• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

Notes From The Didache On The Early Christian View Of Abortion

It's not an argument, it's "God said so." That's faith, not an argument. Do you need a dictionary definition because I dont want to keep having to correct you.

And I am a practicing Christian and do have faith. I know that God also values the unborn but values women, all born people, more.

And the scriptures supporting that have been posted before.

"because I dont want to keep having to correct you."

Oh, so that's what you think you're doing.
 
"because I dont want to keep having to correct you."

Oh, so that's what you think you're doing.

On the definition of what an argument is? Yes. Do you need further assistance with that?
 
But why it's just a stupid parasite you shouldn't be allowed to live?
Most people though not all people, think that a woman's body makes an embryo into a fetus and then gives birth. They care about how far the process of making has gone.
So it's 3 months and one day it starts being a stupid parasite. Why didn't burst out of the body and start living on its own?\
If implanted embryos separate from the woman, they die. Induced abortion isn't necessary for this. It's automatic, because embryos are living as part of the woman.
In a very inconsistent way with other things you said.
No, it's not. I have my view, these surveyed people have theirs.
A returning Roe v Wade was not a presidential order
???
No it's absolutely not a Democratic Republic of any sort. The supreme law is strictly the Constitution not the majority. It never was you don't know what a Democratic Republic is if you think that this country is one.

Yes and they must submit to the supreme law of the Constitution. That's why democratically electing people that must submit to the supreme law means that this country is not in any shape or form a Democratic Republic

Take for instance same-sex marriage if it was a Democratic Republic we still wouldn't be allowed to have that because it was a court ruling based on a constitution not popular vote. The supreme Court raised its middle finger to the majority because they don't matter it's not a Democratic Republic of any sort and went ahead and made the ruling and the states must obey.

That's why we're not a Democratic Republic.
I said we are a constitutional democratic republic. Democratic modifies republic, but constitutional modifies democratic republic. Hence, you do agree, though you want to quarrel.
So where is the majority rule in that nowhere at all that's what I thought so you're mistaken when you say anything but a constitutional republic
I said that "constitutional" modifies democratic republic. Perhaps you don't understand about modifiers. Modifiers are not inferior to nouns. For example, true love and false love both appear to be love, but only true love is. Modifiers are very, very important.
But yet you want to pretend that someone who's elected has authority to do this in the sense of a Democratic Republic

I don't think it's that. I think this is what people tell themselves.
Not at all. Under the Constitution, everybody has to follow that Constitution, including the President, FYI. All the states also have to follow it. It defines the whole. But if there is no democratic element, it's not the US.
 
I don't care. If there is no issue of danger to either the mother or the human life in the womb then it's immoral.
There is always danger to the woman. You just think that medical science should be the one to decide whether or not there is danger.

Your problem is that medical science acknowledges that women can die or be permanently disabled in childbirth or from pregnancy related causes for up to a year afterward even in some cases where medical sciences is unable to foresee the complications that cause this. For that reason, they won't take all responsibility for it.

Who is going to? If you make an anti-abortion law and it denies a pregnant woman abortion and she then dies or is permanently disabled in or after childbirth, who is guilty of killing her or disabling her?

You can't blame nature, because, in a state of nature, she could have gone and found someone to provide an abortion and she'd still be alive and able.

I say, anyone who makes an anti-abortion law or votes for those that do deserves to be prosecuted for criminal negligence or criminally negligent homicide. Let's put them in prison and bankrupt their families and see how they like it. Some people actually need to have skin in the game to understand what morality is.
 
Human life begins at conception. A 30 year old woman's life is no more valuable than that of a baby in the womb.
Human life began with the first humans and, ever since, it's continued. No zygote that does not develop into a trophoblast or blastocyst or implant into a woman's body can continue living past the fixed 8-10 day mortal life it has, unless it is grown in a petri dish, and even then, theoretically, you can only double that mortal life.

Only an implanted embryo can develop into a baby, which is born. And even then, it's chances are not 100%,

So a case could be made that individual human life can only begin by not being individual at all.
 
