die and rot that means you have no value. You are as worthwhile as the chicken I just ate for dinner. Just because you want to have meaning and a purpose, does not mean you have one. You can delude yourself all you want, it doesn't make it true. You have no value, and I can do whatever I wish to you, with or without your consent.

Having souls is not the same as having been 'created for a purpose'. At any rate, care to share with us this purpose for which we were created? And might I ask, who did the creating? If I recall correctly, a human is created through sexual reproduction. Where does this 'purpose-giver/creator' of yours come in?

I think you'll find you are the one deluding yourself in believing in things such as souls, to give your own life meaning. That's fine, whatever. People define their own lives and purpose, that is the point. Souls are not only non-existent, but superfluous as well.

Also, does it really matter that much to you whether you were 'created' for a 'purpose'? Why do you need a magical 'soul' to want to live?

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Yes, it is attached to it's mother. This does not change the fact that it has it's own separate DNA and is not actually a part of the mother. A child is attached via umbilical cord to it's mother even after it's born, but you can't kill a newborn just because someone has not severed the physical attachment to the mother.

You seem to be missing the point. No one wants to kill children. That is absurd.

The fact is, the vast majority of fetuses which are aborted are hardly human-like, are very small, have nearly no central nervous system, and cannot survive on their own- that is, they would die without direct support from their mother from within the womb. They are not their own person, they only have the potential, much as an unfertilized egg or sperm.

Originally Posted by RooJ

Not to be rude.. but your purpose doesnt seem to have as much meaning as mine

Lol, that's okay with me. I'm happy with my mediocre purpose.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Some things cannot be physically proven. Sorry, you will not be able to explain everything in life with the limited intelligence that humans posess. Prove to me that I don't have a soul. You can't. It's a difference of opinion, and it's okay to disagree.

So then don't claim with certainty that souls exist and that without them, life is worthless, if that can't be "physically proven," whatever that means.

Prove to me that we do have a soul. You're the one making the existential claim here, not me, and it's what your whole argument is based on. I've only said that I don't think they exist, not that they don't as a fact.

Anyone want a beer from the fridge, while I'm up?

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

He isn't believing anything.



Having souls is not the same as having been 'created for a purpose'. At any rate, care to share with us this purpose for which we were created? And might I ask, who did the creating? If I recall correctly, a human is created through sexual reproduction. Where does this 'purpose-giver/creator' of yours come in?

I think you'll find you are the one deluding yourself in believing in things such as souls, to give your own life meaning. That's fine, whatever. People define their own lives and purpose, that is the point. Souls are not only non-existent, but superfluous as well.

Also, does it really matter that much to you whether you were 'created' for a 'purpose'? Why do you need a magical 'soul' to want to live?



You seem to be missing the point. No one wants to kill children. That is absurd.

The fact is, the vast majority of fetuses which are aborted are hardly human-like, are very small, have nearly no central nervous system, and cannot survive on their own- that is, they would die without direct support from their mother from within the womb. They are not their own person, they only have the potential, much as an unfertilized egg or sperm.

BLAH. I'm not debating if souls are real with you or not, at least not right now, I lack the patience for it. You can't prove your point and I can't prove mine. You are free to believe that you are a slightly more intelligent animal with no purpose, except for the magical one you somehow give to yourself.

And I fully agree that people, as a general rule, do not want to kill children. However, people do have a selfishness problem.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

So then don't claim with certainty that souls exist and that without them, life is worthless, if that can't be "physically proven," whatever that means.

Prove to me that we do have a soul. You're the one making the existential claim here, not me, and it's what your whole argument is based on. I've only said that I don't think they exist, not that they don't as a fact.

LOL, would it make you feel better if I said I "think" souls exist? Do we really have to play word games like that? I never said, "I have solid proof souls are real", I said this is my opinion, meaning this is what I think.

Corona please Sloth, with lemon.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

BLAH. I'm not debating if souls are real with you or not, at least not right now, I lack the patience for it. You can't prove your point and I can't prove mine. You are free to believe that you are a slightly more intelligent animal with no purpose, except for the magical one you somehow give to yourself.

And I fully agree, people as a general rule, do not want to kill children. However, people do have a selfishness problem.

Your assertions: Purpose can only come from God. Humans have souls.

My assertions: .

You have yet to provide any proof for your claims. I have yet to make a claim.

