• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A simple Yes or No with a short explanation.

Status
Not open for further replies.

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Fantasea said:
There is nothing but emotion that can be used to justify abortion. Is emotion sufficient justification to terminate 50 million human lives? I don’t believe so. Anyone who disagrees is free to furnish medical, scientific, or genetic fact that justifies 50 million abortions.
How long did it take to read this? How many lives does that equal?
Again, I think this is a gross over-simplification.

And the way you and vauge talk about it, it sounds like you suspect a grand conspiracy among heathen women to kill babies. The fact is there ARE 50,000,000 stories to go along with these abortions and each one is distinct. I understand the need to simplify, it makes it a whole lot easier to see a light at the end of tunnel, but truth is, the problem of abortion in our society is as refracted and complex as the 50,000,000 stories that make up its history in America. The abortion problem can't be dithered away as the acts of a bunch of ungodly, greedy, selfish women...as convenient as that might be to your cause.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
6,282
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I still think it's selfish and greedy to say that one life is worth more than another that has never even had a chance. To me the logic here is reverse.

And the way you and vauge talk about it, it sounds like you suspect a grand conspiracy among heathen women to kill babies. The fact is there ARE 50,000,000 stories to go along with these abortions and each one is distinct.
I agree wholeheatedly. Every instance is as unique as the life inside that womb.

I understand the need to simplify, it makes it a whole lot easier to see a light at the end of tunnel, but truth is, the problem of abortion in our society is as refracted and complex as the 50,000,000 stories that make up its history in America. The abortion problem can't be dithered away as the acts of a bunch of ungodly, greedy, selfish women...as convenient as that might be to your cause.
There is no nothing convenient here at all. It saddens me to think that anyone would think (whatever the circumstances) that a life is worthless. What would you think if you moved to a new area and someone walked up to you, your brother, your Aunt and put a knife to thier throat? The person saying, "You are in my way, now I have to walk around you. Feel sorry for me even though I invited you to our new area. This is my house, my street, my sidewalk - On second thought, I don't think you are worth a damn thing because I do not know you." Then slit your brothers or Aunts throat. Then they get away with it because it is law that new folks in the area are allowed to be murdered due to the new folks being in the way.

The scenerio is not much different than abortion in my opinion.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
Pacridge said:
I'm no fan of abortion- but how does emotion justify abortion?

Doesn't the arguement basically fall to when you believe life begins? From what I can see you have some saying life begins at conception and others who seem to think it begins at birth. Isn't that the real arguement here? And if life begins prior to birth- what about birth control? Is that wrong as well?


Birth control, while somewhat related, is a separate subject and is better discussed without references to abortion.

My statement relative to emotion is simply this. Since no one has ever provided scientific or medical factual information that justifies abortion, the only reason for having one is emotion. The two most popular reasons, both of which are emotional, are:

To avoid embarrassment,
The pregnancy has occurred at an inconvenient time.

Perhaps it helps if one looks at it this way.

In the past, learned people were convinced that the earth was the center of the solar system. They were convinced that the sun revolved around the earth. As knowledge and understanding advanced, the truth became known.

In the past, learned people were convinced that the earth was flat and that ships sailing too close to the edge would fall off. As knowledge and understanding advanced, the truth became known.

In the past, learned people were convinced that man could never fly; that the automobile would never replace the horse; that automation would never work; and on; and on; and on.

Things that were not known became known. And, so it continues.

In 1973, learned people, justices of the Supreme Court, openly confessed their ignorance of the answer to the question of when human life begins. They did not have the benefit of the technological advances that came later in the fields of science, obstetrics, and genetics. They based their decision solely on what was known.

On the off-chance that you did not see my response to an earlier post, I have copied it below. I believe that it provides answers to those who wish to have answers. I am mindful, of course, that there are those who don't wish to know the truth because truth can often be painful.

If there are points with which you disagree, please state your factual reasons.

-------------------------------------

say, “…. we’re talking about people’s lives here …” and I agree with you. However, each abortion involves two lives, doesn’t it? One that survives, one that does not.

In an earlier part of your post, you wrote, “…you need to join us here in the 21st century.” I would like to extend the same invitation to all those who continue to adhere to the 1973 thinking of Justice Harry Blackmun, who, in writing the Roe v Wade decision included these words in Section IX B:

“Texas urges that, apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, life begins at conception and is present throughout pregnancy, and that, therefore, the State has a compelling interest in protecting that life from and after conception. We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer."

