I am evolving towards a pro life stance as an atheist, because it seems to align more with reason, and if one is to be completely unemotional and pragmatic, abortion should be considered a last resort just like any form of violence against any life form.

Arguments I've heard from pro-choice folks are mainly from the "freedom over controlling one's own body" perspective.

Well, we all have the right to control our bodies but only to the extent it doesnt harm someone or in some cases some thing else.

As our knowledge of science expands, we see less and less distinction between humans and other life forms, and we've come to learn that all life forms have a common ancestor.  This, to my way of thinking, makes anyone or anything capable of empathy accountable to the rest of the living things to be conscious of their fellow beings, and understand the gravity of responsibility when it comes to doing violence to another life form.

I dont know if this means either the extremes of no "morning after pill " or "abortions up to 1 second before birth", I dont like either extreme of the argument, as a rational, caring, loving human being.

I think the issue is more complex than pro life or pro choice as defined in our society, but I think as thinking, rational atheists, we need to acknowledge the complexity of the issue and , as we do in all scientific pursuits, constantly refine and re-evaluate our positions in light of new discoveries and be ready to put aside cherished beliefs in favor of doing the right thing.

For now, Id err on the side of caution.  I cant imagine how incredibly horrible it would be to experience an abortion from a fetus's perspective.  Thats something the pro-choice side is alarmingly quick to dismiss, stating that they feel no pain etc when we truly have no idea, and are pretty sure there is little to distinguish a third trimester fetus from a newborn baby.

My two cents.

Views: 403

Replies to This Discussion

you are evading my question. I asked how my seeing the issue as "complex" makes me non rational or a pro choice infiltrator as you have accused me of in your original post. I sense you are here to attack, and not necessarily to enlighten. Am I mistaken?
You are not a Pro-Life individual. Therefore, you do not belong in this group.
If you have an issue with some point I've made, please address it specifically. Sweeping statements and personal attacks have no place in a civilized discussion.
Let's discuss this in a group where it belongs.
I think that Mr Jubinsky may mistakenly believe that you have come to this group to attack (or at least levy arguments against) being prolife. If that belief were correct, then he might be 'defending' rather than 'attacking'. I suppose then it's all just a question of how to define territory and intent.

I don't know for certain, but I think that you're merely trying to get more clarity on a contentious issue by engaging in dialogue people who advocate for one side. I'm also going to give Mr. Jubinsky the benefit of the doubt and assume that he just wants to protect a safe zone for people who believe like he does.

I'm sorry that you feel that you've been attacked. I probably would feel the same way if I were you. I have no objection to continuing our discussion if you want to do so.
If he were in good faith why would he not simply start an appropriate group for the discussion? For that matter why don't you?
I recommend you start a new group called "Pro-life atheists who do not tolerate any dissenting ideas, skepticism, or questioning any aspect of our hard line stance, which is life begins at conception and anyone who thinks even slightly differently is guilty of murder."

I promise to stay well clear of that one.
You have played a game of semantics. As the group is defined it is:

For atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, etc. who believe in expanding the definition of "person" to embrace human beings before birth as well as after.

Your interpretation of this (the one that you claim gives you entitlement here) would allow in the group one who has only expanded to an instant before the birth process the definition of "person". Rationally then, your interpretation of the purpose of the group is incorrect.

I have read your blog. I think it would be very appropriate for you to start a group designed for the exchange of Pro-Life/Pro-Choice ideas.
Defense of a safe harbor I can relate to, thats why I joined this group as I've felt uncomfortable even questioning the pro-choice resolute without getting big epithets ranging from "misogynist!" to "you're a man, shut up!" so I had hoped I could explore these leanings I have here in this group.

I don't get a sense John will let up, but I also haven't heard any similar complaints from others in this group, so I've decided to remain here and hope that John realizes he can simply ignore this thread and post other ones if it makes him feel uncomfortable.
Ryan as I said I'm not technically Pro-Life but think I'm more consistent on the principles that many Pro-Lifers so I'd like to see anyone give me the boot. :)
Hang around and learn that to get by, you will need to ignore a lot of what is said. This is especially so of many Pro-Choicers here, most have no clue about what they are talking about and in fact many think their ignorance is a plus!
I am evolving towards a pro life stance as an atheist

With all due respect, and I mean that, if you are not yet pro-life then you do not belong in this group. As you can see from the name this group is for Atheists who are already pro-life. It would be very easy for you to start a group for Atheists who are on the fence when it comes to being Pro-Life or Pro-Choice and such a group might well have many more members than this one. Why do you impose yourself here when this group is not what you are really all about?
So either I accept a cherished belief unquestioningly, or "get lost" ? Is this group so superstitious that it cannot accept critical thinking as part of its mandate? If that is the case, I would submit the group does not belong at Atheist nexus, and rather should be on a religious website, where they are used to having sycophants who simply nod in agreement with each other and shun the "doubting thomas".

I am, as I stated, leaning pro-life philosophically, but as a freethinking atheist, I am also constantly questioning, refining, and gaining new knowledge. I am open to new ways of thinking and never would consciously hold to a cherished belief in spite of evidence to the contrary.

So I return to you, why join a website like atheist nexus where critical thinking is encouraged? This group may be called "pro life" but it is in the context of atheism, not black and white religious extremism.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service