I'm curious though- why did you post this thread? To poll the forum, to start an actual discussion of the subject, or to start a fight? I see no reason for this thread if the discussion is going to run in circles...

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Hahaha, I don't have to prove jack shit. I have no memories before about 3. Ask Pan to prove it.

Here's the thing. Personal experiences count for jack shit. If you want to be taken seriously, you'll have to prove it. 'kay? Kay.

No one life gets to take priority over another. If life worked that way, then I guess I'm more important than millions of other people, because I'm younger and healthier, and my wants over-shadow theirs.

See, I disagree. If there was a choice to save you over, say, a condemned serial killer, I would choose you (tempting though the killer may be). I don't think all life is sacred and worth protecting. There are lives that are more valuable than others.

Sure. And just because you believe it doesn't mean it's right either.

Burden of proof. Show me something to be true, and I will accept it. Feel free to go about proving souls any time now.

This is really very simple. If you have no soul, you were not created with purpose, and were simply born to die and rot that means you have no value. You are as worthwhile as the chicken I just ate for dinner. Just because you want to have meaning and a purpose, does not mean you have one. You can dellusion yourself all you want, it doesn't make it true. You have no value, and I can do whatever I wish to you, with or without your consent.

My word, you really don't get it, do you? Created with purpose? What arbitrary self-deluded tripe. Yes, I have no predetermined purpose. Yes, I have no meaning or inherent worth. It is what I contribute to society and those around me that gives my life meaning and value. If you were to kill me, you'd impact those around me. You would inflict unto them suffering and hardship. Being that humans are moral creatures, this is wrong. You CAN do it, but it would be immoral, illogical, and purely destructive to do so, and as such, you will face a court of law and be convicted of murder. You also have yet to explain what exactly a soul is, what it does, and how the hell it gives life meaning. What is it about a lack of soul that makes the default meaning of life "to die and rot"? Why not have no meaning until otherwise determined?

Also, I don't see chickens becoming pharmacists and saving lives.

Yes, it is attached to it's mother. This does not change the fact that it has it's own separate DNA and is not actually a part of the mother. A child is attatched via umbilical cord to it's mother even after it's born, but you can't kill a newborn just because someone has not severed the physical attachment to the mother.

Cancer has its own separate DNA. It isn't really part of the host...it uses it to grow and spread. Just saying, your argument that all life has value is full of holes. you know, this one:

If any life is to be valued, then ALL life must be valued.

Emotional bullshit, flawed reasoning, wonderful lump of tripe.

Originally Posted by A Roxxor

Your assertions: Purpose can only come from God. Humans have souls.

My assertions: .

You have yet to provide any proof for your claims. I have yet to make a claim.

I'm curious though- why did you post this thread? To poll the forum, to start an actual discussion of the subject, or to start a fight? I see no reason for this thread if the discussion is going to run in circles...

I never claimed to have proof, now did I? I simply said this is my thought, and you are free to have yours. As I've said before, it's okay if we disagree. I'm not interested in trying to make everyone agree with me.

Why did I post the thread? Well, I love learning things, and really the only way you can learn is if people challenge and disagree with you. So, yes I did want to poll the forum, yes I did want to start an actual discussion, and starting a fight was kind of inevitable.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Well, different people will give you different answers on that. Personally, I believe my soul was made by the Creator, and my whole purpose is to please Him and bring Him glory. That includes my life here on earth, and I think the only one who should end my earthly life is the Creator. That's what gives me purpose. Other people don't agree with that, and that's cool. I just find it a little silly to say that we are literally just monkeys with better vocabularies.

This explains a lot, and demonstrates your massive incomprehension of evolution.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Some things cannot be physically proven. Sorry, you will not be able to explain everything in life with the limited intelligence that humans posess. Prove to me that I don't have a soul. You can't. It's a difference of opinion, and it's okay to disagree.

There is a teakettle in the asteroid belt. Unicorns and leprechauns exist. There is a giant comet that will impact earth in one week, but it's invisible. If you give me your entire life savings, I'll return them to you at 3000% value.

Prove me wrong.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

LOL, would it make you feel better if I said I "think" souls exist? Do we really have to play word games like that? I never said, "I have solid proof souls are real", I said this is my opinion, meaning this is what I think.

If you're going to make claims, assertions, and decisions that impact the lives of others (in this case, stating that those who get abortions are immoral, that a fetus is exactly equivalent to a human life), you better make goddamn sure you're 100% correct and be able to substantiate your claims with evidence.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Here's the thing. Personal experiences count for jack shit. If you want to be taken seriously, you'll have to prove it. 'kay? Kay.