Mr. Justice Blackmun was making a simple observation. He was saying that, since this court, in 1973, doesn’t don’t know the calendar of events that take place in the womb, we will pass the buck to some future court that will have the understanding that this court lacks.

Now, here in the 21st century, what do we understand, as a result of research in science, obstetrics, and genetic research?
• Day 1 - conception takes place.
• 7 days - tiny human implants in mother’s uterus.
• 10 days - mother’s menses stop.
• 18 days - heart begins to beat.
• 21 days - pumps own blood through separate closed circulatory system with own blood type.
• 28 days - eye, ear and respiratory system begin to form.
• 42 days - brain waves recorded, skeleton complete, reflexes present.
• 7 weeks - thumbsucking.
• 8 weeks - all body systems present.
• 9 weeks - squints, swallows, moves tongue, makes fist.
• 11 weeks - spontaneous breathing movements, has fingernails, all body systems working.
• 12 weeks - weighs one ounce.
• 16 weeks - genital organs clearly differentiated, grasps with hands, swims, kicks, turns, somersaults, (still not felt by the mother.)
• 18 weeks - vocal cords work – can cry.
• 20 weeks - has hair on head, weighs one pound, 12 inches long.
• 23 weeks - 15% chance of viability outside of womb if birth premature.*
• 24 weeks - 56% of babies survive premature birth.*
• 25 weeks - 79% of babies survive premature birth.*
(*Source: M. Allen et. al., "The Limits of Viability." New England Journal
of Medicine. 11/25/93: Vol. 329, No. 22, p. 1597.)

Genetic research has enabled doctors to work back to the point where the 23 chromosomes from the sperm unite with the 23 chromosomes from the egg to form a new life which is unique. This new life is different from that of both parents and entirely separate from that of the mother whose role in the development of the child will continue unchanged for some years. From the moment of conception the role of the mother is to furnish shelter, nourishment, and protection to the child until such time as the child has grown to point of self-sufficiency. This is an indeterminate period. The first nine months are pre-natal, but the post-natal period runs into many years.

Ultra-sound motion images, now a routine part of pre-natal care, clearly show the infant in real time living color doing all of the things inside the womb that he will be doing outside the womb a few months hence. Few who are present at one of these sessions are able to hold back the tears. None can deny that they are watching the antics of a living human child.
You say that those who opt for abortion don’t feel the same about abortion as I do. I question the validity of that premise. It is not at all a matter of feelings. In an enlightened society, whether a human lives or dies can never be a matter of feelings.

Please be mindful that everything I have written is factual and completely secular. The question of abortion should never be discussed on religious grounds. And, it doesn’t have to be. There are indisputable sufficient scientific, medical, and genetic grounds which make the case that abortion takes a human life.

The sole question remaining is whether one should have the power to take the life of the human occupant of a womb.

However that is no longer an ethical question. It has become a question of money -- and everyone knows what happens when big money is at stake. The sheer economics of the industry which has grown since 1973 demands that a steady stream of ‘patients’ be fed to the cash cow that provides many jobs, sells much equipment, rents much space, and has created many millionaires.

Since economics and politics go hand in hand, it is understandable that the sizable political contributions flowing from the proponents of the status quo have rendered their targeted political supporters deaf, dumb, and blind to the truth.

I acknowledge that there are additional points in your post which I have not yet addressed. I believe that it’s better to settle this point first:

Abortion takes a human life. There are no medical or scientific facts that justify the nearly 50 million abortions which have occurred in the US since Roe v Wade.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
Fantasea,

I don't disagree with your arguements as to when life begins. In fact I whole hearted agree with you. I do believe birth control and abortion belong in the same debate and that they are closely related. What about the so called morning after pill? And some people are using abortion as birth control. So I don't think they should be discussed as if they didn't have anything to do with one another.

I've never been in favor of abortion. But I think it's completely foolish to think we're going to end abortions by outlawing it. Education, I believe, is the key to reducing the number of abortions.

I like your connections of what we thought we knew and what ended up being correct. I believe everyone of your examples were driven by the religious beliefs of the time. Almost everytime the "church" tries to control science it ends up being dead wrong.