The value of a human life. Do you not think human life has value?
There is a difference between thinking a human life has value and human life has value. Human life does have value, but individual human lives are different. If a rapist is in the process of raping a woman and she or a third party can only stop the rape by killing him, and does so, that rapist's human life has been evaluated as less important than the woman's right not to be raped. That's my view. I do not think the rapist's life had any value while he was threatening to rape or actually raping the woman.
 
Human life began with the first humans and, ever since, it's continued. No zygote that does not develop into a trophoblast or blastocyst or implant into a woman's body can continue living past the fixed 8-10 day mortal life it has, unless it is grown in a petri dish, and even then, theoretically, you can only double that mortal life.

Only an implanted embryo can develop into a baby, which is born. And even then, it's chances are not 100%,

So a case could be made that individual human life can only begin by not being individual at all.

Oh, I disagree. At the instant of conception a unique individual human life is created.
 
Oh, I disagree. At the instant of conception a unique individual human life is created.

That is scientifically correct, a biological fact. At fertilization/implantation.

Why does it matter if we're discussing value or even life and death? Science is objective and recognizes no value for any species and doesnt "care" who kills who or why. Right?
 
That is scientifically correct, a biological fact. At fertilization/implantation.

Why does it matter if we're discussing value or even life and death? Science is objective and recognizes no value for any species and doesnt "care" who kills who or why. Right?

At a fundamental level that's correct. I like to think we've risen above fundamental levels
 
Because we're not just another animal species. We're created in the image of God and to rise above our most basic animal instincts is what we are called by God to do.

Third time:
Why should women that dont agree with your religion have to conform to your belief? Do you think they should be forced to by law?

God enforces His Laws, not you, not man. That's usurping His Authority. That's a sin. God gave us all free will to follow Him or not. It's a denial of His Will to try and force His Law on others when He has chosen not to. Right? So morally, law or not, women should not be denied abortions...it's not up to man, it's up to God. Right? If not, explain?
 
Human life is of infinite value, we are created in the image of God. Now answer my question, do you support the death penalty for murder?
There is no evidence that an individual embryo was necessarily created by God or in God's image. There is evidence that a rapist in the act is by definition committing a crime and is also alive, but there is no evidence that he is at that moment created by God or in God's image.

The best answer to the death penalty is this one from the TV series "Bones." When confronted by a defense attorney who didn't believe in the death penalty and assumed Bones didn't, either, Bones said, "I believe in the death penalty. Those men in Rwanda who beheaded children at their desks do not belong in this world." But she said she also believed it was necessary to be sure - presumably completely sure - that the person convicted of the crime had actually done it.

I'm a little more skeptical than that, of course. Because it is always possible for a jury of peers to make a mistake in a conviction, even one who may believe in the death penalty may believe that applying it is a different matter because of human imperfection.

But when a woman kills a rapist raping her, or a person kills a kidnapper kidnapping him or her, because it's the only way to stop the rape or kidnapping, I don't have a problem with it. The implication is that the woman's right and the person's right to liberty can be more sacred than the human life of the human committing a heinous crime by violating it.
 
Because we're not just another animal species.
yes we are. Were homo sapiens, and membets of the abimal kingdom.
We're created in the image of God and to rise above our most basic animal instincts is what we are called by God to do.
Still waiting for you to prove that. Until you do, it's nothing more than dogmatic nonsense.
 
Third time:
Why should women that dont agree with your religion have to conform to your belief? Do you think they should be forced to by law?

God enforces His Laws, not you, not man. That's usurping His Authority. That's a sin. God gave us all free will to follow Him or not. It's a denial of His Will to try and force His Law on others when He has chosen not to. Right? So morally, law or not, women should not be denied abortions...it's not up to man, it's up to God. Right? If not, explain?

All the times I've posted about abortions I've never once said anyone has to conform to my beliefs. Nor have I advocated forcing God's law on anyone.
 
There is no evidence that an individual embryo was necessarily created by God or in God's image. There is evidence that a rapist in the act is by definition committing a crime and is also alive, but there is no evidence that he is at that moment created by God or in God's image.