Here's the thing...I didn't say anything about memories in the womb! Pan did. Sooo...ask them to prove it. 'Kay?

Originally Posted by Mario92

See, I disagree. If there was a choice to save you over, say, a condemned serial killer, I would choose you (tempting though the killer may be). I don't think all life is sacred and worth protecting. There are lives that are more valuable than others.

Alright. Well, I think you're ignorant and self-important. So, I'm more valuable than you.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Burden of proof. Show me something to be true, and I will accept it. Feel free to go about proving souls any time now.

Blah blah blah. I don't have proof, never stated that I did. How many times do I have to say the same thing?

Originally Posted by Mario92

My word, you really don't get it, do you? Created with purpose? What arbitrary self-deluded tripe. Yes, I have no predetermined purpose. Yes, I have no meaning or inherent worth. It is what I contribute to society and those around me that gives my life meaning and value. If you were to kill me, you'd impact those around me. You would inflict unto them suffering and hardship. Being that humans are moral creatures, this is wrong. You CAN do it, but it would be immoral, illogical, and purely destructive to do so, and as such, you will face a court of law and be convicted of murder. You also have yet to explain what exactly a soul is, what it does, and how the hell it gives life meaning. What is it about a lack of soul that makes the default meaning of life "to die and rot"? Why not have no meaning until otherwise determined?

I might impact those around you when I kill you, but it doesn't matter, because those around you are worthless too! Who cares if I go to prison, or if I get away with it? Who cares about laws at all. Who cares about suffering and hardships, you're just an animal. Why are humans moral creatures? What use are morals in a world with no purpose?

As for the cancer thing, honestly I'm not going to touch it. I don't know enough on the subject to make an informed decision on how I feel. If I have some free time, I will do research and get back to you.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

LOL, would it make you feel better if I said I "think" souls exist? Do we really have to play word games like that? I never said, "I have solid proof souls are real", I said this is my opinion, meaning this is what I think.

This is no word game, as there is a difference between what one believes to be true and what one can demonstrate to be true.

Your argument rests on the assumption that without souls, life has no meaning and purpose. That much you have claimed with quite a bit of certainty. To substantiate it, you would have to prove that (1) souls exist and that (2) they give meaning and purpose to life. You've yet to do any of that.

Originally Posted by Mario92

This explains a lot, and demonstrates your massive incomprehension of evolution.

Oh honey, I'm not here to argue the existence of the Creator with you. I'm glad it explains a lot for you though.

Originally Posted by Mario92

There is a teakettle in the asteroid belt. Unicorns and leprechauns exist. There is a giant comet that will impact earth in one week, but it's invisible. If you give me your entire life savings, I'll return them to you at 3000% value.

Prove me wrong.

All that argumentative crap right there? Not taking the bait, sorry.

Originally Posted by Mario92

If you're going to make claims, assertions, and decisions that impact the lives of others (in this case, stating that those who get abortions are immoral, that a fetus is exactly equivalent to a human life), you better make goddamn sure you're 100% correct and be able to substantiate your claims with evidence.

And if you are going to kill something that could possibly be a human life, you better make fucking sure you're 100% correct and be able to substantiate your claims with evidence. So far, you are not able to prove that a soul does not inhabit a fetus. Therefore, it is possible that by aborting a fetus, you may possibly be killing a soul.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

This is no word game, as there is a difference between what one believes to be true and what one can demonstrate to be true.

Your argument rests on the assumption that without souls, life has no meaning and purpose. That much you have claimed with quite a bit of certainty. To substantiate it, you would have to prove that (1) souls exist and that (2) they give meaning and purpose to life. You've yet to do any of that.

Good lord...you love circular arguments, don't you? If I am wrong in my belief that without souls, there is no meaning/purpose to life (any more than a chicken has meaning/purpose), please, show me proof that I am wrong! You are a useless being. Just because you WANT to have purpose doesn't mean you do.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Alright. Well, I think you're ignorant and self-important. So, I'm more valuable than you.

that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But wow, you're one to talk of ignorance.

Blah blah blah. I don't have proof, never stated that I did. How many times do I have to say the same thing?

Ah, so the central foundation of your entire argument rests on faith and superstition. How lovely.