Did you know that in 1901 the head of the US Patent Office wanted to start closing it down. He said everything that could be invented had been invented so there was no need to continue patenting new inventions. Sounds pretty nutty today, doesn't it?
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
mixedmedia said:
One of the real problems I have with the Christian right these days and their take on social policy is that they seem to believe that if they simply make a bunch of rules that people must follow they are going to cure the societal ills that plague them so.


To me, abortion is not a religious issue and should never be argued on the basis of religion.

Irrespective of how it may be viewed by various religious organizations; some pro, some con; I see abortion as strictly a secular matter in which one person has been given arbitrary power of life or death over another. For the simple offense of showing up in the womb at the wrong time, the child may receive capital punishment.

Now, what could be plainer than that?

If there is a fault with my logic, someone out there will point it out to me.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
I still think it's selfish and greedy to say that one life is worth more than another that has never even had a chance. To me the logic here is reverse.

I agree wholeheatedly. Every instance is as unique as the life inside that womb.

There is no nothing convenient here at all. It saddens me to think that anyone would think (whatever the circumstances) that a life is worthless. What would you think if you moved to a new area and someone walked up to you, your brother, your Aunt and put a knife to thier throat? The person saying, "You are in my way, now I have to walk around you. Feel sorry for me even though I invited you to our new area. This is my house, my street, my sidewalk - On second thought, I don't think you are worth a damn thing because I do not know you." Then slit your brothers or Aunts throat. Then they get away with it because it is law that new folks in the area are allowed to be murdered due to the new folks being in the way.

The scenerio is not much different than abortion in my opinion.
So am I correct in assuming, following this logic, that if abortion were illegal today, that women who would procure an abortion illegally would deserve the same penalty as someone who cut someone's throat in cold blood? And, perhaps, the doctors or others who perform them, as well?
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
6,282
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So am I correct in assuming, following this logic, that if abortion were illegal today, that women who would procure an abortion illegally would deserve the same penalty as someone who cut someone's throat in cold blood? And, perhaps, the doctors or others who perform them, as well?
In my opinion:
Yes. Exactly. Correctamundo.

For the record, I do not adovate violence on anyone. I am not a crazy wacko that would blow up any buildings. Crazy right wing wacko - maybe. ;)

I can write my congressman, get involved, and pray that folks see the light.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
I still think it's selfish and greedy to say that one life is worth more than another that has never even had a chance. To me the logic here is reverse.

I agree wholeheatedly. Every instance is as unique as the life inside that womb.

There is no nothing convenient here at all. It saddens me to think that anyone would think (whatever the circumstances) that a life is worthless. What would you think if you moved to a new area and someone walked up to you, your brother, your Aunt and put a knife to thier throat? The person saying, "You are in my way, now I have to walk around you. Feel sorry for me even though I invited you to our new area. This is my house, my street, my sidewalk - On second thought, I don't think you are worth a damn thing because I do not know you." Then slit your brothers or Aunts throat. Then they get away with it because it is law that new folks in the area are allowed to be murdered due to the new folks being in the way.

The scenerio is not much different than abortion in my opinion.
And I also want to say that convenience is not exactly the appropriate term for why women get abortions. Again, I think it is trying to simplify what is a compelling and relevant issue concerning the welfare of women.
And I never said that anyone's life was worthless. I just think that if you want to reach the place that we all here seem to want to be, a place where the need for abortions is gone or greatly diminished, we need to concentrate our efforts on informing & simplifying the lives of those conscious, air-breathing women who ultimately are the only ones who can do anything about it. And I see no other way than comprehensive sex & reproductive education and free and easy access to birth control to all.
 

bryanf

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
80
Reaction score
1
Location
The great battleground state of Ohio
mixedmedia said:
So am I correct in assuming, following this logic, that if abortion were illegal today, that women who would procure an abortion illegally would deserve the same penalty as someone who cut someone's throat in cold blood? And, perhaps, the doctors or others who perform them, as well?
Why not? If it's murder, shouldn't it be punished as such?
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
In my opinion:
Yes. Exactly. Correctamundo.

For the record, I do not adovate violence on anyone. I am not a crazy wacko that would blow up any buildings. Crazy right wing wacko - maybe. ;)

I can write my congressman, get involved, and pray that folks see the light.
Wow. I am stunned. Do you support the death penalty, vauge?
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
bryanf said:
Why not? If it's murder, shouldn't it be punished as such?

