11 year old rape victim forced to carry to term thanks to Ohio law.

[Beet]

Ohio also wants to ban many forms of birth control, including The Pill.

https://twitter.com/innovationohio/status/1126096661124657152

Do people not realize how illogical it is to be against abortion and against birth control at the same time? how dumb can you be.

It is perfectly logical. They both involve controlling womens' bodies. It is well past time for moderates and liberals to stop buying the whole "life of the fetus" charade as the motive of pro-lifers, as I've been saying for years. The abortion issue is about womens' rights... thats it.

[Beet]

For an old man, I thought you would know about all this first-hand.    

Don't be surprised. Older members of the Religious Right have no choice to but to delete all memories about abortion from before the 1980s, lest they remember that their denominations explicitly supported Roe v. Wade when it came out, that Ronald Reagan is responsible for elective abortion being legalized in California (and remember, it was illegal because it wasn't considered safe, not because "life begins at fertilization), or that the biggest proponent of abortion rights in Congress back then was a Catholic priest.

Apparently the Religious Right invented time travel, because they somehow convinced Christians in the Roman Empire to oppose abortion.  And many Christians had to go against their culture on this.

Plenty of Evangelicals and fundamentalists opposed abortion.  As a Baptist without any particular modifiers who goes to a church that didn't exist in 1973 and has a pastor who was almost certainly born after, that doesn't really apply to me.

I find it interesting that denominations believe the Bible is 100% inerrant oppose abortion.  Isn't it also interesting that support for abortion seems to correlate with the decline of Christianity in a country?

Your last sentence is a desired outcome in the eyes of many here.

Well considering that a lot of millenials want nothing to do with religion, I'd say we're finally entering into a world where religion is not automatically a justification for genocides.

At least I know where you stand.  If you're anti-Christian, at least you're out front about it.  I have more respect for that than for people who insist that Scripture says things it clearly doesn't.

No, you fear that less than you do Christians who point out that the Bible does not prohibit abortion, and in fact explicitly assigns the fetus a lesser status than an actual human life.

"...the law does not provide that the act (abortion) pertains to homicide, for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation.’" -- St. Augustine

Yes, St. Augustine did oppose abortion, but not because he thought the fetus is a human life, it's because he believed that marriage and sex were for procreation, and women did not have the right to control their own bodies, so he denounced abortion as well as birth control. In other words, the same motivations I have been saying present day pro-lifers have.

[Beet]

An 11-year old who is pregnant is likely on the more mature side physiologically and anatomically for her age, but of course a medical determination of the risks must be made in each individual case.   So the medical specifics guide what's permissible, but with the conviction that if it's possible to protect the health of the young mother, it's always better to protect the life growing inside her, for her own sake as well, and support her with everything she needs during her pregnancy and birth. Giving birth can be an affirmation of life and hope in the face of grave injustice; abortion compounds the tragedy.

One of the single most disgusting things I have read on this site, especially the parts that I emphasized. I’m not even going to dignify it with my usual trolling reply.

Shua has officially jumped the shark, Humanity wise.

As in, I believe that children conceived due to rape have humanity?   
Yeah.  I didn't expect people here would like that position but I never realized how controversial it was before merely to state it.

Quit the theatrics. You knew it would be extremely controversial.

It honestly didn't occur to me and I still don't really understand why it is.

If you don't understand why a girl whose body was violated against her will having the government insert itself into what happens to her body against her will is not a double insult, I don't know what to say. To call the second violation an affirmation of life is a triple insult.

[Beet]

I wish liberals would stop giving conservatives the benefit of the doubt that they really believe abortion is murder. If you really believe abortion was murder, you would be out there doing civil disobedience every day and formenting revolution against the government.

The vast majority of so-called pro-lifers don't actually think this way. They conveniently use this old trope as an excuse to (1) call people names, (2) selectively justify any position or supporting any awful person in politics.

The evidence only ever piles up that so-called pro-lifers are against womens' rights. Giving people an absurd benefit of the doubt at the end is not productive. Sure, some liberals have doubts about the morality of abortion, but you shouldn't project the uncertainties of your own conscience onto people acting in bad faith.

[Beet]

Pro-choicers complaining that most pro-lifers aren't advocating locking up girls who have abortions, and aren't engaged in enough revolutionary violence.   incredible.

I guess Abraham Lincoln didn't really believe slavery was an injustice, since he wasn't out there at Harper's Ferry with John Brown.

Given that what you guys allege, that millions of children are literally being murdered and have been for 40 years... yeah. Something like that would require much more drastic action than what pro-lifers actually do. If you really believe life begins at conception, shouldn't society be racing to find a cure for embryos that fail to implant? By that standard 1/3 of pregnancies result in death.

[Beet]

1. A person's psychological well-being is not of lesser importance, but determinations of well being are necessarily more subject to value systems and assumptions about the meaning of human flourishing.  I do not trust any mental health determination which would find abortion compatible with promoting human flourishing of the person undergoing the abortion.

So you're just asserting that no amount of evidence can convince you that having a child is not right for some people.

No amount of evidence can convince me that someone is better off with their child dead, killed inside of them.

You did not respond to my question of whether you consider a non-implanted embryo to be an equal tragedy as this girl getting an abortion.

[Beet]

I mean, she's a real person; what do you say to her?

I would say: You matter because you were born. Had you never been born, it would not have been an injustice. The same goes for me and everyone else.

[Beet]

I mean, she's a real person; what do you say to her?

I would say: You matter because you were born. Had you never been born, it would not have been an injustice. The same goes for me and everyone else.

At least you're honest about that, but she would have suffered painful death.

I was a human being before I was born.  Was it open season on me then?

Obviously I was referring to birth as a shorthand for coming into being. To the extent that there is consciousness before birth, an abortion should not be allowed after that point.