If abortion is murder, how come you eat animals?

[NewHope2010]

Who allowed him to? I don't remember voting. Being the creator of the universe doesn't justify doing whatever you want any more than being the leader of Russia justified Stalin murdering all political dissidents. Incidentally, it could also be argued that he was only doing so to defend the USSR.




So those Amalekite women, children and livestock who were murdered were a huge threat to Israel? What about the teenagers mauled to death by bears for making fun of a prophet's bald head? A huge security risk, were they?

If you want to argue with someone, join the debate club. You want to question God and why He does things? Then ask Him yourself and wait for an answer. But the truth is, you don't want an answer. You want to challenge God yourself. I'll pray for you, but right now, I'm holding my side laughing.

 

[NewHope2010]

So God ordering the death of people, which on its face would look like murder, because it was deliberate and had a malicious intent isn't murder, but doing something perfectly legal like abortion is murder even though it's not. Great reasoning!

You just explained the reasoning yourself! In the OT God ordered it! Abortion is not ordered by God. Christianity is to follow the works of Christ and to follow the two primary commands: Love God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind and all your strength - and to love others as you love yourself. If you had a choice, would you ask to have your life taken before you were born just because your mother didn't want to give birth (regardless of the reason)? Probably not.

< staff edit > < staff edit > < staff edit > < staff edit >

 

[Ar Cosc]

If you want to argue with someone, join the debate club. You want to question God and why He does things? Then ask Him yourself and wait for an answer. But the truth is, you don't want an answer. You want to challenge God yourself. I'll pray for you, but right now, I'm holding my side laughing.

God isn't well-known for answering questions. The nearest I can get is arguing with his self-appointed voices on earth.

And I don't want to challenge the god my mum worships, or my friends. Just the one some people think committed mass-murder and are not only okay with it, but glorify it.

 

[Hakan101]

A cow, a pig, a chicken, or a sheep is far more intelligent than a six week old foetus that hasn't even got a functioning nervous system. How come most pro-lifers think it's okay to kill and eat them, but not to terminate a pregnancy?

And if it's the potential to become a fully-grown human, why isn't it equally evil to menstruate or have "nocturnal emissions"?

OH MY GOODNESS are you kidding me.

Do people eat dead human fetuses? If that's the case it's no wonder so many people have abortions, they're probably trying to solve world hunger right? You think we just kill cows, sheeps, and pigs for no good reason? Just didn't want to take care of all that livestock we got hold of, so we shot them in the head?

NO, this is a VERY poor topic of comparison! Pick sport hunting or animal sacrifices or something, but EATING? We eat animals to survive! That's what pretty much all animals do, they can't make their own food so they need to kill something (or in the case of scavengers, at least have it be dead), whether it's living plants or other animals!

As for children yet to be conceived...you seriously trying to suggest wet dreams are acts of evil? You do know we can't really control that, right? There's plenty of debate on masturbation, but really, wet dreams? Come on, where's the rationality here?

 

[Ar Cosc]

OH MY GOODNESS are you kidding me.

Do people eat dead human fetuses? If that's the case it's no wonder so many people have abortions, they're probably trying to solve world hunger right? You think we just kill cows, sheeps, and pigs for no good reason? Just didn't want to take care of all that livestock we got hold of, so we shot them in the head?

NO, this is a VERY poor topic of comparison! Pick sport hunting or animal sacrifices or something, but EATING? We eat animals to survive! That's what pretty much all animals do, they can't make their own food so they need to kill something (or in the case of scavengers, at least have it be dead), whether it's living plants or other animals!

I manage to survive perfectly well without eating meat. The real reason in this day and age is that people simply like the taste. Killing hundreds of animals because you like the way they taste is to me worse than killing one human because you weren't ready to have one.

As for children yet to be conceived...you seriously trying to suggest wet dreams are acts of evil? You do know we can't really control that, right? There's plenty of debate on masturbation, but really, wet dreams? Come on, where's the rationality here?

I'm not. I'm trying to suggest that nobody thinks it's a massive sin to waste sperm, which is pretty much as intelligent as a 5 week old foetus, and also has the potential to turn into a person.

 

[lordbt]

I manage to survive perfectly well without eating meat. The real reason in this day and age is that people simply like the taste. Killing hundreds of animals because you like the way they taste is to me worse than killing one human because you weren't ready to have one.

Why?

 

[Nathan45]

Because in a year or two that child will be more intelligent than most forms of animals.

add an extra year and you could say the same about any combination of sperm or egg yet everyone agrees those are common and worthless.

If a embryo is priceless then women should be making as many as possible. If an embryo is not priceless, why does it matter if one is aborted before or after conception?

Furthermore, before a certain stage in early in the pregnancy, 99% of the material that makes up eventual baby doesn't come from the embryo, it comes from nutrients given to it's pregnant mother. Which are, ironically, often dead animals.