This is really disturbing stuff. I am going to assume that at least some of you believe in the death penalty. How can you hold such contradictory attitudes about life? If you believe so strongly that God should be the sole dealer of life and death what makes it alright for the state, or yourselves through your opinons, to play God?

I realize I am going off into another area here. I'll stop if you say so.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
6,282
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
mixedmedia said:
Wow. I am stunned. Do you support the death penalty, vauge?
Yes I do believe in the death penalty. Only judged by thier piers.

To me this is a different topic, and we can indeed go there.
The death penalty is for those whom commit violent and dispicable crimes.

The unborn child has yet to experience life and make those descisions.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
Yes I do believe in the death penalty. Only judged by thier piers.

To me this is a different topic, and we can indeed go there.
The death penalty is for those whom commit violent and dispicable crimes.

The unborn child has yet to experience life and make those descisions.
Okay, here is my own hypothetical situation:
Suppose a woman, already struggling to raise, say, 4 or 5 children, who perhaps has left her husband because of domestic violence or maybe even was left alone from the death of her spouse, discovers a month or so later that she is pregnant. Already saddled with the prospect of having to work multiple jobs to give her family the financial support it needs, she comes to the harrowing decision that to abort this child is her only option. She knows that if she becomes incapacitated in the later months of her pregnancy, or if she historically has had trouble with her former pregnancies, that at some point she will be incapable of working and providing her present children with the care they need. But abortions are illegal. She has a sympathetic friend who knows a doctor who will perform an abortion and she goes to this doctor, receives the abortion, but is caught.

Now are you telling me that you could live with this woman being put to death? Her children left motherless and subject to state care because she was faced with a heartbreaking decision and made the choice that she felt was right for her and her family? Are you saying that she deserves the same fate as the Kansas woman all over our news right now who, with complete lack of conscience, killed that pregnant woman in Missouri?

This situation may not be typical in abortion clinics today, but if abortion is outlawed these will be the types of women who will desperately break the law in order to receive them. Are you prepared to deal with that bitter reality?

What would Jesus do, man?
 

CSA_TX

Active member
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
254
Reaction score
14
Location
TEXAS
Jesus would advocate adoption. There are other options to killing a helpless child. Just think of the joy that can be brought into a couples life who can not conceive on there own. The waiting list for newborns at adoption agencys is huge.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
6,282
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Now are you telling me that you could live with this woman being put to death? Her children left motherless and subject to state care because she was faced with a heartbreaking decision and made the choice that she felt was right for her and her family? Are you saying that she deserves the same fate as the Kansas woman all over our news right now who, with complete lack of conscience, killed that pregnant woman in Missouri?
I am not on the jury for the Kansas issue, but I hope she gets life. If they give her death, I will still sleep well. I am sure that the ladies that are in prison can't wait to give her an 'attitude adjustment' if the jury convicts her.

Back to the hypothetical:
1. She knew if she got pregnate there would be issues with the pregnacy. Why should I feel sorry for her? I feel more sorry for the unborn kid and her other kids for having a dumbass for a mom.
2. We have a welfare system. The state could raise those kids well. Adoption system has quite a positive standard now. It's getting better everyday.
3. Heartbreaking descision? She is willing to choose her OWN life over others. I think that is selfish greed pure and simple.
4. If the mother is only concerned with "quality of life" rather than life itself, again she is the one that is not seeing the big picture.
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
I am not on the jury for the Kansas issue, but I hope she gets life. If they give her death, I will still sleep well. I am sure that the ladies that are in prison can't wait to give her an 'attitude adjustment' if the jury convicts her.

Back to the hypothetical:
1. She knew if she got pregnate there would be issues with the pregnacy. Why should I feel sorry for her? I feel more sorry for the unborn kid and her other kids for having a dumbass for a mom.
2. We have a welfare system. The state could raise those kids well. Adoption system has quite a positive standard now. It's getting better everyday.
3. Heartbreaking descision? She is willing to choose her OWN life over others. I think that is selfish greed pure and simple.
4. If the mother is only concerned with "quality of life" rather than life itself, again she is the one that is not seeing the big picture.
I am going to let go of this issue now, 'cause I believe it to be an intractably dead-end debate. But I find your lack of compassion typical of the reactionary & vengeful spirit that is currently riding high in our country. I think you guys have a lot of nerve appointing yourselves the caretakers of morality in America.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
6,282
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I am going to let go of this issue now, 'cause I believe it to be an intractably dead-end debate. But I find your lack of compassion typical of the reactionary & vengeful spirit that is currently riding high in our country. I think you guys have a lot of nerve appointing yourselves the caretakers of morality in America.
I am concerened that you think that I am a vengeful spirit; though you may be right. I tend to think that not allowing people that have not had a chance to smell the flowers - debate on a forum - or drink that fine champaign is greedy.

