Do Fetuses Have Souls?

http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/97may/abortion.htm

"The quickening" too, too funny.

 

From the article...

The year after abortion was legalized in New York State, the maternal-mortality rate there dropped by 45 percent -- one reason why legalization can be seen as "a public-health triumph"

 

The Fifth Amendment states that you can't be deprived of life without due process. That's pretty much the best guarantee you're going to get from most governments.

Now, back to the question. When does "life" begin? At least, give us your opinion on when you think life begins and if you think that having "life" equates to having "a soul".

 

Not so fast, pal. Due process is not a guarantee against the taking of life. It simply means that the taking must first be validated by legal process. And what we get from "most governments" is irrelevant here. So let's do get back to the ORIGINAL question which is stated in the title of the thread. If you want to talk law and politics I'd suggest that you'd get a better response on a different forum.

 

The had a way with words back then. Sounds like some '70s Steven King thing.

 

I'll go off on a slight tangent here for a moment just so we're on the same page. The Declaration guarantees the right to life. The Constitution states that such life can't be deprived without due process. This is relevant to the question you posed "Do fetuses have souls" in the sense that we have to determine if an unbirthed human possesses "life". Then, in turn, we can ask if it possesses a "soul".

First we should define what a soul is:

soul |sōl|noun1 the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.
• a person's moral or emotional nature or sense of identity: in the depths of her soul, she knew he would betray her.
• emotional or intellectual energy or intensity, esp. as revealed in a work of art or an artistic performance: their interpretation lacked soul.2 the essence or embodiment of a specified quality: he was the soul of discretion | brevity is the soul of wit.• an individual person: I'll never tell a soul.
• a person regarded with affection or pity: she's a nice old soul.3 African-American culture or ethnic pride.• short for soul music.

Second, we should ask if something must possess life in order to possess a soul.

Third, we should ask if life is just simply life; no soul involved whatsoever.

That's where my question to you originates. Do you think that having "life" equates to having "a soul"? It's actually a simple YES or NO answer.

 

The Declaration is not a governing document. It guarantees nothing. It is a statement of principles and grievances. It does not have force of law. The Constitution on the other hand, is and does.

And the original question stands. I want to talk souls for the moment. I did as you suggested and took this to the religion section. But you still dodge the question. Don't give me your yes or no crap, big guy. The ball is in your court. We can't go any further here until
we get the soul issue out of the way. If you don't want to talk about souls then go post on another topic.

 

I enjoy this thread and would love to hear your opinion on souls. Do you believe in them or do you not believe in them?

 

The question posed was not, "Does Takiji believe in souls?", but "Do fetuses have souls?". In this context I'm obviously granting the existence of them whether I believe in them or not. I'm trying to come to a better understanding of the practical operation and implications of a belief. I'm not questioning here the fundamental premise of the belief. That's a different discussion.

 

Very well. You've granted the existence of souls. Now, do you think that souls can only be possessed by living things or by non-living things, also? Or both?

 

You're wasting my time. Maybe someone will weigh in with an answer or at least an opinion the the fetus soul issue. But it doesn't look like it's going to be you. Talk to you later.

 

Tsk Tsk. You've granted the existence of souls, but won't offer an opinion as to whether they possess living things, non-living things or both. Or perhaps they don't possess anything. Please tell us what you think and we'll go from there. Just what do you think souls do? Do you even have an opinion about that? You're the one who brought up this thread and granted their existence (at least in a learning environment), but you won't give your thoughts or opinions. How do you expect to learn if you're so closed-minded?

 

Do fetuses have souls?

 

There are four options for an answer to your question allowing, of course, that we grant that souls exist:

1. Living things have souls. If you believe that an unbirthed human possesses life, then it also possesses a soul.

2. Non-living things have souls. If you believe that an unbirthed human does not possess life, then it possesses a soul.

3. Living and non-living things have souls. If you believe either way, then it possesses a soul.

4. Souls don't possess anything, living or non-living. If you believe that, then it does not possess a soul.

So, choose one of these options and you'll have your answer.

 

We all reach this point with Coiny eventually. He refuses to justify his positions with a logical defense when some degree scrutiny is applied to them. He simply has never thought through his own positions deeply enough to actually be able to articulate a reasoned defense of them. He believes what he believes because the majority of the people in his life probably have the same beliefs. Questioning them would raise too many doubts and too much uncertainty for his black and white view of the world. This is not unusual for conservatives. They have to have absolutes in order to make sense out of the world around them and they can't stand ambiguity because ambiguity fosters doubt and doubt is unacceptable and intolerable to the absolutist. Unfortunately, the world isn't easily explainable by gods, souls, and divine intervention in human activities but these ideals do provide a easy quick answer for those unwilling or incapable of using reason. The dust bin of history is replete with false idols, dead end belief systems, and disproven superstitions explained away by simple science. Yet, the human race still clings to the ideals and beliefs that provide false comfort, albeit genuine comfort in many cases, based on nothing real. Maybe one day we'll learn to give each other comfort without the aid of a false belief system. Who knows?

 

Thanks.

 

Is there any rational person in the world who believes that a fetus does not qualify as life?

 

Word. I think that was a perfect summation. Although if you're willing to put up with post after post after post of dodging, ducking, and attempts at diversion once in a while he might cave in and actually come up with something. It would be so much simpler if he'd just dispense with all the initial crap and either get on with it or not as the case may be but I don't think it's his nature.

 

My nature is to discuss an issue, look at it from all perspectives, present questions and ask that anyone else try to do the same.

 

There are many people in the world who believe that a fetus does not qualify as life. I wouldn't consider them "rational", however.