Abortion

[Princess Artemis]

"Your moral judgement of abortion* Pass

Internal consistency of your views Pass

 

Your responses during this activity indicate that you should be morally opposed to abortion, allowing only for very rare exceptions. This is in line with your stated position on abortion, which is that it is only justified in very limited circumstances. Moreover, all your responses have been entirely consistent with this view: your position on abortion seems coherent and well thought out (which, of course, is not the same as saying it is right)."

 

Nothing saying about me wishing to impose my morality on anyone else tho'. Also, the analysis section is a little wacky. It gives no indication that perhaps I considered what I may or may not do despite what right one may or may not have on me (just because someone has no right against me doesn't mean I wouldn't help out an innocent person who needs me!), and that I am well aware that spontaneous abortion is a perfectly natural occurrence and not OMGTHEBABYHOLOCAUST WE BETTER DOOOOOO SOMETHIIIIIING TO SAVE ALL THOSE NONVIABLE YOUNG!!!!!!

[prairiecrow]

Has anyone ever posted this before? It's kinda fun. http://www.philosophyexperiments.com/whosebody/Default.aspx

My results:

 

Your moral judgement of abortion Pass

 

Internal consistency of your views Pass

 

Your responses during this activity indicate that you should think abortion is morally justified except perhaps in the late stages of a pregnancy. Moreover, assuming it isn’t a late-term termination, you should not have any significant moral qualms about it. This is in line with your stated position on abortion, which is precisely that it is normally justified. In general, your position on abortion seems coherent and well thought out (which, of course, is not the same as saying it is right).

Edited March 5, 2012 by prairiecrow

[Obscure_Trash]

Here are my results:

 

Your moral judgement of abortion*  Pass

Internal consistency of your views  Pass

 

Your responses during this activity indicate that you should think abortion is always morally justified and that you should not have any significant moral qualms about the practice. This is in line with your stated position on abortion, which is precisely that it is always justified. In general, your position on abortion seems coherent and well thought out (which, of course, is not the same as saying it is right).

 

We all seem to be a consistent bunch according to this test. o3o

[Alpha1]

Your moral judgement of abortion* Pass

 

Internal consistency of your views Pass

 

Your responses during this activity indicate that you should think abortion is always morally justified, even on those occasions it occurs in the late stages of pregnancy. This is consistent with your stated position on abortion, which is precisely that it is always justifed. Overally, your position on abortion seems coherent and well thought out (which, of course, is not the same as saying it is right).

 

[philpot123]

Mine was pass and pass, and I'm sure y'all know what it said my views were

[NazDrag]

Your moral judgement of abortion* Pass

Internal consistency of your views Pass

 

 

I do believe I should join in the intellectual conversation had about with my fellow scholars.

┌─┐

┴─┴

ಠ_ರೃ

 

To those with other beliefs, I shall not force them upon you.

(That was an interesting quiz though. I liked it!)

 

 

On the topic of politics, however, it does appear as if religion is getting in the way of laws. There was a reason a long time ago we had a separated church from state- you all know why. It appears we're running into an issue here though... We got a ridiculous bill passed here in VA requiring women to take some sort of vaginal ultrasound... At least, I think it was passed. If I find the link, I'll post it. It's absolutely ludicrous if you ask me. Stick to your religion, don't force it upon me. I bite.

Edited March 5, 2012 by NazDrag

[Princess Artemis]

On the topic of politics, however, it does appear as if religion is getting in the way of laws. There was a reason a long time ago we had a separated church from state- you all know why. It appears we're running into an issue here though... We got a ridiculous bill passed here in VA requiring women to take some sort of vaginal ultrasound... At least, I think it was passed. If I find the link, I'll post it. It's absolutely ludicrous if you ask me. Stick to your religion, don't force it upon me. I bite.

Show me what religion has forced vaginal ultrasounds as a requirement, and then I'll accept you leveling that charge that someone is trying to get their religion into things.

 

It takes no religion at all to revile women.

