Recently, while browsing through the groups, I came across a Pro-life group. It has only one member-it's founder, and that got me to thinking...Are there any pro-life atheists out there? And being that most, if not all arguments I've heard against abortions are usually religious in nature, what would be the atheists argument(s) against abortion?


Personally, I am pro-choice. I fully support every womans right to choose.

Tags: abortion, groups, pro-life

Views: 410

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I'm glad that you brought up the child as a "consequence" BS. This is one of the things that has always bothered me. Along with the cold "just give it up for adoption" idea. I don't think that people realize that giving a baby up for adoption doesn't always guarantee a stable loving home for the child.

Take a look at the foster care system here in the US. There's always more kids than homes for the kids. The kids often times wind up floating from one house to another, one school to another unable to complete a solid school year. Not to mention some of the horror stories you hear about people fostering the kids in order to get extra money from the state, or in order to abuse them. Do we want to make this worse by adding more unwanted kids into the mix? Even if all the babies get adopted, it's only going to take away potential homes from the foster kids.
An Open Letter from a Pro-Life Atheist

Source: http://www.godlessprolifers.org/library/jones1.html
The writer of that letter lost me when they called me "pro-abortion".
Yeah...lost me at 'dear sirs' lol.
Read it all. Not convinced. Sounds like the same weak arguments religious pro-lifers make, minus the "you're making Jesus cry" facet--which strangely enough, makes the arguments less compelling, since for the religious crowd the usual reasons are usually just props for the ultimate reason (God said not to). Whores and sluts get what they deserve (so this precious human life is also somehow a fitting punishment, a "consequence" of a woman's actions? and that isn't a cruel point of view, to view a child as a punishment to be inflicted upon women for some kind of percieved sluthood? and/or the idea that perhaps the torture of a back-alley abortion is a fitting punishment for a "whore"? Because as I said before, outlawing abortions won't make them go away, they'll just make the situation worse), something that hasn't yet developed can somehow feel pain even before it develops a nervous system, preventing something from developing is somehow the same as killing it, yadda yadda yadda. I'm sorry, but I haven't been convinced that an undeveloped potential human being is the same as an actual human being, and I still think that it's worse to bring a child into the world that you know already won't be wanted. I consider that to be a far crueler and more unethical action than having an abortion as early as you can. I've said it before and I'll say it again--if I got pregnant today, I'd abort tomorrow without looking back. Far better than to bear a child who can only be resented at best and hated at worst.

And I, too, was put off immediately by "pro-abortionist". What a ridiculously loaded label. I don't go around with a colorful flag that says "Wouldn't you like to have an abortion too?" and promoting abortions with big cheers. I would prefer that people make wise and informed decisions and not be unwillingly pregnant in the first place and that they make a decision early and stick with it, but I still think the decision should be in the individual's hands--that doesn't mean I'm running a campaign to ramp up the collective number of abortions! If you get pregnant and decide against an abortion, more power to you so long as you don't presume to decide for me. If someone was lobbying to force all women (perhaps all unmarried women? there'd almost have to be a qualifier on that sort of thing) to get abortions if they get pregnant, I'd be just as unconvinced and unforgiving.


And that "pro-life" crap. Why not just call us "pro-death" then--it would be just as bullshit as the "pro-abortionist" label.

And yes, I consider anti-choice an apt label for the "pro-life" crowd, because while I am not running around rooting for death or trying to increase abortions, the anti-choice crowd is actively opposing the right of another person to make a personal decision. The question comes down not to emotional strawmen like "do you or do you not agree with murdering babies?" but to "do you or do you not think that women have a right to choose whether or not to have an abortion?" It comes down to pro-choice and anti-choice.

Perhaps I'm getting too into this. Perhaps I've been awake too long, because I'm especially cranky right now. Time for sleep! *YAWN*
First off, why does a letter about something only women can do start off with "dear sirs"?

Secondly I don't see any arguments, I just see conclusions. The author assumes that we already agree with all of his ideas. He doesn't offer any evidence. He doesn't explain his logic.

Not to mention the previously linked artcle about fetal pain that makes half of his arguments out right wrong.

And what's with this "get what you deserve" crap? Child as punishment? That's just rotten. Children are too important to be used as devices to "teach someone a lesson". This argument is malicious and has no regard for the life of the child.

Anyone else wonder what he was trying to get at with reason number 7? "Most atheists do not see anything wrong with abortions and will not give you the time of day once you mention god or one of the many "holy" books that religious people believe in."

What does that have to do with abortion? Why would an atheist try to use that in an argument geared towards other atheists?
YES, thank you! There is something so vile about regarding a child as a "punishment". So it's cruel to stop the pregnancy as early as possible, but not cruel to "inflict" the kid onto an unwilling parent. A cluster of cells can feel so much more pain than a fully-formed unwanted child, after all.

What's wrong with no. 7--why would an atheist try and use it in an agrument against other atheists? Maybe this guy isn't an atheist. Believers do occasionally like to go in disguise, but quickly blow their cover due to their complete and total ignorance about the group they are trying to infiltrate. Invader Zim did a better job! :)
It's all just the same as the religious anti-abortion rants, but worse in a sense. This person isn't just listening to their church or their religion, they are motivated by a desire to punish women.

The most frightening part:

"Justice is when you get what you deserve."

Somehow I doubt that he means "the pwecious babee diserves to be borned"!
Argh. The same technique works in duck hunting -- you hide in the bushes and make noises like a duck, and then pick off the ones who fall for the deception.

This is not the first faux-atheist I've come across. "Hey, I'm an atheist! I'm just like you! Except I believe there are mysteries that can only be explained by a divine creator!”