Who is to say what is right? Is greed really wrong? If evolution were true, would that not be a positive action for the survival of the fittest?
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
mixedmedia said:
Again, I think this is a gross over-simplification.

And the way you and vauge talk about it, it sounds like you suspect a grand conspiracy among heathen women to kill babies. The fact is there ARE 50,000,000 stories to go along with these abortions and each one is distinct. I understand the need to simplify, it makes it a whole lot easier to see a light at the end of tunnel, but truth is, the problem of abortion in our society is as refracted and complex as the 50,000,000 stories that make up its history in America. The abortion problem can't be dithered away as the acts of a bunch of ungodly, greedy, selfish women...as convenient as that might be to your cause.
My cause? Have you a crystal ball that reveals to you my cause?

The abortion issue is not so complicated as some would have us believe. In fact, it's very simple. It takes only two honest, informed, secular answers to two brief questions to lay out the entire issue.

1. Just what is it that resides within the womb?

2. What is the result of an abortion procedure?

To expand a bit further, If it is acceptable to abort a child in the third, sixth, or ninth month, why is it not acceptable to abort a child in the tenth, eleventh, or thirteenth month?
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
vauge said:
I am concerened that you think that I am a vengeful spirit; though you may be right. I tend to think that not allowing people that have not had a chance to smell the flowers - debate on a forum - or drink that fine champaign is greedy.

Who is to say what is right? Is greed really wrong? If evolution were true, would that not be a positive action for the survival of the fittest?
Originally Posted by vauge:
I am not on the jury for the Kansas issue, but I hope she gets life. If they give her death, I will still sleep well. I am sure that the ladies that are in prison can't wait to give her an 'attitude adjustment' if the jury convicts her.
Back to the hypothetical:
1. She knew if she got pregnate there would be issues with the pregnacy. Why should I feel sorry for her? I feel more sorry for the unborn kid and her other kids for having a dumbass for a mom.
2. We have a welfare system. The state could raise those kids well. Read up on the foster care system, vauge. Start with Florida. Adoption system has quite a positive standard now. It's getting better everyday. This is a shockingly insensitive attitude towards the children in my scenario.
3. Heartbreaking descision? She is willing to choose her OWN life over others. I think that is selfish greed pure and simple.
4. If the mother is only concerned with "quality of life" rather than life itself, again she is the one that is not seeing the big picture.


I simply don't think it reflects well on people of spirit to speak against others in a tone of "they are stupid and get what they deserve" when it comes to matters of life and death. Didn't Jesus speak of reconciliation and compassion? Didn't he say that those who are without sin should cast the first stone? What is the difference between your casual indifference to the fate of the mother in my scenario and her, as you purport, selfishness and greed for choosing an abortion? And if you're going to bring up the "having a chance to breath and whistle" explanation again, then give me a passage from the bible where it says that the unborn should take precedence over the living.

Hanging onto your need to take the depth from the issue of abortion and make into a simple matter of selfishness and greed...is selfish and greedy. It denotes a lack of real, in-depth understanding of the issue that I think needs to be tackled if you're going to profess a passion for one side or the other.

American Christians (at least the ones foaming at the mouth for social influence (ie, power) at this time) are babes-in-the-woods when it comes to realizing true spiritual depth, capacity for unconditional love and the true nature of the human condition. And just for the record, I don't think it's necessarily all their fault. We have been allowed to become (mentally) fat and lazy due to our "good fortune." We have lost our curiosity about life and continually fall back on pre-formed opinions and devote our attention, better tuned to developing wisdom and compassion, to fluff and meaningless material things. Not a good basis for cultivating a higher state of being. And I do include myself in this phenomenon, but I am trying to break free.

