Abortion, Hitler, the United States, and some big questions.

[wethirst]

Adolf Hitler: 6 million people...killed
+
Stalin: At most 32 million people...killed
_____________________________________
Total of 38 million people murdered



The United States has killed over 47 million of its own people through abortion.
It started with Roe v. Wade
And it continues today
They claim it's ethical, to give people the choice. I'm not a politician, I'm not that big on arguing from a political perspective. But let's talk about morality. Give me one moral reason for abortion except for eugenic purposes; the same exact ideals of Hitler and Stalin. What makes this any different? What basis do you have to say this is right, and Hitler is wrong?

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, wethirst, and welcome to CR!

Ah, the abortion bugaboo...I think you may find that a delicate subject around here, at least it has been in times past.

Originally Posted by wethirst

They claim it's ethical, to give people the choice.

We have to be careful when using the collective "they" or "you." All too often, we (you and I) make overarching assumptions that in the end prove to not be truthful. This is called "prejudice."

I'm not a politician, I'm not that big on arguing from a political perspective.

Just curious, why then did you post this on the political board?

But let's talk about morality.

OK, but I would think that to be more a question of philosophy, although I can see how one might confine the issue to law, in which case perhaps politics is the proper board.

Give me one moral reason for abortion except for eugenic purposes;

I am a man, so I cannot speak from experience, but I can imagine a moral reason...what of an expectant mother who is not financially or mentally or materially ready, who does not want to see her child grow up in filth, disease, poverty, hunger and want? An irresponsible mother in these conditions would have the child anyway, and either give the child up for adoption (or the state would take the child away in the case of crack babies), or would keep the child, go on welfare and become financially dependent on state welfare. Now, I am not arguing for abortion strictly on a financial basis, there are far more compelling underlying issues to resolve, and I am certain it an overwhelming choice for a person facing the issue. I do not envy any person faced with such a heart rending choice.

the same exact ideals of Hitler and Stalin. What makes this any different?

While I can understand the similarities you allude to, I don't feel they are entirely accurate. Forced labor (no pun intended) in a concentration camp until one dies from exhaustion and exposure, effectively tortured to death, is not anywhere near the same as abortion. The prejudical discrimination behind the "ideals of Hitler and Stalin" do not extend to the individual agony over the decision to abort. Abortion is *not* a mandate, it is an opportunity if needed (kind of like a fire extinguisher or an escape ladder, good to have at the ready in an emergency).

What basis do you have to say this is right, and Hitler is wrong?

Since I do not agree with abortion in a wholesale sense, I am not one of the "you" *you* allude to. Even though I firmly disagree with abortion, except in unusual circumstances, I *do not judge* those who are faced with such an agonizing choice. Have you read "Rowe v. Wade?" Do you understand what those Justices faced, and why they came to the decisions they did, and what law and precedent was used in arriving at the conclusions they did?

Personally, I feel adoption is the preferable choice when circumstances permit. I don't think abortion should be used as a form of birth control for irresponsible sex. I don't think fetal material shoould become a commodity, and human life be devalued by such. These, in my mind, are much farther reaching issues with greater scope, affecting whole populations and cultures. Even so, I understand that I do not stand in the shoes of an expectant mother faced with raising a child I cannot provide for, whose father may be unknown or otherwise unconcerned, who may be born addicted to drugs, who may be the result of a rape or incest, whose pregnancy may be threatening my life, or any of a list of reasons that are individual and personal, and compelling. Abortion should not be an easy decision, and once that decision is made the mother *will remember* for the rest of her life. It is a that kind of life altering decision, and it should not be made easy. So, if a mother has come to that decision, then I will not judge her, she has enough judgement to deal with for the rest of her life. I might add, this is not unforgivable, from a Christian perspective. Abortion is forgivable, it just shouldn't be a decision made lightly. Pulling a trigger is a decision that shouldn't be made lightly either, or throwing a switch (electric or injection), or slaughtering an animal or cutting a tree for that matter.

We make weighty decisions in our lives, and we deal with the consequences and aftermath for the remainder of our lives. That's life. People who set themselves up in judgement because other people are faced with weighty decisions fail to understand the lessons of religion. It is somewhat hypocritical to judge someone for a weighty issue they must face, if *you* (collective and personal) have not faced that decision yourself, or without full realization that you too will face overwhelming decisions that conflict with your core beliefs, morality and values. We may say we believe something, but until we are actually faced with an overwhelming conflict to that belief do we know just what our reaction, and true belief, will be.

Besides, the old adage "judge not, that you be not judged" is in my opinion appropo not just for Christians, but for everyone.