This statement alone gives him away:

“Most atheists do not see anything wrong with abortions and will not give you the time of day once you mention god or one of the many "holy" books that religious people believe in.”

Yeah, those evil, callous, God-hating, baby-killing atheists.

This man is a lying sack of shit.
Open Letter to the Anti-choice Stance:

Abortion is a medical decision, period. You nor anyone else has the right to supersede my intrinsic right in making medical decisions concerning my body. Your religious or moral beliefs are of no consequence to me.

In pregnancy, it is the woman who assumes 100% of the physical risk. She is the one who will risk her very life in carrying a fetus to term. Women still die and are maimed due to complications in pregnancy and it is her decision alone to consent to this risk or not.

I do not have the right to step between you and your doctor in your medical decisions...as an analogy;

Let's say you go to your doctor and find you have a tumor (a clump of cells quickly dividing and multiplying) now, your doc wants to do a biopsy but I step in and declare that no matter if it's malignant or benign he (you) has to let that tumor take its natural course..because, you see, I (and my group) have a religious belief that God gave you that tumor to 'test' your faith and it would be blasphemy for any medical intervention, prayer is your only hope, live or die...we'll know it was God's will. But you protest..."you don't have that right. I could die from this and I don't believe this is God's will. My family and loved ones will also suffer...Dammit, this is my decision...How dare you!"

This analogy could go on and on...the person smoked (thus irresponsible and 'deserves' what they get) or the tumor was forcibly injected into the person (rape, incest thus, an exception to the burden of God's will) and the mental gymnastics would just multiply... but essentially, it all boils down to my previous statement; Abortion is a medical decision made between a woman and her doctor, period.
I am pro-life if to be so is to be against abortion. I am against abortion because I am opposed to unwanted pregnancies. I'm a male and never had one (nor have I been the cause of a need for one ... that I know of ... wink, wink, nudge, nudge) but I have had a couple of girlfriends and a wife who have had them. None of them became depressed or anything that the rightwingers want you to believe about the sequelae. My wife was actually forced into it by her husband of the time and when I knocked her up she was ecstatic about it.

The problem seems to be the failure of sex education and the inability of the educational system to motivate pregnancy avoidance. The fanatics of the anti-choice movement also have a history of opposition to information and implements of contraception. They have opposed vehemently every positive step toward sexual freedom even within marriage and it's all religiously motivated. I say fuck 'em!
Frankly, I'm flabbergasted at any anti-choice atheist. But then, there are atheists who believe in tarot cards and ouija boards.

Lots of people here identify themselves as pro-life but then state they would not presume to dictate to another person what to do. That stance makes you pro-choice. Period. (it also makes you not an asshole.)

I am astonished that atheists, who are supposed to dig science and reason, still insist on anthropomorphizing blastocysts. It's not a human, it's a potential human. Potential does not determine value. Anyone who says otherwise, I suspect, has been tainted with the Judeo Christian notion that that magical little blastocyst is infused with a "soul".

The attitude of "let's punish those irresponsible sluts by forcing them to gestate to term" is horrific in ways I can't even explain.

I love life. I love kids. I love animals, plants, families, babies, toddlers. I am also an adult woman who has been sexually active for ten years of glorious fucking completely unburdened by weird Judeo Christian hangups. Never been pregnant. If I were to become pregnant tomorrow (a statistical near impossibility since I have followed rigorous contraceptive procedures since the day I lost my V-card) I would terminate the pregnancy and not lose a wink of sleep.

I hope someday to have kids though, but I would value them enough to time them such that I could financially and emotionally provide for them.

P.S. A properly done pharmaceutical abortion involves the introduction of a chemical which inhibits folacin uptake and stops the cells from dividing. This must be performed quite early on in the pregnancy. I would LOVE for a fellow atheist to try and explain to me how that procedure is inhumane.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

Latest Activity

Clara Dawes joined Dr. Terence Meaden's group
25 minutes ago
Freethinker31 replied to jay H's discussion Free speech (right)
50 minutes ago
Glen Rosenberg replied to James M. Martin's discussion Ben Affleck Debates Maher and Harris and Makes Total Ass of Himself
53 minutes ago
Freethinker31 replied to James M. Martin's discussion Ben Affleck Debates Maher and Harris and Makes Total Ass of Himself
1 hour ago
Glen Rosenberg replied to James M. Martin's discussion Ben Affleck Debates Maher and Harris and Makes Total Ass of Himself
1 hour ago
Loren Miller replied to James M. Martin's discussion Ben Affleck Debates Maher and Harris and Makes Total Ass of Himself
1 hour ago
Loren Miller posted a status
"Watched Bill Maher tonight ... and my estimate of Rula Jebreal just took a major-league DUMP, mostly because she's a Bill Affleck wannabe!"
1 hour ago
Loren Miller posted a status
"Watched Bill Maher tonight ... and my estimate of Rula Jebreal just took a major-league DUMP, mostly because she's a Bill Affleck wannabe!"
1 hour ago
Loren Miller posted a status
"Watched Bill Maher tonight ... and my estimate of Rula Jebreal just took a major-league DUMP, mostly because she's a Bill Affleck wannabe!"
1 hour ago
Craigart14 replied to James M. Martin's discussion Ben Affleck Debates Maher and Harris and Makes Total Ass of Himself
1 hour ago
Scott DeLong replied to James M. Martin's discussion Clown Show Coming: Why the Republitards Will Lose in 2016 Unless They Wise Up and Pick a Charismatic Candidate
2 hours ago
Ted Foureagles posted a discussion
3 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service