Derail: Pro-life religious debate

[marooned]

although i'm pro-choice politically, i would probably view Christianity on abortion as whatever Jesus's position was. he founded Christianity basically out of Judaism. he brings a new understanding of God and what the relationship between humankind and God is. although i couldn't find anything googling that seemed to show his take on abortion in some way (not sure what sort of abortion was even practiced at the time/in that place), i would imagine that since he was a pacifist in all his philosophy he would also not believe it to be good to kill an unborn child. he seems like the sort who considers all life sacred. however, he would i imagine also be against wars fought in God's name. Jesus after all was so non-violent and such a martyr that he will give anything asked of him, including his very life. he will not kill even in self-defense. so from this i feel i could approximate/extrapolate his position.

that said, it doesn't really matter in the debate... since from my point of view the pro-life religious view (how it would be adopted politically into law, its application) will do much more harm to many more lives in the long run. i see it as the immoral view for that reason.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

although i'm pro-choice politically, i would probably view Christianity on abortion as whatever Jesus's position was. he founded Christianity basically out of Judaism. he brings a new understanding of God and what the relationship between humankind and God is. although i couldn't find anything googling that seemed to show his take on abortion in some way (not sure what sort of abortion was even practiced at the time/in that place), i would imagine that since he was a pacifist in all his philosophy he would also not believe it to be good to kill an unborn child. he seems like the sort who considers all life sacred. however, he would i imagine also be against wars fought in God's name. Jesus after all was so non-violent and such a martyr that he will give anything asked of him, including his very life. he will not kill even in self-defense. so from this i feel i could approximate/extrapolate his position.

that said, it doesn't really matter in the debate... since from my point of view the pro-life religious view (how it would be adopted politically into law, its application) will do much more harm to many more lives in the long run. i see it as the immoral view for that reason.

Many of the verses attributed to Jesus aren't very peaceful, although some are.

https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt_list.html

[xerx]

I have suspicions about the real motives (whether or not they're aware of them) of "pro-life" Conservatives: they're in it in order to create more compliant members of society. Like heavy debt or a mortgage, the burden of parenthood is a powerful mechanism of enforcing risk-aversion, compliance to bosses, and social order.

People (of any political stripe, Conservative or otherwise) that are sincere about protecting 'life' tend to support a welfare state or other egalitarian mechanisms.

[marooned]

People (of any political stripe, Conservative or otherwise) that are sincere about protecting 'life' tend to support a welfare state or other egalitarian mechanisms.

precisely, pro-life means every life matters, its hardships and struggles matter, the threats to its survival matter, even when someone screws up royally their life still matters. i don't view it as something from which one can pick and choose, and i see views that might, say, involve creating harsh laws for pregnant women while otherwise screwing over poor women and single-mothers as completely disingenuous. it's like the laws will "save the baby" but it's okay if that child grows up in terrible circumstances, in terrible poverty, without proper access to medical care or education, etc. if that child later becomes a violent criminal then advocate the death penalty. it's just completely contradictory.

[xerx]

precisely, pro-life means every life matters, its hardships and struggles matter, the threats to its survival matter, even when someone screws up royally their life still matters. i don't view it as something from which one can pick and choose, and i see views that might, say, involve creating harsh laws for pregnant women while otherwise screwing over poor women and single-mothers as completely disingenuous. it's like the laws will "save the baby" but it's okay if that child grows up in terrible circumstances, in terrible poverty, without proper access to medical care or education, etc. if that child later becomes a violent criminal then advocate the death penalty. it's just completely contradictory.

Yeah, pretty much this.

Personally, I think that a cradle-to-adulthood welfare system (which includes cheap daycare) is the only possible compromise on the issue of abortion.

[Grendel]

Many of the verses attributed to Jesus aren't very peaceful, although some are.

https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt_list.html

when you realize christ is a nazbol

[xerx]

This is anecdotal, so feel free to ignore it; but, from what I've observed, when you have a kid, a psychological switch is triggered that makes you buy into the existing system. You become less radicalized, less open to changing the system, and more accepting of arbitrary rules designed to ensure stability.

I saw a documentary about an American White Supremacist who left that way of life after becoming a parent. His reasoning was that he wanted to make the world a better place for his daughter. In fact, this is a complete non-sequitur; if you truly believed that other races were inferior, making the world a better place for your daughter would involve the marginalization up to possible extermination of other races.