| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
27 Apr 2006 05:18:20 AM |
| Object: |
Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
http://www14.plala.or.jp/scotteigoacademy/htmls/args/AbortionandOverPopulat=
ion.html
Is Abortion a Solution for Over-Population?
=A92004 by Jonathan Scott
Last Updated 7-4-2005
(My opinons are my own and are in no way intended to represent the
official position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.)
--- In YERtheAER@yahoogroups.com, a woman wrote:
Jonathan,
At some point, not far off, humankind will start dying off in huge
numbers. We have nearly doubled the number of people in my lifetime,
and I hope to have many years left. Let's see, when I was born, we
had 3 1/2 billion...less than four decades later, we have nearly
doubled...When I'm 80, will we have 13 or 14 billion? If so, what
kind of life will they have? The planet is only 8,000 miles across,
for crying out loud.
Hmmm. You do have a good argument. If there is the continued
growth of the species, what will happen to everyone? To the planet? I
understand this and it's a valid point.
I'll just say this...
In my high school Biology class, I read about something called
"The Bottleneck of Winter." As it seems, in woodland areas, baby deer
are born in the spring. And during the summer and fall, the new deer
grow and by the time winter comes, there are, more times than not, too
many deer for the available food supplies. In the winter, the leaves
have all fallen and the grass is sometimes covered in snow that is too
thick for the deer to get through. So, due to this, each year during
the winter, many many many deer die due to the lack of food. And then,
when the spring comes again, the remaining deer breed once more and the
new crop of baby deer arrive. This happens each year. Hunters use this
as an excuse for deer hunting. (How would you prefer to die: starvation
or being shot?)
In the above example, one thing that some people may not see is
that the deer do not do as we do. They don't kill each other off in
order to preserve the food supply. They simply allow each other to live
as best as they can and everyone tries their best to survive. And when
spring does come, the survivors never hesitate to procreate.
Perhaps there are two or three things I think are the scariest
aspects of what is going on in society right now.
1) We're not killing each other off because we somehow believe it
is the noble thing to do. We do it out of insane levels of greed.
In your arguments you somehow suggest that in allowing mothers to
abort their babies that this is good in that it reduces the number of
people on the planet thereby increasing our odds at survival. The women
who are having these abortions though aren't doing it for the lofty
purposes you mention. They are not doing it for the sake of preserving
society. They are not doing it for the sake of protecting the food
supply. They are only doing it for the sake of their own unwillingness
to raise children. They don't want the responsibility and financial
burden of it. That is why they do it. They are willing to end a life in
order to preserve their own freedom...and not for the loftier goals
that you mention.
2) The solution to the problem is being brought about by people
who have chosen to have limited self discipline.
Gays have chosen to believe that they are biologically incapable
of living any other lifestyle.
Aborters are deciding to kill rather than to become a parent...or
even to let someone else adopt.
Those who divorce are those who have chosen to have a "breaking
point." A point at which they are no longer willing to keep trying.
All three of these lifestyle options deal with people who have
chosen to limit their own levels of self-discipline and self-control.
In other words, we are not relying on our own efforts to solve
this problem. We instead are relying on our lack of effort. This is
inherently unhealthy.
3) Why do we get to live? And why do they get to die? And why is
it that anyone has to die at all? Aren't there solutions available to
us that do not make us murderers? Perhaps the current solution isn't
the best one. Perhaps it is just the one that we want.
The thing about all of this to remember is that all of these
reasons are just excuses. People want what they want and they go for
that first. And then afterwards, once they have the thing they want,
then they justify it.
Your arguments are just justifications, perhaps not for your own
actions, but for the actions of another. Granted, they are good
justifications....but they are still nonetheless just justifications.
Were we really concerned with the growing population problem, we would
probably try and implement a solution that was a little less blood
thirsty.
So, in short, these are the three main problems I have about this
argument:
1) We're not doing it for the sake of the planet. We're doing it
because we are greedy.
2) We're not using our self-control and discipline to fix this
problem. We're merely allowing ourselves to remain undisciplined.
3) There are probably better solutions...solutions that we won't
be taking though because we prefer to:
1) be gay
2) abort babies
3) walk away from our responsibilites (divorce)
"Necessity is the Mother of Invention"
Our current 'invention' does not address the 'necessity' that we
have. Instead, it addresses an entirely different necessity. This may
be a problem.