[wil]

The fact of the matter is we still have unwanted children. I think that is the real issue, yes one should be more careful about getting pregnant, but really the last thing we want in this world is unwanted children. All children need love and caring, and if we force people into having children that don't want them...I don't even know how to discuss the social, political and moral aspects of that.

Not that it means anything to this discussion although it probably does to the other millions that died at the hands of Hitler I think that number is closer to 11 million.

Roe v. Wade. In the United States we elect presidents who appoint judges, and senators who approve them. Want to make a change, get political, campaign for your candidates and get out the vote.

[I, Brian]

To be honest, I think the fact of the matter is more that we refuse to accept responsibility.

It's not so much that I'm suggesting an anti-abortionist view is correct, as much that to me a too liberal position on the matter is somewhat misguided.

We want choices - but not consequences. Abortion isn't a way to address a difficult situation, and walk away with no consequences.

The idea of abortion with no limits I found made rational sense when I was younger. But then when I forced into the situation of accepting responsibility when it happened, it was the case of accepting it. Now I consider abotion laws to be too unrestricted.

I think the argument between aborting a cell cluster with potential, and fully formed foetus, to be distinct but blurred under existing abotion legislation.

2c.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

To be honest, I think the fact of the matter is more that we refuse to accept responsibility.

I think you are on to something here, Brian, something alluded to by many without broaching this particular subject.

I think the argument between aborting a cell cluster with potential, and fully formed foetus, to be distinct but blurred under existing abotion legislation.

Agreed. And the original decision handed down in Rowe v. Wade addressed that specific issue. Originally, a fetus that is "quickened" is supposed to have full rights as an individual. Unfortunately, subsequent legislation has diluted that. Abortion, per Rowe, was not supposed to be at "anytime" during the pregnancy, only during the first trimester. As soon as that little pollywog starts moving round on its own inside the womb, it is, according to the initial Supreme Court decision, an living being, and no longer "subject" to abortion. I think the laws have been amended since then, in large part because of what Brian alludes to, refusal of responsibility. And certain organizations have a vested political interest in promoting abortion, even beyond the quickening of the fetus.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, wil!

Originally Posted by wil

The fact of the matter is we still have unwanted children. I think that is the real issue, yes one should be more careful about getting pregnant, but really the last thing we want in this world is unwanted children. All children need love and caring, and if we force people into having children that don't want them...I don't even know how to discuss the social, political and moral aspects of that.

While I agree conceptually, there is no lack of adoptive parents, evidenced by the ever increasing cost to adopt (supply and demand). So the variable that tips the apple cart must be an overabundance of irresponsible "procreators." I know this will upset some, be that as it may, I have overheard many conversations where women discussed having more children specifically to get bigger welfare checks or collect more child support. You can't convince me it doesn't happen. Children caught in such a game are not wanted as children, they are lottery tickets, they are tax deductions.

Roe v. Wade. In the United States we elect presidents who appoint judges, and senators who approve them. Want to make a change, get political, campaign for your candidates and get out the vote.

You never cease to amaze me, wil! I mean that in the best way!

[wil]

Namaste 123 and thanks for the kind words.

Tis true folks are standing in line to adopt....newborns. Not many looking for those troubled 12 year olds who weren't wanted 12 years ago...

I agree with the welfare issues, my heart goes out to those children and adults who feel this is a means of living.

The challenge to me is not the law, but once again education. We need truth in education, not wars on drugs or teenage pregnancy, not scare tactics or demeaning words, just truth.

[China Cat Sunflower]

So wethirst, are you in favor of measures that would make abortion unnecessary? Like comprehensive sex education and readily available contraceptives?

Chris

[wethirst]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, wethirst, and welcome to CR!

Ah, the abortion bugaboo...I think you may find that a delicate subject around here, at least it has been in times past.

We have to be careful when using the collective "they" or "you." All too often, we (you and I) make overarching assumptions that in the end prove to not be truthful. This is called "prejudice."


Just curious, why then did you post this on the political board?


OK, but I would think that to be more a question of philosophy, although I can see how one might confine the issue to law, in which case perhaps politics is the proper board.


I am a man, so I cannot speak from experience, but I can imagine a moral reason...what of an expectant mother who is not financially or mentally or materially ready, who does not want to see her child grow up in filth, disease, poverty, hunger and want? An irresponsible mother in these conditions would have the child anyway, and either give the child up for adoption (or the state would take the child away in the case of crack babies), or would keep the child, go on welfare and become financially dependent on state welfare. Now, I am not arguing for abortion strictly on a financial basis, there are far more compelling underlying issues to resolve, and I am certain it an overwhelming choice for a person facing the issue. I do not envy any person faced with such a heart rending choice.


