13 Jan 2023, 11:03 am
magz wrote:
Mikah wrote:
magz wrote:
Mosquitos are innocent in the purest form of innocence 
Please, continue this line of argument. I am curious where it leads.I simply reject your claim that not having any morality is the purest form of innocence. Mosquitos are a classical counter-example.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innocence
I was using it in sense b): freedom from guilt or sin through being unacquainted with evil. Which is purer than being innocent of a particular crime.
If not innocence what is it? If it is innocence what is the purer form?
13 Jan 2023, 12:05 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
13 Jan 2023, 1:09 pm
MissMary227 wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
MissMary227 wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
@MissMary227:
I happen to believe that there are justifications for having abortions that are consistent with a Christian worldview. Causing the death of another person while acting in a necessary way to preserve your own life is not a sin.
I happen to believe that there are justifications for having abortions that are consistent with a Christian worldview. Causing the death of another person while acting in a necessary way to preserve your own life is not a sin.
Hi, AngelRho. I like your username. What does it mean?
Self-defense, yes. We agree. But killing your baby is not self-defense.
If you are saying, as the Jews believe, that to kill the fetus to save the mother is biblically sound, then I disagree with that, and with the Jews who think that is okay. I have looked it up and I don't interpret any verses that way.
Quote:
The Bible makes no distinctions between threats that are intentional and threats that are unintentional. There's no difference between someone operating heavy machinery not looking where he's going and an armed robber.
I see where you are going with this. You are saying that a mother has just as much right to defend her body from a foreign enemy as an internal enemy, as if the baby is attacking her unintentionally, but causing her harm nonetheless.
The bible does say one has the right to kill to protect himself.
But you cannot equate a conceived baby in utero to a malicious attacker, or even a non-malicious attacker.
The baby is not attacking her, it is simply living and growing. An enemy attacker is meaning to do you harm, or take your stuff.You all act as if pregnancy is this horrible event that is so bad for you and hurts your body. It is not! Pregnancy is beautiful and women are made to endure it well. Sure, they might complaint about it but pregnancy and labor and childrearing is part of women's curse. Just as man's curse it to work.
Quote:
And that principle extends to the unborn. The conditions are strictly that abortion is ONLY a medical, life-saving procedure, a last resort, and a decision that the woman is allowed to freely make (e.g. she can freely choose under no obligation to sacrifice her own life to save her baby). Given the state of medicine and medical technology, this is less and less the case.
When would a woman need to sacrifice her unborn baby to save herself? Give me some scenarios. Because I am a midwife and I can't think of any viable ones that are not extremely far-fetched.
Quote:
Where I've noticed people on WP seem to struggle is with objective objections to abortion. Many of us get hung up on the idea that the father of the child might have an interest in the baby being born. Also, the state has an interest in the right of babies to be born. The interest of all of individuals is in self-preservation and the right to live. We shouldn't fear being murdered. And in a free society, we all already have the freedom to do as we please with our own bodies. It's in telling others what they can/can't do where it becomes a problem.
I say let women kill their babies if they must. It is a sin, but I cannot control what a woman does in her own home or life.
Quote:
This is normally applied to the relationships between women's rights and patriarchy. But it also applies to the relationship between women's interests and the interests of the unborn.
If women are so concerned the patriarchy and we pro-lifers are going to get all up in her uterus, then she should know I'd like her to keep her uterus to herself. She is the one who does not want to keep her uterus to herself. She is the one who wants to forego privacy and hire a trained mercenary to assassinate her baby by inserting sharp instruments into her womb. Because [/b]she[/b] knows by herself she is truly left alone with her uterus and she hates that because she hates what her uterus produces. So it is a bald-faced lie that women and feminists tell themselves--and other gullible bystanders--that they don't want people to come between her and her vagina or reproductive 'care' or whatever the narrative is. She is too weak to carry out her threats of murder by herself and she knows it!
The whole abortion argument and narrative assumes the hiring of a third-party trained assassin!! ! ! ! Eliminate the assassin and give women the right to do whatever THEY want with THEIR bodies. And they will mostly continue the pregnancy (as they always have historically) and give the babies up for adoption or find another solution. Yes, they 'give up' a year of their life for another human being, but that is not a big deal in the scheme of life.
