The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
What's the Point of Living?
Windbit
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I've been pondering this a bit, and after going through the latest abortion thread I've got to ask: Why is bringing a new life into the world a good thing?
People keep going on about how abortion is murder and how fetuses/babies has a right to life. Why does he/she/it have a right to life? It's not even self-aware yet. Is it because life is so good that everyone that could be alive should be alive?
The way I see it now, abortion isn't so much murder as it is euthanasia. Just think about it: there is good and bad in life. Depending on where you live, who your parents are, and other factors, your life could either be decent or horrible (see Africa). It's a gamble; a bet that you don't choose to make.
If you were never born, however, there would be no risk involved. You'd never have to exist, and you'd never suffer. You'd never feel happiness either, but the only reason anyone wants happiness is because they are alive. Nonexistence is a win/win situation.
For those of you who are Pro-Life Christians, consider this: When a person dies, they either go to Heaven or Hell, right? So, giving birth to a baby introduces the risk that they will suffer eternal damnation in Hell when they die. Preventing a child from being born ensures that they will never suffer eternal damnation, if Hell and all that jazz really exist.
I pose to you, the readers, that those of you who are against abortion are selfish. Why should a child be born at all? Because you would feel guilty if you killed it, an adorable little baby that never hurt anyone.
Isn't it better to prevent than to cure? Why should we who are alive force the unborn into a world where they will most likely suffer? Shouldn't we keep them from being able to suffer at all?
People keep going on about how abortion is murder and how fetuses/babies has a right to life. Why does he/she/it have a right to life? It's not even self-aware yet. Is it because life is so good that everyone that could be alive should be alive?
The way I see it now, abortion isn't so much murder as it is euthanasia. Just think about it: there is good and bad in life. Depending on where you live, who your parents are, and other factors, your life could either be decent or horrible (see Africa). It's a gamble; a bet that you don't choose to make.
If you were never born, however, there would be no risk involved. You'd never have to exist, and you'd never suffer. You'd never feel happiness either, but the only reason anyone wants happiness is because they are alive. Nonexistence is a win/win situation.
For those of you who are Pro-Life Christians, consider this: When a person dies, they either go to Heaven or Hell, right? So, giving birth to a baby introduces the risk that they will suffer eternal damnation in Hell when they die. Preventing a child from being born ensures that they will never suffer eternal damnation, if Hell and all that jazz really exist.
I pose to you, the readers, that those of you who are against abortion are selfish. Why should a child be born at all? Because you would feel guilty if you killed it, an adorable little baby that never hurt anyone.
Isn't it better to prevent than to cure? Why should we who are alive force the unborn into a world where they will most likely suffer? Shouldn't we keep them from being able to suffer at all?
Windbit on
0
Posts
The point of life isn't to enjoy it. The point of life is simply to live. To exist. That's really the only right we can offer to anyone.
Who are we to judge who deserves what?
And even then, even if you're feeling sadness, you can still glory in the fact that you are experiencing such a strong emotion, and being human. If you think about it that way, it can be amazing.
The great thing about life is the ability to live it as you would like. You can bring up society, social contract, various factors of living, etc; however in the end it is a person's choice to choose how to live. And if you decide to abort, you are choosing to deny the unborn child it's right to choose.
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but only because your argument is seriously flawed. Pull back and apply what you are saying to the Pro-Choice ideology first.
EDIT: Also nonexistance isn't win-win because you will never be around to experience said win.
Sorry but this is retarded. On two levels.
One, you would rather have a baby be born even if it means he or she will be living a life of absolute poverty and go through every shit that is associated with it - illness, risk of abandonment, lack of education, possibility of getting mixed up in crime - simply because the point of life is simply to live?
Two, you would rather put a mother through all that when it is obvious that she either cannot or does not want to support that child?
You would put the right of an unborn fetus to life before the right of a mature person to choose how she wants to live her life?
A fetus exists from the moment a egg is fertilized. Wether or not it is a person and has a right to life is a different argument. They way I interperet your argument, is that if an abortion is allowed, that the fetus/baby would have never existed. No, it dosent exist as a person, but it does exist.