[philpot123]

Your moral judgement of abortion* Pass

Internal consistency of your views Pass

 

 

I do believe I should join in the intellectual conversation had about with my fellow scholars.

┌─┐

┴─┴

ಠ_ರೃ

 

To those with other beliefs, I shall not force them upon you.

(That was an interesting quiz though. I liked it!)

 

 

On the topic of politics, however, it does appear as if religion is getting in the way of laws. There was a reason a long time ago we had a separated church from state- you all know why. It appears we're running into an issue here though... We got a ridiculous bill passed here in VA requiring women to take some sort of vaginal ultrasound... At least, I think it was passed. If I find the link, I'll post it. It's absolutely ludicrous if you ask me. Stick to your religion, don't force it upon me. I bite.

Separation of church and state applies to the national government, congress in particular. A simple reading of the first amendment will tell you that a small town courthouse displaying the ten commandments is not congress making a law, nor is it congress ESTABLISHING a particular religion, and it is certainly not congress prohibiting the free exercise of anyone's religion. The first amendment was put in place so we could not declare a national religion such as the one colonists fled from in England. It also prevented the national government from making laws that interfered with religion (although interesting to note, the national government is prohibiting the free exercise of Rastafarian beliefs with the war on drugs. THAT to me is more of a 1st amendment violation than the ten commandments on the wall will ever be ...) But the current court interpretation of the first amendment is so far out of whack it's not even funny. It explicitly applies to congress, not everything else they use it for. It also says nothing about the states. The states are constitutionally able to do things the national government can't. Now, I would argue that the "vaginal ultrasound" bill has absolutely nothing to do with a particular religion. One does not have to be a Christian to oppose abortion, or to come up with a ridiculous law that isn't going to help anyone. So separation of church and state doesn't really apply to that. I agree that it's a ridiculous law, but I see no direct ties to any religion there.

[Sookan]

I took the test, and found it to be a little restrictive. I passed consistency, but some of the answers I gave don't line up to my beliefs. Actually, I have two beliefs that I constantly find butting heads with one another. I wonder if anyone else has this dilemma?

 

I'm thinking of a woman. She sleeps with men (or a man) wantonly with no protection. A few weeks after she does this, she realises she is pregnant and goes to a clinic to get an abortion. This happens on a regular basis, and she makes a habit out of it.

 

Although this is a very specific and unlikely scenario, I find myself disturbed by the possibility of it. I would be disappointed if I found out that a woman did this, even though I believe that abortion is always justified, that a woman's right to choose is paramount to all other factors.

 

What is my belief, in the end? Maybe, try to earnestly deserve the right to freedom, or choose with wisdom. It's not easy to put into words, and I think many people would believe my stance poorly thought-out.

 

I apologise for bringing up points that have probably already been addressed and answered. I did actually follow this topic back in '09 and '10 when I actively posted here, and things don't seem to have changed much. I'm a little older, less vindictive, and more considerate of others' thoughts. That's not to say I would relinquish my rights, but I have understanding where before there was only disgust. Well, perhaps that's all I need to say.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Sookan

[diannethegeek]

Your moral judgement of abortion* Pass

Internal consistency of your views Pass

 

 

I do believe I should join in the intellectual conversation had about with my fellow scholars.

┌─┐

┴─┴

ಠ_ರೃ

 

To those with other beliefs, I shall not force them upon you.

(That was an interesting quiz though. I liked it!)

 

 

On the topic of politics, however, it does appear as if religion is getting in the way of laws. There was a reason a long time ago we had a separated church from state- you all know why. It appears we're running into an issue here though... We got a ridiculous bill passed here in VA requiring women to take some sort of vaginal ultrasound... At least, I think it was passed. If I find the link, I'll post it. It's absolutely ludicrous if you ask me. Stick to your religion, don't force it upon me. I bite.

The Virginia law was altered at the last minute so that it still requires an ultrasound but allows women to choose not to undergo the transvaginal version. It's been posted about here several times in the last few weeks.