There is a certain benefit in waiting.

Let's say that you purchased extremely expensive Oak saplings and planted them... Someone came buy and smashed them, destroyed them... You demand some payment for them equivalent to what you paid, and they say,

"These were merely saplings and this was a prank. There is no difference between this sapling and even a large bush!"

Would you accept them equating those two?

No, but that doesn't relate to abortion. I'll give you an alternative scenario:

Lets say you purchased some expensive oak saplings and planted them in your backyard. Then you decided you didn't want them and hired a gardener to plow them up, destroying them, and replaced them with a swing-set.

Then some neighbor of your came up to you with a sanctimonious attitude and told you that you were morally wrong to destroy the saplings and that you should have allowed them to flourish in your backyard even though you didn't really want them.

In the first place... if someone else destroys your saplings, that's vandalism. It's also illegal to assault a pregnant woman for obvious reasons-- But that's completely different from abortion.

If a woman wants an abortion, that's her perogative. I think that she's sovereign over her own body, and it's not other people's job to tell her when to reproduce or not to reproduce.

I don't see why an embryo or early fetus should have any more rights than a sperm or an egg-- all are potential persons but not persons yet.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

If abortion is murder, how come you eat animals?

Equally I could ask why many animal rights defenders are pro-choice. Why should a different species take greater priority over our own species?

A cow, a pig, a chicken, or a sheep is far more intelligent than a six week old foetus that hasn't even got a functioning nervous system. How come most pro-lifers think it's okay to kill and eat them, but not to terminate a pregnancy?

If intelligence is the issue here then killing a toddler would be less immoral than killing a pig (I heard that pig have the intelligence of a 2-year old, correct me if I'm wrong.) Similarly, killing a severely brain-damaged or retarded person would be less immoral than killing a chimp.

Your argument seems to be than a beings' right to life is based on it's intelligence. If that's the case then what's the problem with humans killing animals?

 

[Chris81]

If all us who are against abortion were to suddenly become vegetarians, would this cause those who support the pro-choice movement to change positions and call for an end to abortions?

 

[Nathan45]

If all us who are against abortion were to suddenly become vegetarians, would this cause those who support the pro-choice movement to change positions and call for an end to abortions?

no. But at least you'd be more consistant!

as for myself, i'm pro-choice and i enjoy a good hamburger and i don't see either opinion changing.

 

[rambot]

For me specifically, i'm just curious why they eat eggs...

 

[Chris81]

no. But at least you'd be more consistant!

as for myself, i'm pro-choice and i enjoy a good hamburger and i don't see either opinion changing.

That was the answer I was likely expecting and truthfully if I was on the other side of this question, I would probably say the same thing.

I think the OP is a bit of a red haring. I could easily ask why all vegetarians or those who support PETA are are not exclusively pro life.

Oh well, not like the pro life/pro choice argument is going to be resolved in this thread or for that matter in another 30 years at this rate. Peace!

 

[NewHope2010]

God isn't well-known for answering questions. The nearest I can get is arguing with his self-appointed voices on earth.

And I don't want to challenge the god my mum worships, or my friends. Just the one some people think committed mass-murder and are not only okay with it, but glorify it.

My dear, you are quite wrong. God is very well-known for answering the prayers of those who know Him. A DEVOUT Christian will tell you that.

As far as the God of your mom,friends, etc. why in the world do you think there is a difference? It bothers me all the trouble there is in the world now because people are trying to go tit-for-tat over whether God, Jehovah, El-Saddai, etc are the true one or not. When will we realize we all serve the same God. Different faiths have different names for the same deity. We just argue so much as humans about which "walk" is the right one to get to Him. For Christians it's Jesus, for others its good works, still for others its through routine prayer.

As far as the mass-murdering thing, I don't glorify it, but I definitely see why it's so puzzling to you. I do know that in the OT there were plenty of people that were killed for disobedience to certain laws or for sexual sin, or for witchcraft. I do not claim to know why God decided they must perish. But I would gather that His judgement had a reason well beyond my level of understanding, just like the laws He created and used to build our universe is beyond my understanding. Every law has consequences if you break it (jump off a tall enough building and you'll go splat - gravity is not an intellect so it cannot voluntarily change its law to benefit or show mercy to an individual. But we don't blame gravity for people commiting suicide or hover too close to the edge -it was their choice). So, I believe that if God sets a law (commandment) if you break it, you are liable to suffer the consequences unless He chooses to have mercy on you. I'm not the one to challenge why He does what He does, who He gave His mercy to or not, but I'm not all-knowing either.