While I can understand the similarities you allude to, I don't feel they are entirely accurate. Forced labor (no pun intended) in a concentration camp until one dies from exhaustion and exposure, effectively tortured to death, is not anywhere near the same as abortion. The prejudical discrimination behind the "ideals of Hitler and Stalin" do not extend to the individual agony over the decision to abort. Abortion is *not* a mandate, it is an opportunity if needed (kind of like a fire extinguisher or an escape ladder, good to have at the ready in an emergency).


Since I do not agree with abortion in a wholesale sense, I am not one of the "you" *you* allude to. Even though I firmly disagree with abortion, except in unusual circumstances, I *do not judge* those who are faced with such an agonizing choice. Have you read "Rowe v. Wade?" Do you understand what those Justices faced, and why they came to the decisions they did, and what law and precedent was used in arriving at the conclusions they did?

Personally, I feel adoption is the preferable choice when circumstances permit. I don't think abortion should be used as a form of birth control for irresponsible sex. I don't think fetal material shoould become a commodity, and human life be devalued by such. These, in my mind, are much farther reaching issues with greater scope, affecting whole populations and cultures. Even so, I understand that I do not stand in the shoes of an expectant mother faced with raising a child I cannot provide for, whose father may be unknown or otherwise unconcerned, who may be born addicted to drugs, who may be the result of a rape or incest, whose pregnancy may be threatening my life, or any of a list of reasons that are individual and personal, and compelling. Abortion should not be an easy decision, and once that decision is made the mother *will remember* for the rest of her life. It is a that kind of life altering decision, and it should not be made easy. So, if a mother has come to that decision, then I will not judge her, she has enough judgement to deal with for the rest of her life. I might add, this is not unforgivable, from a Christian perspective. Abortion is forgivable, it just shouldn't be a decision made lightly. Pulling a trigger is a decision that shouldn't be made lightly either, or throwing a switch (electric or injection), or slaughtering an animal or cutting a tree for that matter.

We make weighty decisions in our lives, and we deal with the consequences and aftermath for the remainder of our lives. That's life. People who set themselves up in judgement because other people are faced with weighty decisions fail to understand the lessons of religion. It is somewhat hypocritical to judge someone for a weighty issue they must face, if *you* (collective and personal) have not faced that decision yourself, or without full realization that you too will face overwhelming decisions that conflict with your core beliefs, morality and values. We may say we believe something, but until we are actually faced with an overwhelming conflict to that belief do we know just what our reaction, and true belief, will be.

Besides, the old adage "judge not, that you be not judged" is in my opinion appropo not just for Christians, but for everyone.

Thank you for the welcome, and regards to you in return.
As well, thank you much for your critique. I realize how far I have to come in becoming an effective communicator. So, were I to think it necessary, I would probably restate some of my thoughts after your thoughts, but my point was more to get some conversation going (a great weakness of mine), and maybe some has.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by wethirst

I realize how far I have to come in becoming an effective communicator. So, were I to think it necessary, I would probably restate some of my thoughts after your thoughts, but my point was more to get some conversation going (a great weakness of mine), and maybe some has.

The arguments for or against abortion can be pretty well summed up in two or three well parsed paragraphs. I've been there and done that, and I'm not going to do it again. If you have some thoughts on how to minimize the demand for abortions I'll listen, otherwise I'm done.

Chris

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by wethirst

Adolf Hitler: 6 million people...killed
+
Stalin: At most 32 million people...killed
_____________________________________
Total of 38 million people murdered



The United States has killed over 47 million of its own people through abortion.
It started with Roe v. Wade
And it continues today
They claim it's ethical, to give people the choice. I'm not a politician, I'm not that big on arguing from a political perspective. But let's talk about morality. Give me one moral reason for abortion except for eugenic purposes; the same exact ideals of Hitler and Stalin. What makes this any different? What basis do you have to say this is right, and Hitler is wrong?

I'm curious as to the abortion rate in other nations. And unlike Hitler, or Stalin, the "people's" Supreme Court made the decision in the US to legalize it (mostly as a way to keep women from dying or being horribly injured during illegal back room abortions).

Also, it seems people want to play, but do not want to pay. All the accoutriments of a committed relationship, without the responsibilities that go with...

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Also, it seems people want to play, but do not want to pay. All the accoutriments of a committed relationship, without the responsibilities that go with...

Q, I think this point of yours is the single most important that could be made, relative to the aborbtion/pro-life issue, from a moral point of view. Clearly there is a problem, and I find it very troubling that many people have simply come to view abortion as another form of birth control. If we think about what the word means, and accept the FACT that it is the interruption of a natural process ... we cannot help but become concerned.