I might impact those around you when I kill you, but it doesn't matter, because those around you are worthless too! Who cares if I go to prison, or if I get away with it? Who cares about laws at all. Who cares about suffering and hardships, you're just an animal. Why are humans moral creatures? What use are morals in a world with no purpose?

Simply by the way our brains are wired. We think, we exist, we are. We feel suffering, pain, happiness, joy. If you need a soul for morality to exist, you need to seriously reexamine your beliefs, because that is absolutely terrifying. Normal people don't hurt others out of a sense of compassion (as well as to preserve their own happiness). The human brain is extraordinarily complex. Don't sell it short. And you still assert there is no purpose without a soul or creator. Please substantiate that claim. We've repeatedly demonstrated exactly how a person can give their lives and others meaning, value, and purpose.

All that argumentative crap right there? Not taking the bait, sorry.

Because it challenges your established beliefs, and you want to continue to cling to them. Exactly like...

And if you are going to kill something that could possibly be a human life, you better make fucking sure you're 100% correct and be able to substantiate your claims with evidence. So far, you are not able to prove that a soul does not inhabit a fetus. Therefore, it is possible that by aborting a fetus, you may possibly be killing a soul.

...this. Sorry, this isn't how reality works. You COULD be killing a thousand people every time you take a bite of chicken. You COULD be perpetuating global suffering simply by existing, and when you die, all suffering will cease. This all MIGHT be happening. But you don't have to prove it ISN'T happening...it is I who must prove it IS. Savvy? If you're willing to accept baseless claims and assertions without evidence, you'll soon find yourself in a great mess of trouble. MIGHT there be a soul in a fetus? Sure. But MIGHT getting an abortion save the soul of the mother (and by extension, her entire family)? Equally possible.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Good lord...you love circular arguments, don't you? If I am wrong in my belief that without souls, there is no meaning/purpose to life (any more than a chicken has meaning/purpose), please, show me proof that I am wrong! You are a useless being. Just because you WANT to have purpose doesn't mean you do.

Don't shift the burden of proof. You're the one making the claims. Substantiate them or reveal your insincerity.

Originally Posted by snoop

It's fine if you believe that it should be illegal past a certain date in the pregnancy, etc., but basically, as I interpret it, you believe that it should be legal (albeit with a few stipulations/rules). That's not really in the middle. Either you are for abortion or against it... or have no opinion at all (the aforementioned "middle").

So far looking at this thread, though, it seems a lot of the pro-choicers are ok with abortion way longer into the pregnancy than I would draw the line (I'd draw it at when the first signs of consciousness appear; I don't think there's a definite answer of when exactly that is, so at the moment I'd have the line at the end of the first trimester until we get a better idea of when that point is). I'd also support considering abortion after that point as murder, legally. I think (I could be wrong) a lot of pro-choicers would have a problem with that, so I dont generally refer to myself as pro-choice even though I am to some extent.

@buriedmonsters: Bringing religion into it only hurts your argument, not everyone is religious, and appealing to the concept of "souls" which they (and I) don't believe in, is not going to do anything to convince them. There actually ARE secular pro-life arguments (I used to be 100% pro-life even as an agnostic atheist), and using them would work better (even though it's still very very difficult to change anyone's mind on this matter).

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Don't shift the burden of proof. You're the one making the claims. Substantiate them or reveal your insincerity.

Philosophic burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia According to that, I think I have lived up to the "burden of proof". Your turn. You have made a claim that you find nothing wrong with aborting a 20 week old fetus. Now prove to me that that fetus has no soul, and therefore you are aborting nothing but a mass of cells

Originally Posted by COLnop

So far looking at this thread, though, it seems a lot of the pro-choicers are ok with abortion way longer into the pregnancy than I would draw the line (I'd draw it at when the first signs of consciousness appear; I don't think there's a definite answer of when exactly that is, so at the moment I'd have the line at the end of the first trimester until we get a better idea of when that point is). I'd also support considering abortion after that point as murder, legally. I think (I could be wrong) a lot of pro-choicers would have a problem with that, so I dont generally refer to myself as pro-choice even though I am to some extent.

@buriedmonsters: Bringing religion into it only hurts your argument, not everyone is religious, and appealing to the concept of "souls" which they (and I) don't believe in, is not going to do anything to convince them. There actually ARE secular pro-life arguments (I used to be 100% pro-life even as an agnostic atheist), and using them would work better (even though it's still very very difficult to change anyone's mind on this matter).