[Princess Artemis]

Sookan, I suppose it depends on why you believe abortion is always justified. If it is because you honestly believe that it is equivalent to curing oneself of a cold, then...yes, it is very confusing indeed why you would be disturbed by a woman who took no steps to stop themselves from catching cold, considering the way they catch cold is very fun and meaningful for them.

 

If you believe it is a matter of rights paramount, with any other concerns meaningless in the face of that, then it makes sense why you would be disturbed by that scenario. I'm disturbed at how Westboro chooses to exercise their rights, but I would not want them curtailed just because of that.

[xhunter]

Separation of church and state applies to the national government, congress in particular. A simple reading of the first amendment will tell you that a small town courthouse displaying the ten commandments is not congress making a law, nor is it congress ESTABLISHING a particular religion, and it is certainly not congress prohibiting the free exercise of anyone's religion. The first amendment was put in place so we could not declare a national religion such as the one colonists fled from in England.

 

It also says nothing about the states. The states are constitutionally able to do things the national government can't.

 

Now, I would argue that the "vaginal ultrasound" bill has absolutely nothing to do with a particular religion. One does not have to be a Christian to oppose abortion, or to come up with a ridiculous law that isn't going to help anyone. So separation of church and state doesn't really apply to that. I agree that it's a ridiculous law, but I see no direct ties to any religion there.

in subjects like abortion religion does nudge its way in though not always in the direct approach. what is unique about debates on major subjects that does with these laws that can change, if not anger, a vast amount of people is that most will say they believe that this or that should not be because "____ said that ___ is wrong because ______".

 

with laws and the things that annoy people are things like "in god we trust" on money. in the states people that believe both this and against it have to use it or they can't get what they need. most don't believe in god so it makes no sense and what if they believe in another religion? around 78.4% of the USA is Christian but things that everyone comes across or uses like

 

-pledge in school, 'one nation, Under god,...' (In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer. http://oldtimeislands.org/pledge/pledge.htm)

-"In God we trust" ('was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. ' http://www.treasury.gov/about/education/Pa...-we-trust.aspx)

-Display of Religious monuments and similar displays on public ex. Ten Commandments monuments. (http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_detail.aspx?id=332)

 

even though that high number of people are christian does not give it a right to have things that only point to one religion in particular the right to be acted on or displayed publicly when other religions can't have any of those rights. i'm shore the main reason people consider anyone that support abortion, gay rights, inequality laws, an atheist is because more than half of the population that is atheist support these's arguments with science.

 

1. religion (mainly Christian) is slowly making the states into a Theocracy going against the founding fathers and that is one of the main reason the founding fathers left their home. most states and in places like Bible Belt with not respect other beliefs will make it harder on others to thrive making it unsafe or morally unwise to move into those areas. the bad thing is if the states all becomes a Theocracy the modern people that want religious freedom have nowhere to go to escape it sense other continents are claimed and protected. even if only a few survived from the Theocracy of other states war would probably go to war making it. SA 'states of america' sense there will be no unity.

 

2.the states are part of the USA so it probably is wise that things like the above are avoided or it might turn into something like the above comment. abortion is one thing religion should have nothing to do with.

 

3.So true though religion affects peoples thoughts and sometimes will make people do these things because of their beliefs to inshore that it makes something harder. there are a few low ties to all religions on abortion though they are pushed under the rug type.

 

Ask people this question and you might see that a lot go by their religion when they say a law is good or bad, or even abortion.

"why do you believe abortion,_____,_____,_____ are bad/good and should/should not be banned". it mainly all comes down to a point of view of a religion on any subject.

[philpot123]

The states have no constitutional limitations on religion. They are free to pass whatever laws they want whether they be a violation of this imaginary line of "separation of church and state" or not. The people can speak out against it, vote people out of office, and get things changed (or move to another state) if they don't like the laws. That's the beauty of the 10th amendment.

 

My point of view on abortion has little to do with my religion. There is a fairly common consensus among religious and non-religious people alike that murder is wrong. I happen to believe that a fetus in the womb is deserving of the rights of personhood because there is no difference that should DEPRIVE them of that right. I'll add more to this when I'm not rushing out of the house.