Perhaps it would also help, if we truly knew the facts concerning human development. How difficult, it will be, to convince a large number of people that most abortions are techinically NOT murder, until our technology has become more refined. Esoteric studies by clairvoyants, confirmed over, and over, and over again (as true SCIENCE requires), show that the Soul attaches itself to the developing fetus at almost exactly the mid-point of the gestation period. So up until the middle of the 2nd trimester, or at 4 1/2 months of development, we have an organism, but not an ensouled being. There is obviously a lifeforce present, yet we could probably safely say that the fetus is still a "part" of a woman's body, if we wanted to quibble.

Further teachings indicate that a Soul can choose, even at the very last minute, to abort its own incarnation, as this is its KARMIC RIGHT. Thus, if it deems the organism unfit (immediately prior to birth) to enter in, a still-birth will occur. Science can tell what happened to cause a still-birth, but this is the efficient cause, and not the original, or actual reason. Once the connection of the life-thread (sutra-atma, or sutratma) occus, just prior to birth, the soul has definitely accepted the prepared organism - the physical body, as well as the emotional (astral) body, and the mental body. A PERSON definitely exists, once this has taken place.

Those who assert that even a newly fertilized ovum is a "human being," are slimply sliding down the slippery slope of the argument, and we might as well just all call ourselves cannibals, if we want to follow this logic. After all, it is largely the FOOD I EAT, which my body converts into sperm cells (or eggs), which join to produce this thing, which eventually grows into the human organism. Use of the word `potential,' thus becomes very misleading, and pro-life proponents play upon our emotions, rather than reason, logic and scientific fact.

It may take some time, before instrumentation is available to prove to the die-hard skeptics, and materialists, that indeed, human beings are ensouled ... and that the entrance of the Soul into (or overshadowing of) the human body occurs at a definite time, for us all, without exception. What disturbs me far more than an over-zealous pro-lifer, is the person, and mentality, which argues that abortion is acceptable birth-control. This promotes a disgregard for human life, even if unintentionally, and much worse, it is the abnegation of responsibility. We know things are already out of hand, when "doing the right thing," if one knocks up one's girlfriend, is to pay for the abortion. Granted, the milk has already been spilt, but what is the lesson we're really learning?

To compare the abortion issue, surrounding which there is so much misconception (ahem!) & lack of a certain insight, to the Jewish Holocaust, is simply to appeal to our emotions. Hitler, too, and his cohort, acted largely out of ignorance .... and demonstrated that they didn't have all the facts, regarding the Plan for human evolution. One should research the Teachings of which Hitler and his group were well aware, before making comparisons like this. We cannot excuse the horrors of the World War(s), but it is our responsibility to understand why the conflict precipitated, and do our best to see that our collective ignorance does not allow another such global catastrophe. Abortion, while in the most extreme of cases can be said to be an individual catastrophe, really only threatens us because our technology so easily allows us to avoid the issue at hand.

If I do x, y will often result. Why y? That is what we should be asking. It's also important to ask, why x? In a way, it's a very difficult question, because the motivation (desire) does not originate on the mental plane. But the separation of the sexes, was NOT the original state of human existence (worth researching, for those who are not familiar with the MANY `Adams' in the Hebrew mysticism). We split into man and woman for a reason - to LEARN something. And the fact that our coming together again literally generates another human organism, also shows us something. I think many a married couple has probably gained insight into this Mystery. It goes beyond causality, even beyond attraction (love), and touches upon the deepest lesson of all: Oneness. 1+1=?

taijasi

[Faithfulservant]

Originally Posted by wil

The fact of the matter is we still have unwanted children. I think that is the real issue, yes one should be more careful about getting pregnant, but really the last thing we want in this world is unwanted children. All children need love and caring, and if we force people into having children that don't want them...I don't even know how to discuss the social, political and moral aspects of that.

Not that it means anything to this discussion although it probably does to the other millions that died at the hands of Hitler I think that number is closer to 11 million.

Roe v. Wade. In the United States we elect presidents who appoint judges, and senators who approve them. Want to make a change, get political, campaign for your candidates and get out the vote.

Sorry I just need to say that unwanted children are STILL people and have the right to life. They arent dogs and cats to be euthanized because there are too many of them and no homes. Im not sure if you thought about it before you said it like that...

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

So wethirst, are you in favor of measures that would make abortion unnecessary? Like comprehensive sex education and readily available contraceptives?

Chris

And improving adoption procedures so that they support everyone involved.

[I, Brian]

Education is a very good point. On the one hand, there is an attempt to get sex education out there - but if it's anything like what I got taught at school, it simply focuses on the biological elements of sex, and really fails to drive home the message that adults are - generally - fertile and prone to become parents without proper precautions. I also think the message always need to be a peer delivered one than from a distant authority.