Why do atheists care about religion? This video sums it up nicely.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- The Atheist Missionary
- I am a Canadian skeptic/humanist interested in furthering a critical analysis of religious belief systems. The name "Atheist Missionary" is a sarcastic jab at religious fundamentalists. Atheists don't proselytize and are unified only by their freethinking nonbelief in the existence of a supernatural deity.
Twitter Updates
Sites which I commend to my visitors
- Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
- God is Imaginary
- Humanist Toronto
- Intelligent Design - a "science stopper"
- Journeyman Philosopher
- Pharyngula by PZ Myers
- Proof that there is still a sucker born every minute
- RichardDawkins.net: A Clear Thinking Oasis
- Say Hello to my Little Friend
- Skeptics Annotated Bible
- Stephen Law website/blog
- This is not a joke
- Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne
- Why won't God heal amputees?
Blog Archive
Highly recommended books
- How Are We To Live? Ethics In An Age of Self-Interest
- Living High and Letting Die: Our Illusion of Innocence
- Moral Clarity: A Guide for Grown-Up Idealists
- The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution
- The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason
- The Life You Can Save: Acting Now To Save World Poverty
- The Philosophy Gym: 25 Short Adventures in Thinking
- You Can't Go Home Again
Followers
BlogCatalog
Subscribe To My Podcast
The Atheist Missionary is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License.
4 comments:
So anybody against abortion does not use rational thought to come to that conclusion?
IMHO, the only thing irrational about a blanket prohibition on abortion is that it is based on dogma and not reality. Paul, your Church opposes abortions even if the fetus is the product of incest or rape. Your Church opposes abortion even if the mother's life is threatened by the pregnancy. Most damningly, your Church ignores the reality that abortions are going to take place regardless of whether they are outlawed or not. If you (like me) would like abortions kept to a minimum, wouldn't it be best to have the government regulate them so that they are carried out in early stages of pregnancy? Wouldn't it be best if contraception is promoted so abortions aren't used as de facto contraception? Finally, do you really want to force women to risk their lives if they want to obtain an abortion? Unfortunately, I already know your answers to all of these questions because, as a Roman Catholic, you are not allowed to think for yourself.
Okay. I am going to make the assumption that you believe that killing an innocent human being is wrong. The question then becomes, is a fetus a human life?
You could say that because the fetus is not fully developed that it is not fully alive, but you cannot prove that a fetus is completely void of life. And "civilized" society does not arbitrarily destroy things unless we are certain that there is no human life present. For example. A demolition crew would refuse to blow up a building unless they were certain that the building was empty. If a demolition crew will not destroy a building without first establishing with certainty that it is completely void of life, why does society arbitrarily destroy millions of fetuses without first the establishing the same fact?
You might also argue that a fetus is not yet a "person" due to lack of cognitive thinking and self-awareness. This would be based off of the Cartesian concept of humanity, the understanding that humans are beings that think, and that it is this thinking that makes a human being a “person.” “I think therefore I am.” This is not the only concept of humanity though. For instance, The Greek philosopher Aristotle claimed that the capability of rational thinking is a consequence of one’s nature. Therefore, he believed that it is not the ability to reason that makes one a person, rather, it is one’s human nature that enables him or her the power to reason. There is also a major flow with using Cartesian philosophy in this case, psychology has demonstrated that a human being is not self-aware until seven to nine months after birth. So if it is okay to kill a fetus because it is not self-aware, then should it not also be acceptable to kill a six month old infant?
Is a fetus a living human being?
"Paul, your Church opposes abortions even if the fetus is the product of incest or rape." Yes, because a innocent human being should not be killed because somebody else broke the law.
"Your Church opposes abortion even if the mother's life is threatened by the pregnancy." Wrong. the Church says that it is justifiable to take the life of the child if, and only if, it is done with the intention to save the life of the mother. The majority of cases which this applies is the rare instance of an ectopic pregnancy.
"Most damningly, your Church ignores the reality that abortions are going to take place regardless of whether they are outlawed or not." Rape is "going to take place regardless of whether they are outlawed or not." So should we make rape legal? How about child abuse?
Is a fetus a living human being? And if so, how do you justify the wholesale slaughter of millions?
Paul,
A question: since 1 out of every 3 fetuses spontaneously aborts, who is responsible for those? Is God not the biggest abortionist of them all?
Post a Comment