 

[Princess Artemis]

xhunter, the states aren't part of the USA, they are the USA. The Fed is there at the pleasure of the United States, brought into existence by the Constitution the states came together and signed. The Federal government is subject to the states, not the other way around.

 

That said, there are a lot of Christians who have an issue with the Pledge as it stands now, and with invocation of the religious on US currency. IIRC, a Christian President briefly removed "In God We Trust" from our currency because he didn't think it belonged there.

 

The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. It does not guarantee that all things everywhere in the country will be free from religion. It does not guarantee that every law is unconstitutional if it can be connected, in any tenuous way, to the opinion of a religious person somewhere.

 

Therefore, just because a lot of people have religious reasons for thinking abortion is wrong, that doesn't mean anti-abortion laws are automatically religious.

[Fuzzbucket]

xhunter, the states aren't part of the USA, they are the USA. The Fed is there at the pleasure of the United States, brought into existence by the Constitution the states came together and signed. The Federal government is subject to the states, not the other way around.

 

That said, there are a lot of Christians who have an issue with the Pledge as it stands now, and with invocation of the religious on US currency. IIRC, a Christian President briefly removed "In God We Trust" from our currency because he didn't think it belonged there.

I THINK she meant "the states" as in "each individual state is part of...." and therefore "the states" are party to a few federal things like the Pledge of Allegiance - which I would have had trouble with, as I would not have been prepared to say under god... Just as I always affirm in court rather than taking an oath on the bible.

 

Religion cannot legitimately be part of government, IMHO.

[Princess Artemis]

I THINK she meant "the states" as in "each individual state is part of...." and therefore "the states" are party to a few federal things like the Pledge of Allegiance - which I would have had trouble with, as I would not have been prepared to say under god... Just as I always affirm in court rather than taking an oath on the bible.

 

Religion cannot legitimately be part of government, IMHO.

Maybe, but even so, the Federal government wouldn't have anything to say to an individual state unless they consent to have it said. The Federal government exists at the will of the states, not the other way around, and the Fed, being a government, is too big for its britches and acts as if it runs everything.

 

I'm a Christian and I have very similar issues with the Pledge and taking oaths in court because of my religion. Those are things which usurp my religion. As long as I have the freedom to affirm in court and not pledge, then we're cool. And indeed, I have the right to affirm in court and not pledge, so we are, in fact, cool. By having those institutions, the government is not forcing religion on me. I am free to practice religion, or not, as I will. I would rather that there not be Bibles in courtrooms and Pledges to flags, but I'm not out to enforce my religion on others.

 

If I were ever forced to pledge allegiance to the flag, boy howdy would there be a problem.

 

One way or another, pledges and oaths in court don't prove or disprove that anti-abortion laws are religious. Morality isn't religious--make that claim and a whole lotta people would get most irritated. Just because a good number of religious people happen to agree with something doesn't make it, itself, religious. Lots of religious people think we have inalienable rights. Doesn't mean that's a religious statement. That's my point here--saying that anti-abortion laws are religious is silly. They aren't, though they are likely to be supported by certain sorts of religious people more than others. Saying that requiring vaginal ultrasounds for abortions is a religious matter and thus not something that should be a law is worse than silly, it's obscene. Institutionalized rape is horrendous and should not be allowed under any circumstance. To say that it's something religion approves of and is trying to force on the American people is very wrong.

 

I understand some people just really hate religion, but I would hope they had better sense than to think that any religion thinks institutionalized rape is something that ought to be a state law. It doesn't take being religious to think that, it takes flat out hatred of women to think that, and I guarantee you, no one has to be religious to hate women.

[xhunter]

I THINK she meant "the states" as in "each individual state is part of...." and therefore "the states" are party to a few federal things like the Pledge of Allegiance - which I would have had trouble with, as I would not have been prepared to say under god... Just as I always affirm in court rather than taking an oath on the bible.

