Comments on: Australian abortion aid ban lifted http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/ Advocate for Science, Reason and Atheism Sun, 14 Mar 2010 17:01:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: John Weaver http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20038 John Weaver Fri, 13 Mar 2009 02:06:01 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20038 Dear Sean, Lol. It has been proposed, actually. Seriously, though, I don't think there's a single gay gene. What I've read seems to indicate that homosexuality has a lot of different causal factors, and that those factors differ in men and women. I do worry, however, about the hormonal explanation for homosexuality, since I imagine if that explanation is correct, the religious right would try hormonally altering fetuses through injections. The way I feel lately, the God gene goes hand in hand with the stupidity gene, but I hate saying that 'cause I don't want to be prejudiced against religious people. John Dear Sean,
Lol. It has been proposed, actually. Seriously, though, I don't think there's a single gay gene. What I've read seems to indicate that homosexuality has a lot of different causal factors, and that those factors differ in men and women. I do worry, however, about the hormonal explanation for homosexuality, since I imagine if that explanation is correct, the religious right would try hormonally altering fetuses through injections.
The way I feel lately, the God gene goes hand in hand with the stupidity gene, but I hate saying that 'cause I don't want to be prejudiced against religious people.

John

]]> By: SeandBlogonaut http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20034 SeandBlogonaut Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:52:34 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20034 Heaven forbid that they find a God gene then:D The dastardly atheists might conspire with evil secularist governments ;) Heaven forbid that they find a God gene then:D The dastardly atheists might conspire with evil secularist governments ;)

]]> By: John Weaver http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20029 John Weaver Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:31:15 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20029 One last thing. One reason why I am still tentatively pro-life is because I fear the fanaticism of religious right genetic engineering. Al Mohler, one of the leaders of the Southern Baptist convention, argues that parents should have the right to genetically determine whether their children are gay or not (he argues that Christian parents should genetically engineer homosexuality out of the gene pool). Now, granted, I don't think we will ever find one conclusive 'gay' gene, but I could see the religious right trying to weed out the population of GLBT individuals by some-sort of pre-natal screening. I guess where I stand is that people may very well have freedom of choice whether or not to have a child (like I said, I'm tentatively pro-life, not fanatically so), but people should probably be restricted in their ability to 'choose' what kind of child they will have. One last thing. One reason why I am still tentatively pro-life is because I fear the fanaticism of religious right genetic engineering. Al Mohler, one of the leaders of the Southern Baptist convention, argues that parents should have the right to genetically determine whether their children are gay or not (he argues that Christian parents should genetically engineer homosexuality out of the gene pool). Now, granted, I don't think we will ever find one conclusive 'gay' gene, but I could see the religious right trying to weed out the population of GLBT individuals by some-sort of pre-natal screening. I guess where I stand is that people may very well have freedom of choice whether or not to have a child (like I said, I'm tentatively pro-life, not fanatically so), but people should probably be restricted in their ability to 'choose' what kind of child they will have.

]]> By: John Weaver http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20028 John Weaver Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:25:52 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20028 As for enforcing morality on others, I think your argument (no offense) is philosophically simplistic. Every law system is an enforcement of morality on to others. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have a legal system. Your problem, and my problem as well, is with the system of morality being enforced, not with the fact that people are enforcing morality on others. It's impossible not to do that, at least until our society evolves beyond its current primitive form As for enforcing morality on others, I think your argument (no offense) is philosophically simplistic. Every law system is an enforcement of morality on to others. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have a legal system. Your problem, and my problem as well, is with the system of morality being enforced, not with the fact that people are enforcing morality on others. It's impossible not to do that, at least until our society evolves beyond its current primitive form

]]> By: John Weaver http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20027 John Weaver Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:25:01 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20027 Dear DB, I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying that the "it's not my position to tell someone what to do with their body" is going to become increasingly philosophically problematic as time goes on. I think uniting this argument with the sexual violation argument makes more sense for pro-choicers. We tell people what to do with their bodies all the time: people aren't allowed to commit suicide for instance, or inflict their body through violence on someone else. Don't get me wrong - I worry much about the policing of the body as anyone else, which is another reason why I'm skeptical of the pro-life movement. But sexual and reproductive freedom, even if we uphold those standards, can probably never be fully absolute. We probably shouldn't for instance, allow one person to deliberately infect another person with a STD, even if both parties are willing (and especially, if one person is deliberately sleeping with someone else to infect them unknowingly. Sorry, seen too much Law and Order!). Dear DB,
I understand what you're saying, I'm just saying that the "it's not my position to tell someone what to do with their body" is going to become increasingly philosophically problematic as time goes on. I think uniting this argument with the sexual violation argument makes more sense for pro-choicers. We tell people what to do with their bodies all the time: people aren't allowed to commit suicide for instance, or inflict their body through violence on someone else. Don't get me wrong – I worry much about the policing of the body as anyone else, which is another reason why I'm skeptical of the pro-life movement. But sexual and reproductive freedom, even if we uphold those standards, can probably never be fully absolute. We probably shouldn't for instance, allow one person to deliberately infect another person with a STD, even if both parties are willing (and especially, if one person is deliberately sleeping with someone else to infect them unknowingly. Sorry, seen too much Law and Order!).