And one last thing, if Christianity is going to be an institutionalized part of American governance and society, I believe its leaders should be put up to the popular vote. That okay with you guys?
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
I'm gonna take a break 'til after Christmas. I hope you all have a wonderful holiday weekend. And do lots of hugging and kissing. We all need it.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
6,282
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
mixedmedia said:
I simply don't think it reflects well on people of spirit to speak against others in a tone of "they are stupid and get what they deserve" when it comes to matters of life and death.
I do not remember saying that, but it might be the Dr Pepper that is running through my viens. I did say that she was indeed a "dumbass mom" and I stand by it. She should get what the JURY gives her - my opinion be damned. The prison system would indeed take care of that lady IF she is convicted.

You took two completly different subjects and fused them.

Didn't Jesus speak of reconciliation and compassion? Didn't he say that those who are without sin should cast the first stone? What is the difference between your casual indifference to the fate of the mother in my scenario and her, as you purport, selfishness and greed for choosing an abortion? And if you're going to bring up the "having a chance to breath and whistle" explanation again, then give me a passage from the bible where it says that the unborn should take precedence over the living.
I said I was Christian, never said I actually attend church. But for the sake of argument; Jesus lept in his womb, Job talked about himself as a child being in the womb. The bible refers as people LIVING in the womb.

The difference here is that you are argueing that unborn children are not living. I do have a question - is an amoeba alive?

Hanging onto your need to take the depth from the issue of abortion and make into a simple matter of selfishness and greed...is selfish and greedy. It denotes a lack of real, in-depth understanding of the issue that I think needs to be tackled if you're going to profess a passion for one side or the other.
Again, you might be right - but this is how I see it. The unborn are LIVING in the womb and growing. Killing for the sake of killing because they do not want that growing child - is indeed greedy. In my opinion.

American Christians (at least the ones foaming at the mouth for social influence (ie, power) at this time) are babes-in-the-woods when it comes to realizing true spiritual depth, capacity for unconditional love and the true nature of the human condition.
Unconditional love would be to love that living human being before it is birthed.

I'm gonna take a break 'til after Christmas. I hope you all have a wonderful holiday weekend. And do lots of hugging and kissing. We all need it.
Thank you. You too have an excellent Christmas. :)
 

mixedmedia

iniquitably employed
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
6,823
Reaction score
373
Location
Naples, FL
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?actio...de=current_opinion&article=CO_041215_hoeksema

I just read this and had to pass it on this evening. It hit me hard considering how I was feeling - and sharing! - this morning. And this guy says what I feel so much more eloquently.

I highly recommend subscribing to the Sojourners email newsletter to anyone, Christian or not - I, as I have said before, am not - but I am a true blue believer in universal truths. Each weekly newsletter speaks to at least a few of those truths very clearly and in an inspiring way.

Take care, ya'll....they're saying it may snow here for Christmas. I hope so!
 

Winter Ivy

New member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
vauge said:
I said I was Christian, never said I actually attend church. But for the sake of argument; Jesus lept in his womb, Job talked about himself as a child being in the womb. The bible refers as people LIVING in the womb.
The Bible also refers to people "living" after death: but that doesn't give the dead significant rights. (And the ones that they ostensibly have courts uphold because of the effect on their living relatives, not through their rights per se.)

The difference here is that you are argueing that unborn children are not living. I do have a question - is an amoeba alive?
If you think it's a question of "alive," then I would hope you're a strict vegan.

Again, you might be right - but this is how I see it. The unborn are LIVING in the womb and growing. Killing for the sake of killing because they do not want that growing child - is indeed greedy. In my opinion.
You're allowed to be greedy with your body. The courts have upheld people's rights to refuse blood transfusions even when they caused the accidents creating the blood spill; in fact, they have even upheld the right of a man who, minutes before a bone marrow donation, decided to withhold his marrow and watch his cousin die from the immunosuppressive radiation and drugs needed to create the transplant. If you're not required to donate your body for someone you know, then why should you be required to donate it for an extended period of time to someone you don't know and who has never had the consciousness that makes a human a person?

Also, keep in mind that it's not just a question of the end product -- in many respects, women find the pregnancy more problematic than the actual z/e/f.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
I posted the following a little while back. I'm surprised that it hasn't prompted a response, or two.

The abortion issue is not so complicated as some would have us believe. In fact, it's very simple. It takes only two honest, informed, secular answers to two brief questions to lay out the entire issue.

1. Just what is it that resides within the womb?

2. What is the result of an abortion procedure?

To expand a bit further, If it is acceptable to abort a child in the third, sixth, or ninth month [after conception], why is it not acceptable to abort a child in the tenth, eleventh, or thirteenth month [after conception]?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom