Skip to main content

A Dialogue on Abortion

By Michael Vito Tosto (Ben Love) ~

PRO-LIFER: Abortion is wrong.


PL: Because it’s murder.

PC: You get to kill someone if they’re in your house and you don’t want them there. But you shouldn’t be allowed to terminate an unwanted life-form in your own body?

PL: People who break into your house took a risk knowing that death could be the result. A baby in your womb didn’t ask to be there. It shouldn’t be punished.

PC: Maybe I didn’t ask the baby to be there, either. Maybe I was raped.

PL: That’s unfortunate… but you’re still stuck with that child.

PC: Since it’s something happening within a person’s own body, that person should have a say in what happens. I don’t have the right to tell someone else what they can and cannot do to their own body.

PL: That’s like saying pedophiles should be let off the hook because you can’t decide for them that their actions are wrong. It’s the same thing.

PC: No, no, a pedophile is performing an act upon another sentient being, a child who is aware of what is happening. Abortion, on the other hand, is something you do to your own body. Apples and oranges.

PL: No, it’s something you do to another body that’s inside of you. Something that’s alive.

PC: “Alive” is not the same “sentient.” Trees are alive, but we cut them down by the thousands. Not one of them has ever been aware of what was happening.

PL: An unborn child is different.

PC: Why?

PL: Doctors can see that the brains of unborn babies are active.

PC: This doesn’t mean they are aware. Brain activity is not necessarily the same as sentience. There are people in vegetative states who are in no way aware of what’s going around them or happening to them.

PL: But babies can respond to stimuli!

PL: So can a Venus flytrap. That doesn’t mean it is sentient.

PC: But a baby has living cells in it. It’s life!

PL: A tumor has living cells in it. But you’d have no problem having one of them removed from you. Or take a cancerous kidney, for that matter. That has living cells in it as well. But you’d remove that kidney without a second thought. Shit, even bacteria are alive. But you have no problem killing them when they invade your body unwanted.

PL: A tumor or a kidney or some damn bacteria—these are not the same as a baby.

PC: What is an unborn child if not an assemblage of non-sentient living cells and tissues that respond to stimuli the same way your toe does when you stub it? Are you as against the amputation of toes as you are against abortion?

PL: A toe is not a baby!

PC: What, then, is the definition of life? A tumor is alive. A toe is alive. An unborn baby is alive. None of them are aware of what they are. A baby needs to be born and experience the world as a sentient being in order to be subject to the morality and ethics of lifeforms. Until then, it is merely a living extension of the woman carrying it. As such, she should have the right to choose how to handle it. If she didn’t plan it, doesn’t want it, and has no moral qualms about terminating it, how is that any different than having a tumor removed?

PL: I just don’t know if I agree philosophically that a baby and a tumor are all that similar.

PC: Exactly! You don’t agree with me. And I don’t agree with you. It is at this point, using the word “philosophically” as you did, that our opinions diverge. This here is the very nature of the debate! And “pro-choice” is a stance that says I don’t have the right to make my opinions in this debate your opinions. I might have my own private ideas about the morality or immorality of abortion, but due to the nature of the debate, I don’t get to force them on you. You, as a pro-lifer, are trying to do that to me and everyone else. I, as a pro-choicer, endeavor to refrain from that kind of coercion.

PL: I just think life is precious.

PC: So do I.

PL: But you have no problem killing unborn babies.

PC: You subscribe to capital punishment, right? So you have no problem killing adults.

PL: Those adults had it coming! Their own choices sealed their fate.

PC: But if all life is precious, then why make a distinction it all?

PL: Those adults broke the law.

PC: That’s fine. But I think you have to be born in order to be subject to laws. Nobody ever put a tumor on trial for killing its human host. An unborn baby can be neither guilty nor innocent. It’s just a physical extension of the mother until it emerges from that womb. If it’s a part of her body, she gets to have a choice.

PL: I disagree.

PC: I know. And unlike you, I’m okay with you disagreeing with me. I don’t need to make you think or believe what I think and believe. I’m fine with the debate.

PL: I don’t want there to be a debate. I want everyone to adopt my stance on this.

PC: Yeah, I know.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

On Living Virtuously

By Webmdave ~  A s a Christian, living virtuously meant living in a manner that pleased God. Pleasing god (or living virtuously) was explained as: Praying for forgiveness for sins  Accepting Christ as Savior  Frequently reading the Bible  Memorizing Bible verses Being baptized (subject to church rules)  Attending church services  Partaking of the Lord’s Supper  Tithing  Resisting temptations to lie, steal, smoke, drink, party, have lustful thoughts, have sex (outside of marriage) masturbate, etc.  Boldly sharing the Gospel of Salvation with unbelievers The list of virtuous values and expectations grew over time. Once the initial foundational values were safely under the belt, “more virtues'' were introduced. Newer introductions included (among others) harsh condemnation of “worldly” music, homosexuality and abortion Eventually the list of values grew ponderous, and these ideals were not just personal for us Christians. These virtues were used to condemn and disrespect fro