I have a question for Atlas's pro-lifers..

[Ebowed]

The morning after pill, if it terminates a fetus is murder

That's scientifically impossible.

Emergency contraception can prevent the implantation of a zygote into the uterus, but it cannot affect an embryo or fetus.  Pregnancy begins at implantation anyway, not conception.

[Ebowed]

So you're saying that God predestines certain women to have an abortion?  Why do you whine so much about it then?  It's part of God's plan.

Saying that life begins before pregnancy is just silly, Inks.  You should care when pregnancy begins, because banning anything that kills a zygote means banning certain types of birth control.  Birth control which reduces the number of abortions.

If your main focus is on viable life, why do you have any interest in abortions performed in the first and most of the second trimester?

[Ebowed]

And "viable" starts at conception.

Viability is a medical determination, not a philosophical or religious one.  It varies from pregnancy to pregnancy, I should point out as well.  But there is no such thing as a viable zygote.

[Ebowed]

"What about rape?" - It's not the child's fault - dont' punish the innocent 3rd party.  My mother who counsels these people says that most raped women who get abortions get even more emotionally unstable.

Uh... wow.  That's because they were impregnated by a rapist...

[Ebowed]

I see no reason it shoudl not include the unborn, and until you can provide reason otherwise, I will remain unconvinced.  I am perfectly content, the burden of proof is on you.

Generally, the burden of proof rests on one who seeks a change in the status quo.

[Ebowed]

Definition of crap

Typical pro-life argument.

[Ebowed]

Protestantism-90% opposed but there are fringe groups who support abortion rights

Where are you getting these numbers?  They're complete nonsense.  More than 10% of Protestants support abortion rights.  Why do you think at least 45%+ of the US is pro-choice?

Anyway, if abortion is wrong regardless of whether you're religious, consider that polling indicates that up to 75% of American agnostics and atheists are pro-choice, indicating that many pro-life arguments are theological, and not scientific.  Regardless, many non-religious people may personally oppose abortion, but do not feel the need to legislate their beliefs on others, which is the central focus of this entire debate.

[Ebowed]

Protestantism-90% opposed but there are fringe groups who support abortion rights

Where are you getting these numbers?  They're complete nonsense.  More than 10% of Protestants support abortion rights.  Why do you think at least 45%+ of the US is pro-choice?

Anyway, if abortion is wrong regardless of whether you're religious, consider that polling indicates that up to 75% of American agnostics and atheists are pro-choice, indicating that many pro-life arguments are theological, and not scientific.  Regardless, many non-religious people may personally oppose abortion, but do not feel the need to legislate their beliefs on others, which is the central focus of this entire debate.

Since when do political arguments need to be scientific? THere is nothing inherently scientific about being pro-choice. It's merely typical of people with a certain kind of amoralist belief system to kid themselves that their set of beliefs and positions is somehow more objective than other peoples'.

Yeah, you think I'm amoral and disgusting.  I get it.

Reasons to oppose abortion may be scientific, philosophical, or logical; I was merely saying that I did not feel theological ones to be relevant when legislating was concerned.  I mentioned only science since this poster doesn't seem to be able to defend his arguments very well and I'm throwing him a bone by giving him the easiest angle (science) from which to defend the pro-life viewpoint.