]]> By: SeandBlogonaut http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20024 SeandBlogonaut Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:54:54 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20024 To pick out a point on biotechnology I have no issue with screening for healthy embryo's. When it comes to preselecting embryos for deafness or eye colour etc then I think we need to ensure that it will be in the best interests of the child, then in the best interests of th wider community. I couldn't see an issue with superficial features such as eye and hair colour but deafness :S To pick out a point on biotechnology I have no issue with screening for healthy embryo's. When it comes to preselecting embryos for deafness or eye colour etc then I think we need to ensure that it will be in the best interests of the child, then in the best interests of th wider community. I couldn't see an issue with superficial features such as eye and hair colour but deafness :S

]]> By: SeandBlogonaut http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20023 SeandBlogonaut Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:47:42 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20023 Its a good discussion thanks to DB and yourself:D Its a good discussion thanks to DB and yourself:D

]]> By: DB http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20019 DB Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:03:27 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20019 You cover a lot on this issue, but again, all it comes down to, in my opinion, is not the debate over definitions and terms, rather the fact that I believe a woman has a right to decisions about her body and no person or government has the right to tell that woman otherwise. I don't even care to address the personhood issue, because I refuse to move past the "it's not my position to tell someone what to do with their body" argument I present. Not my body, not my decision, nor is it the decision of a government or religious group of people. If someone's belief says one thing regarding abortion, then it is their choice to take that position, but they do not have the right to enforce their version of morality on me or anyone else through asinine laws. The abortion debate has become some clever way for people to force their views of morality on others, a age-old phenomena that we are seeing in a lot of lately. Regarding the "why aren't they revolting?" comment, I can offer that conservative Christians usually just talk about issues rather than taking a meaningful action. I believe this has something to do with their over reliance on prayer. You know, they pray to think they are doing something, when they aren't actually doing anything. They might think abortion is genocide, but short of bombing abortion clinics, there is no chance they are going to leave their Churches to do anything about it which is fine by me. You cover a lot on this issue, but again, all it comes down to, in my opinion, is not the debate over definitions and terms, rather the fact that I believe a woman has a right to decisions about her body and no person or government has the right to tell that woman otherwise. I don't even care to address the personhood issue, because I refuse to move past the "it's not my position to tell someone what to do with their body" argument I present. Not my body, not my decision, nor is it the decision of a government or religious group of people. If someone's belief says one thing regarding abortion, then it is their choice to take that position, but they do not have the right to enforce their version of morality on me or anyone else through asinine laws. The abortion debate has become some clever way for people to force their views of morality on others, a age-old phenomena that we are seeing in a lot of lately.

Regarding the "why aren't they revolting?" comment, I can offer that conservative Christians usually just talk about issues rather than taking a meaningful action. I believe this has something to do with their over reliance on prayer. You know, they pray to think they are doing something, when they aren't actually doing anything. They might think abortion is genocide, but short of bombing abortion clinics, there is no chance they are going to leave their Churches to do anything about it which is fine by me.

]]> By: John Weaver http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20018 John Weaver Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:39:56 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20018 Sorry, Sean, my comment was so long I had to split it up. Great post by the way Sorry, Sean, my comment was so long I had to split it up. Great post by the way

]]> By: John Weaver http://seantheblogonaut.com/2009/03/australian-abortion-aid-ban-lifted/comment-page-1/#comment-20017 John Weaver Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:39:19 +0000 http://seantheblogonaut.com/?p=2383#comment-20017 By the way, I think an even better argument against the anti-abortion movement is their whole manipulation of the term genocide. Remember, many pro-lifers (not this one) belive the pro-choice movement is committing genocide. Yet what is their reaction? To do nothing. If anything, the violent wing of the pro-life movement is often more consistent than the non-violent wing, which believes that one never has the right to overthrow a government or disobey it. If Christian pro-lifers (I'm an agnostic one myself) honestly believe pro-choicers are Nazis, why aren't they revolting? By the way, I think an even better argument against the anti-abortion movement is their whole manipulation of the term genocide. Remember, many pro-lifers (not this one) belive the pro-choice movement is committing genocide. Yet what is their reaction? To do nothing. If anything, the violent wing of the pro-life movement is often more consistent than the non-violent wing, which believes that one never has the right to overthrow a government or disobey it. If Christian pro-lifers (I'm an agnostic one myself) honestly believe pro-choicers are Nazis, why aren't they revolting?

]]>