I can see how bringing religion in can definitely hurt my argument, but in my mind it's all tied together, so that's the way I'm going to present it. I would love to hear a secular Pro-Life argument, no one here has showed that and it would be great to hear from someone with that viewpoint.

If you do not have a soul, [...] then you have no worth. Useless people cannot give other useless people value. Your life has no meaning, no matter how much you wish it did, and if I kill you it doesn't matter.

I wonder, if you suddenly became an atheist, would this mean you'd immediately go out and murder people because they "have no worth"?

I'm just curious. It's always useful to know where a psychopath is, so I can start heading in the opposite direction.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Philosophic burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia According to that, I think I have lived up to the "burden of proof". Your turn. You have made a claim that you find nothing wrong with aborting a 20 week old fetus. Now prove to me that that fetus has no soul, and therefore you are aborting nothing but a mass of cells

No, you haven't. We're all waiting for the evidential support of the following: the claim that souls exist and that they give meaning and purpose to life. I don't know if you've every been in an argument before, but saying "X is Y, X is Y, X is Y" over and over doesn't work. The onus is on you.

Originally Posted by buriedmonsters

Philosophic burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia According to that, I think I have lived up to the "burden of proof". Your turn. You have made a claim that you find nothing wrong with aborting a 20 week old fetus. Now prove to me that that fetus has no soul, and therefore you are aborting nothing but a mass of cells

Show to me that chickens and other animals don't have souls. Plants for that matter, too. If you're gonna kill them and eat them, you want to make sure they don't have souls, right?

Originally Posted by Mario92

that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But wow, you're one to talk of ignorance.

Exactly, it's MY opinion. Basically everyone you run across will have a reason they are better than you, and who is to say they are wrong? How in the hell are we supposed to classify how valuable people are, we have no unbiased opinions. This brings us back to life needing to be valued simply because it is life.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Ah, so the central foundation of your entire argument rests on faith and superstition. How lovely.

Well, actually, the central foundation of my argument is that people need to look beyond their own selfish wants and have compassion for other people. If you can't prove or aren't sure (which I am not) when life truly begins, err on the side of compassion. But, whatever.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Simply by the way our brains are wired. We think, we exist, we are. We feel suffering, pain, happiness, joy. If you need a soul for morality to exist, you need to seriously reexamine your beliefs, because that is absolutely terrifying. Normal people don't hurt others out of a sense of compassion (as well as to preserve their own happiness). The human brain is extraordinarily complex. Don't sell it short. And you still assert there is no purpose without a soul or creator. Please substantiate that claim. We've repeatedly demonstrated exactly how a person can give their lives and others meaning, value, and purpose.

Nope. You haven't. You are a useless being. You were created out of random events with no love or purpose. So was everyone else. Your brain has evolved enough to develop emotions, and those emotions tell you that you WANT a purpose, a value. But you cannot simply give yourself, or anyone else, a purpose just because you want it. Sorry.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Sorry, this isn't how reality works. You COULD be killing a thousand people every time you take a bite of chicken. You COULD be perpetuating global suffering simply by existing, and when you die, all suffering will cease. This all MIGHT be happening. But you don't have to prove it ISN'T happening...it is I who must prove it IS. Savvy? If you're willing to accept baseless claims and assertions without evidence, you'll soon find yourself in a great mess of trouble. MIGHT there be a soul in a fetus? Sure. But MIGHT getting an abortion save the soul of the mother (and by extension, her entire family)? Equally possible.

Yeah yeah. Blah blah. Guess what, you don't have a soul, and I don't think you're as valuable as me...so I can kill you if I want, and then I don't have to listen to you repeat the same inane babble over and over.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

I wonder, if you suddenly became an atheist, would this mean you'd immediately go out and murder people because they "have no worth"?

I'm just curious. It's always useful to know where a psychopath is, so I can start heading in the opposite direction.

Don't worry, I won't ever become an atheist.

This thread is bordering on the ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Show to me that chickens and other animals don't have souls. Plants for that matter, too. If you're gonna kill them and eat them, you want to make sure they don't have souls, right?

Well, as far as I can tell, animals don't have souls, but I'm honestly open to the idea. But btw, I've been a vegetarian for the last 10 years. Saying I ate chicken for dinner was not a literal example...actually I have yet to eat dinner at all.

Plants don't have brains. Lets not argue about them please.