Our inventions (current solutions) to the over population problem
weren't brought about by our need to slow the growth of the species.
Our inventions were instead brought about by our frantic desire to have
as much sex as is possible, in exactly the way we wish to have it and
to not have to deal with any of the consequences of it.
"Necessity is the Mother of Invention"
The scary thing though is this...if our need really is to slow
down the growth of the species, but the solution we have chosen merely
LOOKS like it addresses that need, then it is entirely possible that
the need is not being adequately addressed...and that we are in danger
of not slowing down the growth of the species anyway.
Here's the scariest thing...
If another better solution does at some point present itself to
us,
we may not take it. Because our main intention is to remain justified
in our lifestyles, perhaps we will frantically hold on to the solution
that gives us our justifications. If the new solution that we will shun
really is the solution that we need, and we push it away because of our
insanity, the species may die off, not from the elements, not from
nature...simply from our desire to have responsibility free sex.
.
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
27 Apr 2006 08:34:35 PM |
|
|
"Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@hoshmail.com> wrote in message
news:1146133100.481392.28180@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
http://www14.plala.or.jp/scotteigoacademy/htmls/args/AbortionandOverPopulation.html
Is Abortion a Solution for Over-Population?
It's a contributing factor to solving he population problem, not the be-all
and end-all.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
27 Apr 2006 11:31:58 AM |
|
|
In article <1146133100.481392.28180@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> "Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@hoshmail.com> writes:
{...}
2) The solution to the problem is being brought about by people
who have chosen to have limited self discipline.
Gays have chosen to believe that they are biologically incapable
of living any other lifestyle.
Aborters are deciding to kill rather than to become a parent...or
even to let someone else adopt.
Those who divorce are those who have chosen to have a "breaking
point." A point at which they are no longer willing to keep trying.
All three of these lifestyle options deal with people who have
chosen to limit their own levels of self-discipline and self-control.
In other words, we are not relying on our own efforts to solve
this problem. We instead ...
Whoa whoa whoa whoa WHOA! Back up there. Stop for a minute.
Don't you see it?
YOU HAVE SOLVED THE ENTIRE PROBLEM! And you didn't even notice...
Consider:
1) overpopulation is an looming, insescapable threat.
2) but abortion is morally repugnant. However:
3) being gay or not being gay is a matter of personal choice.
Therefore...c'mon, do I really have to go over this with a
HiLighter or something? ... therefore, if large numbers
of us will simply choose to be gay, both problem number
(1) ane problem number (2) will soon become distant memories,
matters of interest only to historians.
Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you thank you thank you.
I ... no, really, you're all being too kind ... I just
want to thank all the little posters who made this honor
possible...
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "*nemo*" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
27 Apr 2006 06:06:46 PM |
|
|
In article <1146133100.481392.28180@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
"Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@hoshmail.com> wrote:
Is Abortion a Solution for Over-Population?
No one said it was, *****-wit.
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
27 Apr 2006 04:06:32 PM |
|
|
Sound of Trumpet wrote:
http://www14.plala.or.jp/scotteigoacademy/htmls/args/AbortionandOverPopulation.html
Is Abortion a Solution for Over-Population?
©2004 by Jonathan Scott
You want to do your part?
Go ***** yourself.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "uri" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
27 Apr 2006 04:33:58 PM |
|
|
The world is not overpopulated. Since humans inevitably die (due to
war, violence, injury, poverty etc..), the world will never be
"overpopulated".
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
27 Apr 2006 05:56:00 PM |
|
|
On 27 Apr 2006 14:33:58 -0700, "uri" <danny99@bezeqint.net> wrote:
The world is not overpopulated. Since humans inevitably die (due to
war, violence, injury, poverty etc..), the world will never be
"overpopulated".
Are you really this stupid, or do you just think *we* are? The total
world population has more than doubled in the last 40 years. If
unchecked it will double again by 2030. The world is indeed
overpopulated, and thanks to idiots like you, it's only going to get
worse.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Neil Kelsey" |
|
| Title: Re: Abortion Is Not A Solution For Over-Population |
27 Apr 2006 04:24:07 PM |
|
|
Sound of Trumpet wrote:
http://www14.plala.or.jp/scotteigoacademy/htmls/args/AbortionandOverPopulation.html
Is Abortion a Solution for Over-Population?
Generally, over population is concerned with people who have already
been born, unless you're proposing retroactive abortions.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