The best answer to the death penalty is this one from the TV series "Bones." When confronted by a defense attorney who didn't believe in the death penalty and assumed Bones didn't, either, Bones said, "I believe in the death penalty. Those men in Rwanda who beheaded children at their desks do not belong in this world." But she said she also believed it was necessary to be sure - presumably completely sure - that the person convicted of the crime had actually done it.

I'm a little more skeptical than that, of course. Because it is always possible for a jury of peers to make a mistake in a conviction, even one who may believe in the death penalty may believe that applying it is a different matter because of human imperfection.

But when a woman kills a rapist raping her, or a person kills a kidnapper kidnapping him or her, because it's the only way to stop the rape or kidnapping, I don't have a problem with it. The implication is that the woman's right and the person's right to liberty can be more sacred than the human life of the human committing a heinous crime by violating it.

No one committing the crimes of rape or kidnapping is an innocent person, a baby in the womb is. That's why I've used innocent as a description of human life in the womb but never would I use innocent to describe rapists or kidnappers
 
Last edited:
No one committing the crimes of rape or kidnapping is an innocent person, a baby in the womb is.
Innocent of what? You have yet to answer that question too. And there is no "baby" until birth.
 
yes we are. Were homo sapiens, and membets of the abimal kingdom.

Still waiting for you to prove that. Until you do, it's nothing more than dogmatic nonsense.

No, I don't think I'm going to try proving anything to you but I will state my beliefs. I just don't value your opinion that much.
 
Nope, didn't say that at all.


Because it's a deliberate killing of an innocent human life.
How is that any morally different than forcing a family into poverty deep enough to make them homeless. Are you not aware what homelessness does to a child? Are you not aware what happens to most children that are denied the security and stability of a home.
Human life is of infinite value, we are created in the image of God.
So are the already born children and other family members. Their lives have been sacrificed on your alter of forced birth of every conception. Their value as the image of God has been destroyed by your religious belief that only an embryo is the image of God.
Now answer my question, do you support the death penalty for murder?
I do not support a death penalty for anything. I especially do not support your death penalty for entire families.
 
All the times I've posted about abortions I've never once said anyone has to conform to my beliefs. Nor have I advocated forcing God's law on anyone.
So you are just expressing your religious beliefs and following these beliefs is simply a matter of choice. No legal force is involved. Nobody is required against their wishes to give birth and force their family into deep instability, insecurity, unsafe environment and danger of failure? Good! I can support your right to your own religious beliefs. However, the minute you contribute one penny, one minute of support to an anti-abortion organization you have lost my support because every every one of those organizations is dedicated to denying women the right to make decisions about her family and her reproductive life. Every one of them is paying lobbyists to get laws passed that turn control of women's reproductive lives over to the state. And that is using the government to install your religious beliefs as public policy.
 
How is that any morally different than forcing a family into poverty deep enough to make them homeless. Are you not aware what homelessness does to a child? Are you not aware what happens to most children that are denied the security and stability of a home.

So are the already born children and other family members. Their lives have been sacrificed on your alter of forced birth of every conception. Their value as the image of God has been destroyed by your religious belief that only an embryo is the image of God.

I do not support a death penalty for anything. I especially do not support your death penalty for entire families.

I haven't said a word about forcing anyone into anything. People voluntarily make immoral decisions all the time.
 
So you are just expressing your religious beliefs and following these beliefs is simply a matter of choice. No legal force is involved. Nobody is required against their wishes to give birth and force their family into deep instability, insecurity, unsafe environment and danger of failure? Good! I can support your right to your own religious beliefs. However, the minute you contribute one penny, one minute of support to an anti-abortion organization you have lost my support because every every one of those organizations is dedicated to denying women the right to make decisions about her family and her reproductive life. Every one of them is paying lobbyists to get laws passed that turn control of women's reproductive lives over to the state. And that is using the government to install your religious beliefs as public policy.

That's right.
 
All the times I've posted about abortions I've never once said anyone has to conform to my beliefs. Nor have I advocated forcing God's law on anyone.

And that's why I asked you if you did. Right?

So then your answer would be, "No, women that dont agree with my religion should not have to conform to my belief". Is this accurate? If not, please explain.

And you and any women that believe as you do get to practice your religious beliefs concerning abortion without any interference, correct? So what's the problem?
 
Back
Top Bottom