If god hates abortion, why make women get pregnant when they don't want to be?

Ask your god. He's supposedly the one that forms them in the womb. Why start to form a being that he knows will just be aborted? Seems pretty dumb to do if he hates abortion.

Weak argument.

Oh right, because rape doesn't exist.

An aborted embryo has no feelings or thoughts. Flushing it means one less abused child. And god not designing people to get pregnant when they don't want to be means millions fewer abortions or abused children.

 

An embryo is an embryo, Just like an egg is NOT a chicken. An egg is an egg.

It would not have bothered me if I had been aborted as an embryo. Abortion is far more merciful than a life of guilt and pain, just ask so many that spend their lives in prison. Most of them had dads that were pieces of chit. Most of them were unwanted children.

My fate was not to be an abortion. Those that are abortions were not meant to be born. No one can refute the will of God.

Christ said, "If you love your life you will lose it." "The wages of sin is death" "All have come short of the glory of God" Even Jesus had his moment of doubt, and he died. Jesus IS NOT God. God doesn't die.

 

The underlying premise of your question is flawed. Human life evolved through natural processes, it wasn't "created" by a "higher power". There is, in fact, no evidence for a "higher power". So the idea that they "think ther're in a position to understand the reasoning" of your so called "higher power" is just silly.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0&feature=related

 

God likes to be able to look into children's eyes when he murders them. I mean, look at the bible....God orders the deaths of children all the time, but not before they are born....that is taking it too far.....

 

There's all kinds of evidence, you just refuse to see it. Take cause and effect all the way back to the big bang, something had to cause it. Without cause, there would be no universal laws, like gravity and the "god particle" that gives mass to everything that is.

 

That is not evidence of your point. The "universal" laws can be considered "cause" (meaning without them life could not exist). However, they do not point to a deity. Unless your deity is physics and chemistry, that is.

 

Well there you have it. Life could not exist without cause. There could not be universal laws without cause. Cause is truth. Truth is God. That's the God I worship. It's far more than physics and chemistry. Without cause there is no conscientiousness.

 

They aren't "killed." If you don't know the difference between intentional killing and an accidental death...well...you're hopeless. Anyone could cut your life short at any time in any number of ways. That does not make you any less human because you are killed. Your argument lacks any sense at all. Reality matters, and reality is not simply randomly defining what a thing is based upon faulty insupportable assertions simply because you say so.

 

It is an infinite blessing to be conceived in God's love. It is a grievous shame to have that life cut short by the will of a lowly creature. Man has no right to take the life of another man for no just reason.

You diminish all human life--at all stages--when you demean the most fragile and vulnerable. Also--your world view is so dark. It must be sad for you.

 

This is a factual error. embryoes are organisms. Eggs are cells.

Who are you to determine the worth of the life before it is ever lived? Are you voting for Obama? He was an unexpected pregnancy. So many people are born into difficult circumstances and rise above to the benefit of all of us. Solving social ills is the answer, not killing off "undesirables."

Abortion is not the will of God--it is a travesty of mankind's doing.

He was God and man--theologically God became a man to redeem man's nature for those who chose to accept that redemption.

 

Eggs are not chickens. Fertilized eggs are not chickens. Chicks (what come from hatched eggs) are chickens. Additionally this is not a good metaphor for human reproduction. Fertilized eggs lead to chickens without taking energy from their mother bird.
Women should be allowed to do what they believe is best. The law as is allows that. The moralist "that is a human," is not really correct. It is a part of a human. It takes energy and causes medical risk. It is not my place to tell a woman to keep or abort a fetus. The law says it is her choice.

The laws of physics and chemistry can be a cause (meaning contributing factor) to life but they are not evidence of god. Evidence is rational. God is a faith thing (a myth, an excuse for doing what you would do with or without god because you believe it is right).

 

If God loves abortion, why did he create contraception?

More contraception = less abortion.

 

You are arguing against yourself. You don't diminish life by saying that people should be allowed to do what they believe is best for their own lives.

 

The human being in the womb is a life. He should be allowed to live. If not, there are no other "choices" to make. She's DEAD.

 

So why did god make men have the desire to have sexual relations with every woman who is even moderately attractive and capable of voluntary sex? So men can have concubines? Or so everyone in Africa can catch AIDS?

Do god's laws apply to animals? Or is god a construct used to help build a society? What laws do you think apply to humans?

 

Not a human. Human- bipedal primate mammal. Zygote- a cell formed by the union of two gametes.
The unborn are not yet bipedal.
There are other issues in telling women they can't have abortions- the quality of life suffers significantly for women who have children without having an established means of supporting the child (which is fine by me if it is her choice).

 

This is seriously a dumb argument--it makes me wonder how old you are. Are only people who can walk human? Is an ostrich human because it walks on two legs?


Zygote is the name of a stage of development--and anyway--no one aborts a zygote, the human is way past that stage of development by the time he reaches the womb. Study up on your biology, and then come back to the discussion.

 

I used the definition of human. You have used no science to attempt to differentiate between the fetus and a parasite (which they are- they cause damage to the woman's health and can cause severe allergic reactions). Until you can use science to make your points, you are just calling people names. Please provide scientific evidence that the aborted fetus is an actual human. Thank you.

 

You're comparing mammalian reproduction to a parasite infestation? The reason I ignored that is because it's ludicrous! What's the point in giving credence to cretinous claims?

Dear sir, in order to verify that an abortion is successful, they have to identify the HUMAN REMAINS. Sheesh. Get some learnin'. :roll

 

They have to find the remains of a fetus. By my previous definition of a human , they may or may not even have one foot- therefore not human remains.

The relationship is parasitical. They draw nutrition and increase risk with no immediate benefit to their host. The ignoring of the relationship does not make it false. You have still failed to provide anything based on science or reason.

You keep telling me to learn and you fail to figure out what you are talking about. You are talking about telling other people what is right for them without even looking into how it affects their quality of life. I am glad the law is more considerate of what individuals determine to be the best way forward for them.

 

They have to find the remains of a fetus. By my previous definition of a human, they may or may not even have one foot- therefore not human remains. It takes around 7 weeks to even make one foot.

The relationship is parasitical. They draw nutrition and increase risk with no immediate benefit to their host. The ignoring of the relationship does not make it false. You have still failed to provide anything based on science or reason.

You keep telling me to learn and you fail to figure out what you are talking about. You are talking about telling other people what is right for them without even looking into how it affects their quality of life. I am glad the law is more considerate of what individuals determine to be the best way forward for them.

 

Sorry. Double-post. Unintentional.

 

I'd rather ask why do people have sex if they're not willing to risk a pregnancy? I don't care what God has to say about it.

 

No, dear. They do it to make sure dead, dismembered parts aren't left in the woman and cause infection. And regardless of what a human being looks like has no bearing on whether or not they are a human being.

Parasites are disease. Pregnancy demonstrates a healthy condition of the female body.

Killing a human being in the womb is certainly affecting that human being's "quality of life!" Oh...but since you can easily brush the carnage under the rug (or flush it down the drain) and there is no scream of pain...it's okay in your opinion. :roll Only those who HAVEN'T been aborted have the right to abort. Irony.