 

Religion cannot legitimately be part of government, IMHO.

yap that's what i meant. i probably should have went into more detail.

 

i to was never able to say Under god when my school did the pledge and i made shore that i never spoke the pledge out only mouthed the words till i got to that part where i would skip. i once had a teacher that said i had to say under god but i did not and never will, i don't care if they skin me because of it. i will not say anything i believe is false or has a very high chance of being false. i really don't feel comfortable lying ever, i'm such a weirdo . but i guess that is for a different thread.

 

i personally believe as a hypothesis that religion in most individual states affects abortion laws to a curtain degree even if its a small degree. what really jeers me is that some people would bring their god or the god they claim to worship into it when they harm or murder those that do the abortions or get the abortions. i think we had went over that somewhere on this forum, can't remember. one bad apple ruins the bunch.

[Princess Artemis]

i personally believe as a hypothesis that religion in most individual states affects abortion laws to a curtain degree even if its a small degree. what really jeers me is that some people would bring their god or the god they claim to worship into it when they harm or murder those that do the abortions or get the abortions. i think we had went over that somewhere on this forum, can't remember. one bad apple ruins the bunch.

Affects it, sure. Religious feeling affected things like abolishing slavery, too. So it cannot be such a terrible thing that we must defend the government from it in all its forms and assume that every law that has a religious feeling in it anywhere is a religious law. It doesn't work that way.

 

Y'know, I don't think badly of atheists just because it's absolutely known that at least one prominent one is a privileged old white dude who needs an attitude adjustment towards women, and that there's a pretty big problem in atheist circles with respecting women--I've read a lot about how hard many are trying to figure out how to attract women to their conventions and things, but failing utterly because some of them are acting like idiots (you can look this up if you like--Google will find it easy enough for you). I'm not taking that out on the philosophy though, or saying, Atheists are All BAAAAD and Hate Wimmin! One bad apple may ruin a bunch, but one bad human does not ruin any other human. If you've got an issue with a person, take it to the person. Persons who act badly are simply that.

Edited March 5, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[xhunter]

Y'know, I don't think badly of atheists just because it's absolutely known that at least one prominent one is a privileged old white dude who needs an attitude adjustment towards women, and that there's a pretty big problem in atheist circles with respecting women--I've read a lot about how hard many are trying to figure out how to attract women to their conventions and things, but failing utterly because some of them are acting like idiots (you can look this up if you like--Google will find it easy enough for you). I'm not taking that out on the philosophy though, or saying, Atheists are All BAAAAD and Hate Wimmin! One bad apple may ruin a bunch, but one bad human does not ruin any other human. If you've got an issue with a person, take it to the person. Persons who act badly are simply that.

sometimes one bad human does ruins another but that is a very low chance and completely a situation thing. actually were i live atheist really don't look down on women. its more a equal thing. your talking about the Mormon convention things or something else about it?

[potterwolf]

Affects it, sure. Religious feeling affected things like abolishing slavery, too. So it cannot be such a terrible thing that we must defend the government from it in all its forms and assume that every law that has a religious feeling in it anywhere is a religious law. It doesn't work that way.

That doesn't necessarily mean the religious feeling is a good thing to have influencing law making. Religion may have been a factor in the abolition of slavery, but religion isn't the reason that slavery is still illegal today. If anti-slavery laws were made for religious reasons, then they were made for bad reasons, although the laws themselves had good effects.

 

Y'know, I don't think badly of atheists just because it's absolutely known that at least one prominent one is a privileged old white dude who needs an attitude adjustment towards women, and that there's a pretty big problem in atheist circles with respecting women--I've read a lot about how hard many are trying to figure out how to attract women to their conventions and things, but failing utterly because some of them are acting like idiots (you can look this up if you like--Google will find it easy enough for you).  I'm not taking that out on the philosophy though, or saying, Atheists are All BAAAAD and Hate Wimmin!  One bad apple may ruin a bunch, but one bad human does not ruin any other human.  If you've got an issue with a person, take it to the person.  Persons who act badly are simply that.