And as far as ordering the death of the first-borns, I don't know why. I can imagine it was devastating for those who weren't directly responsible, but then again if Pharaoh had done what he was commanded to by God it wouldn't have happened. Every time God's wrath is shown it's because of disobedience. Why in the world as humans have we not learned not to rebel and disobey - and then get mad when we have the repercussions. We are like children. A child is completely dependent on the parent, yet still tries to rebel and think they know better - even as toddlers! And then we want to rebuke the punishment.

Do you feel the punishment fits the crime? Maybe you don't, but I know that God has blessed people throughout entire generations for the good deeds of one person (Moses and Abraham are the first that come to mind). And likewise in the OT He cursed entire kingdoms for the actions of some. But I can't judge God for that because I don't know the hearts of all those people, I don't know what would have happened if they were allowed to live, I don't know if God suffered the little children by freeing their spirit from their body at the first inkling of pain - I don't know all that. But all I do know is that I am very thankful for Jesus Christ, so those types of sacrifices and punishments are unnecessary now.

I now live under the umbrella of God's grace through Jesus Christ. If I screw up and ask forgiveness in Jesus' name I'm forgiven. We all are. We have grace and we have the Holy Spirit. I'm so thankful that I don't have to live in the times before Jesus Christ was sent, that I'm not going to judge God for what He did to people who lived hundreds of generations before me. I live for now and that's what matters. And I try to love (emphasis on TRY - I have not completely arrived yet) everyone, and be a blessing to others. If we all did just that then we would all have the happiness, peace, and joy that's promised us in the Bible. But then again, if you don't believe in the Bible you want even TRY to seek that for yourself through Jesus Christ. So sweetie, I don't know what to tell you except that you should take some time out of your life to TRY God. See if you don't sense weights lifted from your life. See if doors don't open for you that you didn't expect. See if you don't have a sense of peace you never knew before. Take a short time of your life to read and study the new testament and pray for understanding before you read. I can't make you believe it will work, you have to be willing to believe (just like you're willing to believe if you fly in a plane it won't crash).

But I will pray for you and hope God blesses your spirit with that understanding so you will know why those who worship Him so diligently find reason to.

 

[Hakan101]

I manage to survive perfectly well without eating meat. The real reason in this day and age is that people simply like the taste. Killing hundreds of animals because you like the way they taste is to me worse than killing one human because you weren't ready to have one.

I'm not. I'm trying to suggest that nobody thinks it's a massive sin to waste sperm, which is pretty much as intelligent as a 5 week old foetus, and also has the potential to turn into a person.

I'll try to be calm on this one.

"Killing hundreds of animals because you like the way they taste..." Do you even hear what you're saying? You do realize that there are plenty of benefits from eating meat besides taste, right? Like getting all your essential amino acids in one piece of food. And do I even need to mention the sheer protein meat possesses? There are other vitamins and minerals---iron, phosphorus, b12---all these are found massively in meat. How about fish, which are loaded with omega fatty acids?

So basically what you're saying is rather than eat something that has all that in a single package, we should pick around and find plants, nuts, etc and just piece that together to get by? By all means, you can do that, but the notion that people kill animals and eat them just because they taste good is ridiculous. We kill them for the nourishment; all taste has to do with is *which* animal we eat. If you're talking about America today and the fact that people eat way more meat than they need to, that's another story. But the fact remains that it serves as an important food source.

As for the sperm issue...I would think this kind of thing is elementary...millions of sperm are "wasted" every day, it's just the nature of the reproductive process. I mean really, that's just how sex works: millions of sperm are shoved in there just to increase the chance that *one* will make it and get that egg fertilized. If you're saying that's a sin, then even genuine husbands and wives are sinning against God just to create another one of his children. Except they're not sinning, because it's not a sin. It's just part of the process of sex.

That is a *completely* different issue than abortion. That is like people playing the lottery: millions will play, but only one will win. Abortion is more like you've already won the lottery, but then someone robs you of your ticket before you can collect the money. It's a poor comparison, but hopefully you understand what I'm saying.

If you're just trying to justify abortion, I can understand you might have personal or legitimate reasons for that. But this argument about food is just not the right path to take. There are plenty of legitimate claims for abortion; this however isn't one of them.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

I manage to survive perfectly well without eating meat. The real reason in this day and age is that people simply like the taste. Killing hundreds of animals because you like the way they taste is to me worse than killing one human because you weren't ready to have one.

In addition to Hakan101's answer, it's also possible to live on an all-meat diet as the Inuits once did. They too had their share of health problems (such as haemophilia) but generally they are healthy. As omnivores it's possible to live on either an all-plant or all-meat diet, although personally I wouldn't recommend either.

It might sound superficial, but there's a reason we like the taste of meat: it's good for us. Meat and animal products benefit our health. I doubt there are many people who like the taste of tree bark because humans cannot digest tree bark.

