WHY SHOULD ATHEISTS BE PRO-LIFE?

prolifeinfo.org ^ | Anonymous

[Snuffington]

If it is aborted, it is very likely NOT to begin functioning in the near future.

The same can be said at any stage of development: fetus, newborn, toddler, teen, etc.

[Consort]

Combining religion, politics, and abortion is a brilliant ploy that actually serves to fragment people with like views.

[Got a right to Life? . . Huh?]

I agree that agnostics and atheists have very logical reasons to oppose abortion.

For the atheist who believes that when you die, your life is over, period, the taking of an unborn human's life should be a very serious matter. There will be no comforting of this being by a heavenly father, angels, or relatives after a torturous death; there will be no mere reincarnational transfer. Thousands of times each day unique, never-to-be-again, individual beings have their one and only chance at life terminated without even a trace of "due process".

For religious pro-lifers, the loss of an individual's life is no less egregious. We simply have the added concept of inevitable accountability to further motivate us in our fight against this holocaust. Some of us believe that we could be held accountable for standing idly by while our society murders the unborn at the rate of over a million per year.

I applaud the few pro-life agnostics and atheists who recognize the ethic of allowing others the same right to life that they currently enjoy. Sadly, about half our society has been brain washed into believing that common human empathy need not apply to the unborn. The main task before all pro-life people is to convince the empathetically challenged that an unborn human fetus is a human being and that they have no more "right" to kill that person than they do anyone else no matter what "right" the "Supreme" court fashions out of thin air.

[potlatch]

YOU were that little 'speck' once, right after conception. Are you denying that you were human life then??

[Western Phil]

It is clearly a question when meaningful human life begins. Humans are distinct from all other animals by their mental capacities. Hence, meaningful human life does not begin until the brain starts to function in a significantly meaningful way

I would argue that meaningful human life begins at the age of memory. Somewhere around 1.5 to 4-5 years. The abortionists are in it for the easy money.

[WKB]

I find it very interesting that a atheist would sign up of the birthday of Jesus christ.
That and a few comments in this artcle indicate there is still hope for you.
May God Bless

[Got a right to Life? . . Huh?]

It is clearly a question when meaningful human life begins. Somewhere around 1.5 to 4-5 years.

Human life is meaningless until they can retain memories?

[dsutah]

Another one, if anyone remembers him, was Dr. Bernard Nathanson. He was one of the founding partners of NARAL. He also was the one who made the famous pro-life movie: "The Silent Scream". I saw it, and although horrifying, was a good movie. It was based on a film footage of a child while an abortion was going on. It was his inspiration in turning away from abortion. He gives a little speech in it that's interesting too.

Just a few years ago, he converted to the R.Catholic church. That's an irony, but true. He had mocked and derided them when founding NARAL. He was what he called an 'Atheistic Jew'. He had turned away from his old Jewish faith. Strangely enough, when he turned against abortion, he came back to belief in God, and turned to the church that he once mocked.

There are even those who are Wiccans who are pro-life. One a pro-life webpage I've seen, there is a link to their page. They also claim agreement with their 'Christian' friends who are pro-life. At least the author of the page did. They claimed that no person who is truly Wiccan (I'm paraphrazing)should be for abortion. For it causes harm to someone, and it can come back at them.

I do know that Hypocrates was not Jewish, nor was he Christian, he spoke about 'the gods' in his "Hypocratic Oath". So I assume he was a pagan doctor. But in his oath, he claimed that a doctor had the responsibility to use his training to do everything he can to make a person well, not to help kill him. He also said the physician was not to give a woman something to kill her child. This it seems to suggest Hypocrates felt to do this would be violating ethics.

[nickcarraway]

Hence, meaningful human life does not begin until the brain starts to function in a significantly meaningful way

Who gets to decide that?

[nickcarraway]

There are two general ways to determine moral Status/rights:

1. The subjective contingent criteria of which you are talking about. -i.e. conciousness, significant brain function, awareness of pain. That means moral status is given by those who already ``have it,'' and withheld from those deemed not worthy by those who get to make the decisions. It's a very unquantifiable, subjective, and arbitrary way to decide such things (and dare I say unscientific?)

2. Scientifically we can look at a ``virtually unbroken series of quantifiable. noncontingent, scientifically verifiable and infinitely reproducable events,'' that occur. This new life has it's own distinct DNA at conception. The entire map for how this new person, for the rest of it's life is already present, programmed for all the future development it will undergo.

[jlogajan]

This new life has it's own distinct DNA at conception.

So do the skin cells you routinely flake off.

[nickcarraway]

The skin cells I flake off have the same DNA I do, not an entirely new DNA, which isn't shared by anyone else. Do you think that skin cells, all have their own, independent DNA? They don't, they have exactly the same DNA as the person they flaked off of. At conception, the new life has a new DNA, not the father's, mother's or anyone elses. Also, the skin cell does not have the blue print to grow into a full human being, without any new input. The skin cell is just going to stay the same, or decay.

[nickcarraway]

You misundrstood me. I didn't say:

The new life has DNA.

I said:

This new life has it's own distinct DNA at conception.</>

Skin cells have DNA, but not their own, distinct DNA. According to science.

[valkyrieanne]

You make a much better case than the writer of the article.

Thanks. The writer has had an abortion, so she says, and thus is probably very emotional about it (and understandably so.)

[valkyrieanne]

It is clearly a question when meaningful human life begins. Humans are distinct from all other animals by their mental capacities. Hence, meaningful human life does not begin until the brain starts to function in a significantly meaningful way.

Some peoples' brains *never* function in "a meaningful way." Should we be allowed to kill them?

Other people's brains *do* function, but if someone *else* defines their brains as "not functioning meaningfully," then they feel that justifies killing those "non-meaningful" people too.

We all like to think our own brains function "meaningfully," but there is always someone, somewhere on the planet who thinks that we do not. (9/11/01 should have driven that point clearly home.)

Do we kill people because someone, somewhere has defined their existence as "meaningless?"

[Dimensio]

You mean the celebrated birthday of Christ -- no one can say the exact date of his birth, but it was certainly not December 25.

OTOH, my birthday is December 25. While you're out partying a birthday whose actual date is unknown, maybe you could send me a card? Ingrates :)

[WKB]

You mean the celebrated birthday of Christ

I stand corrected. I believe Jesus was born September 26. Which just happens to be my birthday.

[JediGirl]

lurking..

[nickcarraway]

Oh no, I'm not an atheist. The article was written by an anonymous atheist.

[xp38]

Sept. 26th you say? Early Birthday Wishes!!! You share your birthday with Olivia Newton-John for sure....Jesus is a bit more uncertain. I remember reading it was probably in the spring due to that being when flocks of sheep are watched. I don't think that pins it down for sure either but who knows.