Also, Christians believe that if a child dies before baptism, that the childs soul is in the Limbo of Infants , which is that they were too young to commit sin, but were not yet absolved from the orginal sin. As a former christian myself, I didnt meet many who believed in this, but I have a feeling most "Pro-Life Christians" would.
There's really no easy way to kill everyone alive without causing considerable suffering. Maybe worldwide sterilization. There are supposedly GM crops that can render a man infertile. Get those into the food supply and that'll get rid of a sizable chunk of the populace than can reproduce.
So everyone who gets pregnant is mature? Physically, sure, but mentally?
Are you actually suggesting this?
Don't mostly Catholics believe in Limbo, though? I was raised a Southern Baptist (I'm obviously not one now), a group of fundamentalists who believe the Bible word-for-word to be 100% literal. Limbo's not mentioned in the Bible, so to a Southern Baptist it either doesn't exist or is possible, but isn't worthy of discussion.
Nah. Maybe if it could affect every man on the planet, but it obviously can't. The sharp drop in population would surely cause a lot of harm to those who are alive and can have children, so it's probably not worth the risk.
She's too young to make a decision so let's force her to spend 9 months as an incubator, deal with serious health risks and give birth to an unwanted child with little means of support?
is that what you are implying?
At least with the abortion that's it. With letting the baby live, there's all sorts of opportunities for the child to suffer.
Sounds like it.
It's irresponsible.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
It is a mostly Catholic idea. Apparently, it is, like all things in the Bible, inferred from a passage which you can bend and twist to mean anything you want.
My point is that creation of any life is irresponsible. You can't guarantee anything, but you're willing to gamble with a new life. A life that doesn't really have any real reason to be subjected to the possibility of suffering and the dependence on emotion.
Because I like fucking.
Cite?
Yeah, or you like raising kids.
There is no real reason beyond basic pleasure and vanity to justify childbirth, unless you believe there is some kind of divine mandate to multiply.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Of course with self-awareness its not nearly as simple as that...
Are you asking if I'm quoting someone? I'm actually quite proud of how intellectual sounding those two sentences came out. Even though they offer a pretty good argument for pro-life when I am actually not against abortion.
For what purpose, though?
The divine mandate is the only real reason I could accept as making any sense.
"Be fruitful and multiply."
Atheists have no excuse.
To keep things going, I guess?
Without it I'm pretty sure everything would've died out a long time ago, except for those little asexual microbes. Just like if nothing ever bothered to eat or drink.
Yeah, and with reproduction being inevitable it is sort of pointless to argue that it shouldn't happen at all when, obviously, that's not the sort of thing you can put into practice.
We can at least apply some standards to it, though, if not to eliminate the amount of particularly harmful conceptions then to at least reduce them.
That's why we have statutory rape laws and the right to choose.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
I'm asking for a cite of someone else's argument or a reference to your own argument. You have presented two conclusions without arguments.
My argument is that because all life in general has no point for existing besides reproducing itself over and over (which is to say it exists to exist) then a life that is filled with happiness doesn't deserve to exist any more than a life that is filled with sorrow (since neither one really deserves to exist).
Dude, I have to clarify here that your logic, to many Christians, is plain wrong. I can't speak for every Christian, but conception, not birth, is considered the beginning of mortal life--maybe even before that (in Jeremiah, God says something to the effect of "I knew you before I placed you in the womb"). Also, Pslams refers to humans being sinful from the moment of conception. (This concept is called original sin, which basically means no one starts with a clean slate--even those who arguably have no capacity to commit sin, like infants.) If you take this stuff literally, it means that by default a newly-created fetus is damned to hell--and it means that your argument is worthless. Like I said, I can't speak for all Christians. (I wasn't familiar with the "baby limbo" idea.) I'm thankful that you're earnestly trying to approach this from different perspectives. But I hope you've realized that there's more than one reason as to why so many Christians are pro-life.
And I thought the latest Pope stated that limbo does not exist.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21595208-5001028,00.html
Opening the gates of heaven to babies who died unbaptised.
So suck it. :P
EDIT: And I'm a Christian, for the record. I believe God instilled it in us, but no matter what you believe, it's a fact. You can pretend it isn't, but you'd be a fool.
You assume there's a purpose. There's no inherent reason to believe that there is a purpose, at least in the sense that humans use the word.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
That's not a reason to have kids.