Just wanted to point out that I found it very peculiar for a user account claiming to be female, with a female gendered screen name, failed to include themselves even once when referencing females in their long winded religious fanaticism inspired misogynistic rant about reproductive rights.
And the one reference to the bible saying people have a right to kill to protect themselves doesn't say themselves, it says himself.
Makes me wonder if I know which young man is behind these posts.
Hi, Goldie
Does one usually argue a heated topic in the first person?
And Pikachu is non-binary, didn't you know?
One doesn't usually forget that they're supposed to belong to the group they're arguing for when referencing them a couple dozen times. Someone would say "us," or "we," or "our," etc etc when they belong to the group they're referencing.. not completely exclude themselves from the gender they claim to be arguing about if they were in fact a member of that gendered group.
Highly suspicious, indeed.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
13 Jan 2023, 1:12 pm
Mikah wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
Personal private choice between a patient and their Doctor. None of the government's, fox news', or religions' business.
Good old Roe vs Wade logic. I once described the stupidity of that ruling by saying it was akin to ruling that child and/or spousal murder is a personal private matter for families and no one else's business and therefore protected under the constitutional right to privacy. Now that is has been repealed I suppose I won't have many more chances.
Apples to oranges.
You're free to believe that fertilized eggs are equivalent to fully formed humans all you want, but you can't make everyone else believe that, nor whatever your religious beliefs may be etc. You're free to choose not to abort your own pregnancies, but others should be free to make that choice for them based on whatever criteria they decide are important to them - whether health, finances, age, capabilities of being parents, genetic/inherited disorders, substance abuse, who the father is/circumstances of impregnation etc etc etc everyone's reasons are their own to contemplate and decide on.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.
13 Jan 2023, 1:13 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
13 Jan 2023, 1:30 pm
Misslizard wrote:
People seem to care more about the unborn than the living.
If anti-abortion believers truly cared about children there would be none left in foster care or group homes waiting for adoption.
It’s easy to say you care about the life of a fetus, it requires no action.Just words.
Taking in an unwanted child would require effort and responsibility.
I get that not everyone has the means to adopt, but lots of others do.
A former foster kids perspective below.
https://www.upworthy.com/amp/a-woman-wh ... 2638661116
If anti-abortion believers truly cared about children there would be none left in foster care or group homes waiting for adoption.
It’s easy to say you care about the life of a fetus, it requires no action.Just words.
Taking in an unwanted child would require effort and responsibility.
I get that not everyone has the means to adopt, but lots of others do.
A former foster kids perspective below.
https://www.upworthy.com/amp/a-woman-wh ... 2638661116
Or kids going hungry, without clothes/shoes, without medicine, without sports & art in their lives and other opportunities.
But the extent that pro-life people care about life is simply arguing with people who don't subscribe to their particular beliefs about abortion and that's it. They don't give a flying F about the living, only about controlling potential mothers' choices, bodies, and lives.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.
13 Jan 2023, 2:00 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
13 Jan 2023, 2:07 pm
IsabellaLinton wrote:
Anyone ever heard of the separation of church and state, or the freedom of religion?
Or science, or free will?
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.13 Jan 2023, 3:18 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
13 Jan 2023, 3:31 pm
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,911
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
13 Jan 2023, 3:47 pm
13 Jan 2023, 3:56 pm
13 Jan 2023, 3:57 pm
13 Jan 2023, 4:07 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
13 Jan 2023, 4:15 pm
r00tb33r wrote:
Worst thing that can happen to a child is being unwanted.
I dunno about that.. some pretty horrific things have happened to children. Far worse things than being unwanted. But yes, being unwanted isn't a good thing for a child, I agree.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.13 Jan 2023, 4:20 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Harris: No concessions on abortion |
23 Oct 2024, 3:40 pm |
| lawmakers trying to ban abortion pills, because minors. |
24 Oct 2024, 5:56 am |
| Now its official that women are dying from abortion ban. |
19 Sep 2024, 4:44 pm |
