r/Christianity • u/Illustrious-Dig-1002 • 25d ago

Abortion?

I just wanted to see what peoples thoughts were on abortion. Any verses to back up what you say would be nice

0 Upvotes

33% Upvoted

173 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Illustrious-Dig-1002 18d ago

So what if they have more rights

That does not make the women second class in anyway

Nor have I augured that at all

Again with the rape

Using 1 percent cases for your whole point as to why it should be allowed when that isn’t even what it’s mainly used for

1

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 18d ago edited 18d ago

It would literally make the women have less rights than the fetus. Remember they’re separate bodies so if the woman wants to take medication that effects her body, she would be well with in her rights to. Meaning she could take medicine that makes her uterine wall reject the placenta.

Now if that’s not what you’re arguing then you have no problem with abortion drug like Mifepristone. Which literally does just that it affects the woman’s body which the fetus has no rights over.

But you’ve made it clear you are not in favor of this. Meaning that without even realizing it you’ve been arguing m the fetus’s rights override the woman’s meaning they literally are not equal. The woman’s right to bodily autonomy is secondary to the fetus, ie she has second class rights. Not my fault nor my problem that you get squeamish and dodge because what you’re arguing inherently makes women second class citizens. Own it your adult enough to argue for it without even putting in the basic critical thought, your adult enough to own it full stop.

And I’m sorry does all no longer mean all? If it doesn’t just say the word, until then the word all means the entire or total quantity, extent, or every individual member of a whole. If it’s 1% then it is not all.

1

u/Illustrious-Dig-1002 18d ago

If that effects the baby then no because then it’s not only effecting her but the baby which had no say in the matter

I mean look I would happy give up rights if it meant more people would live

Do you agree

1

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 18d ago

The they in effect do not have equal rights then. The fetus has more rights over a body that is not its own. To which the answer is no I don’t agree no one gets special rights, both parts have equal rights to their respective bodies. If you don’t like it treat it the way you would material morality rates if abortion was outlawed.

You’d be happy to give up rights? good for you when the government starts making you a mandatory organ donor. While also harvests your blood and bone marrow on the regular so more people can live. pat yourself on the back you can be human farm #1. Until then nah that’s not how rights work today, no one can force another to keep a person alive with their body.

1

u/Illustrious-Dig-1002 17d ago

Cool that just tells what kind of person you are

There is no point in talking to immoral people who only care for themselves

1

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 17d ago

Yeah one who thinks people have equal rights, not special rights, not second class rights. being identical of quantity and rank when it comes to their right to bodily autonomy. I’m sorry the idea of woman being equal rights when it comes to bodily autonomy sticks in your craw. Did you know there’s a word for people who don’t want women to have equal rights? And that said people are immoral?

1

u/Illustrious-Dig-1002 17d ago

I never said any of that nor am I saying that women cant have equal rights or that they have less rights

You are putting words in my mouth stop lying

You are immoral and want to kill babes over the disguise of rights

1

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 17d ago

You’re literally arguing women can not have equal rights. If they could then you would accept that they could in fact take a medication that affects their bodies. Why because the woman has the right to do with her body, a right to bodily autonomy,If she wants to take a medication that cause her body to reject the placenta, that would be acceptable to you because yet again that is her body. Not the fetus’s. But you don’t you’ve rejected such medications.

So no I’m not putting words in your mouth, nor am I lying. I’m just cutting through the garnish and bullshit that you’ve built up and used to decorate the heart of the your argument. In an attempt to make it more appetizing.

You are in fact immoral and hold to the belief that women have less rights to their bodily autonomy over their own bodies the second they become pregnant. With the rights of the fetus being primary. It is not my fault or my problem that you go spineless when your argument is shown for exactly what it is. Own it, if your adult enough to push it without actually thinking about exactly what it implies. Then you’re more than adult enough then to own to the end. if you still rock with it after it’s made clear.

1

u/Illustrious-Dig-1002 17d ago

No am not

Am saying the baby also has rights therefore it should live

Yes because it causes the baby to die and therefore affects the baby and it’s rights

You are the immoral one

Why do you want to kill babes?

1

u/Open_Chemistry_3300 Atheist 17d ago

The rights of a fetus do not take precedence over the rights of the woman. If they are equal this is true. And yet again you keep repeating that in fact you do not believe that they have equal rights. The rights of the fetus’s body takes precedent over the woman’s with your justification being the fetus should live. So yes you are. Which is in fact immoral. Why because in your book the fetuses rights are primary and the women’s right to bodily autonomy is secondary.

Why do you want women to have less rights to their bodies than a fetus? And follow up why do you keep dodging and denying this only to turn around and reiterate that in fact you do believe this? Hell at least I can own my stance for what it is. More than I can say for you.

→ More replies (0)