 

[ug333]

I am a pro-life, omnivorous atheist. To me, the argument that a fetus can be aborted because it isn't intelligent yet is like suggesting that a severely mentally retarded person can also be killed. In fact, it is even easier to argue for the death of the mentally retarded individual, because their progression is limited. Most people would argue that, as a society, we value human life regardless of the intellect. That is part of our social contract with each other.

A fetus is, by MY definition, a human. Sperm and egg are not humans (they are cells from a human). So, I am pro-life. I define a fetus as a human because I am not sure, and one of my core beliefs is: when in question, favor life. As a society, it seems reasonable to protect the lives of the society, and to error (when possible) on the side of protecting a non-human as opposed to killing a human.

I do not have a social contract with a cow. As a species, cows are limited. I would ask that they be given a good life and dispatched quickly. A more complex animal like a monkey to me does deserve more respect. A less complex animal, like a lobster, gets less of my moral concern.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

Furthermore, before a certain stage in early in the pregnancy, 99% of the material that makes up eventual baby doesn't come from the embryo, it comes from nutrients given to it's pregnant mother. Which are, ironically, often dead animals.

This is awesome.

Also, OP is like a slippery slope anyway. Not interested.

 

[benglobal]

It's a question of the truth rather than a tit for tat debate on what denotes intelligence one way or the other. To take a life as a want and not a need is wrong. That applies to all life, not just human. The question is, do we take life for a want rather than a need? Does the cow need to die to meet our need for food or is it a want? does the foetus need to be terminated to meet a need or is it a want? I am pro life and that applies to all life.

 

[oryx]

A cow, a pig, a chicken, or a sheep is far more intelligent than a six week old foetus that hasn't even got a functioning nervous system. How come most pro-lifers think it's okay to kill and eat them, but not to terminate a pregnancy?

And if it's the potential to become a fully-grown human, why isn't it equally evil to menstruate or have "nocturnal emissions"?

Its okay to kill and eat animals because animals aren't persons. Its not okay to kill (and eat) your son or daughter because your son or daughter is a person and their person hood is inherent in their being human.
Its not the same, For animals its merely 'inhumane' or 'cruelty'. For humans its 'injustice.'
Else coming home and giving the cat a swift kick because I had a bad day at work would be 'battery' just the same as if I had come home and given my daughter a swift kick because I had a bad day at work. Else concentration camps would be on the same level as battery farms. A mink farm was recently only fined for cruel treatment of "persons". [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]"Blocked drains were overflowing with maggots and faeces and on that occasion they did see a number of injured mink.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] The court heard some of the animals were so badly hurt that bones were protruding from infected wounds, some of which were inflicted by other mink[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]." [/FONT]Yet human people have been hung-equal for equal- for the same treatment of human people.

If it is true that mink are people, it shows that either its right that people (in your definition of the word) are also unequal or else we have to define personhood by being a human being.

Also, if it is true that dogs, chickens, cows etc are people, what if a dog (person) killed a chicken(person)? Wouldn't that be murder? Or if a lion chased a gazelle(or a human!) and suffocated them and ate them, would that not also be unlawful because the act of a person suffocating another person is unlawful?
Alot of people bring up the chicken egg argument (aren't unborn chickens people too?!). But if born animals are people it is unlawful for a snake or a mongoose to steal eggs (kidnapping, I suppose) and kill them to eat them.

A human being doesn't need to display a certain level of intelligence or have a grown a certain body part. If humans need to do that, then our rights are not inherent but dependent upon is functioning like a certain type of other human being, in this case, a born human.
If personhood is based not upon membership of certain species-homo sapiens-, but a level of functionality across many species, then yes, cows, chickens and pigs are also persons. In which please explain why a human person can own a dog person or a cat person as a pet without it being slavery?
Or why, indeed, if they can own a dog person without it being against the law (slavery being illegal), why can't they have another human person as a pet too?

People can't own people. Which only makes sense if the 'people' in question are human beings, rather than all sorts of animals who function a certain level.

Sperm and egg aren't the start of human development, fertilization is. Sperm and egg do not have the 'potential' to become adult humans precisely because sperm and egg aren't immature humans. If sperm and egg are already a developing child, that would make reproduction happen before sex(and fertilisation) and that's false because humans are mammals and only reproduce sexually-at fertilisation. If sperm and egg are already a developing child-therefore making masturbation illegal because it would kill them-please tell me then, what the point of that developing child being fertilised? (By, I guess, another developing child)

 

[Icewater]

Its okay to kill and eat animals because animals aren't persons. Its not okay to kill (and eat) your son or daughter because your son or daughter is a person and their person hood is inherent in their being human.

Is it? Suppose we were to chance upon a species with intelligence equivalent to that of humans. Would they not be persons simply because they're not actually human?

If you believe that they do deserve the same protections that we afford humans, then what makes them deserving of those protections but not animals?