 

Really? I wasn't aware of that problem. Who's the privileged white dude of whom you speak?

[Princess Artemis]

sometimes one bad human does ruins another but that is a very low chance and completely a situation thing. actually were i live atheist really don't look down on women. its more a equal thing. your talking about the Mormon convention things or something else about it?

I mean that one bad human doesn't spoil a bunch in an analogous way that a bad apple can spoil a bunch. Apples don't have personal responsibility.

 

Mormon convention? I'm not sure. Also, I'm only talking about an issue some people have in some places...in fact, I straight out said that I wasn't saying, or thinking, that atheists have issues with women. As a philosophy, it does not, so I would expect that people who follow such a philosophy would tend not to, but they are also people and people are not perfect! Just because there is some problem with some atheists doesn't reflect badly on the all or on atheism. See? Some religious people who are more stupid than brains harming abortion doctors for religious reasons doesn't mean the rest are bad.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean the religious feeling is a good thing to have influencing law making. Religion may have been a factor in the abolition of slavery, but religion isn't the reason that slavery is still illegal today. If anti-slavery laws were made for religious reasons, then they were made for bad reasons, although the laws themselves had good effects.

 

Where did I say it was necessarily a good thing? My point was it wasn't necessarily a bad thing, and it certainly doesn't automatically make the laws religious. That's not the same thing as saying it is always a good thing.

 

Really? All religious reasons are automatically bad? As I understand it, Britain began the process of abolishing slavery partially because of religious conviction. Without that conviction, it may not have happened. Make of that what you will.

 

Really? I wasn't aware of that problem. Who's the privileged white dude of whom you speak?

 

It would be easier if you looked yourself. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastro...male-privilege/ is what I was specifically thinking about. That'll lead you on a depressing afternoon of reading if you follow the links and wallow in the comments. This is straying dangerously off topic, so if you want to talk about it more, I'm willing in other threads.

[potterwolf]

Really? All religious reasons are automatically bad? As I understand it, Britain began the process of abolishing slavery partially because of religious conviction. Without that conviction, it may not have happened. Make of that what you will.

Yes. Because I think that if your reason for doing something is religious, then you're acting based on a false premise. As I already said, I recognize that the abolition of slavery was influenced by religion. Although slavery is wrong and abolishing it was the right thing to do, I think religion is a bad reason for it. It's quite possible to do the right thing for the wrong reasons.

 

Like, even though I consider myself somewhat prochoice, I can respect people's prolife beliefs, especially if it's not based on a religious belief that I think is false, such as the existence of a soul. I think that prolife people who remain prolife solely because it coincides with their religious beliefs are acting on a false premise, and thus, they have bad reasons.

 

But that doesn't mean that there can't be good outcomes.

[Fuzzbucket]

Things may be picking up a bit...

 

Male legislators kind of asked for this one....

 

(Yes it's frivolous. BUT NOT REALLY.)

[Princess Artemis]

I see what they are doing there, but they do realize that stuff might actually get passed, right?

I checked one of the links and that one was happy to have almost passed an amendment to institute unnecessary invasion of men. WTFety F?! Being evil to men doesn't solve the problem of being evil to women!

Edited March 6, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[Fuzzbucket]

I see what they are doing there, but they do realize that stuff might actually get passed, right? 

I checked one of the links and that one was happy to have almost passed an amendment to institute unnecessary invasion of men.  WTFety F?!  Being evil to men doesn't solve the problem of being evil to women!

No, it doesn't. But if it even makes male politicians think about what they are doing....

 

 

 

 

No, on second thoughts I take your point; the men involved here probably don't know how ! I had no idea that one had almost passed... That just shows how smart they are....

 

(Yes I admit I may sound a teeny bit anti-men here. That is only because they seem to want woman back in the barefoot and pregnant state of the dark ages.... I do know that there are many nice men here who are as outraged as women by these proposed laws to keep us in our place.)

Edited March 6, 2012 by fuzzbucket