R
Robertsxxx
Guest
So are you going to answer the questions or not?
By position* I was refering to the stance of pro-life, not the rationale or justification behind it.
- Status
By position* I was refering to the stance of pro-life, not the rationale or justification behind it.
R
Robertsxxx
Guest
PS:
The problem with the poster is they really came with the topic to the wrong forums, & should have tried their luck at Buddhism related places that have better knowledge of the cycles of life & how that process works & how the action of abortion is evaluation & “gets back at you”.
That made absolutely no sense. What did you actually mean to point out by this?
The problem with the poster is they really came with the topic to the wrong forums, & should have tried their luck at Buddhism related places that have better knowledge of the cycles of life & how that process works & how the action of abortion is evaluation & “gets back at you”.
A
Awful_Things
Guest
The OP is not pro-life. Read his post again. That will answer your second objection, too.
R
Robertsxxx
Guest
It didn’t. Now maybe care to answer now?
What I see from the original post is that they do learn toward pro-choice & personal jusgement; however, along with the “choice of abortion” they put the karmic next life reincarnation consequence that are not so… good?
So it’s “think for yourself, but abortion will result in this negative consequence”; so the overall idea “abortion=bad”.
A
Awful_Things
Guest
You know, I think we’re reading it in different ways, but going back, I see the way you are getting your interpretation. In all fairness, it is probably the more proper interpretation given his wording. I’m bringing into this the bias of having read the OP’s posts in different threads, and assuming he meant a very particular thing, which is that, by aborting a fetus, we are saving it from a miserable life of poverty and pain. Most of the responses read it the same way, but I’ll concede that your reading of it is more true to the literal reading. My apologies.
The original poster hasn’t posted to this thread in two days.
No, the original post is not pro-life. Reading through the posts of the original poster, you will find the poster to be very much against life.
Ironic that the OP brought about pro-life arguments, and more telling that the poster seems to have abandoned the thread.
T
TamM
Guest
When I read the OP I interpreted it as meaning we should picture ourselves living the life the child would live if it were born instead of aborted. Just my two cents.
A
Awful_Things
Guest
Absolutely. Me, too, but reading again, I completely see how Robertxxx read it differently and offer my apologies. As with vz71, I’m aware of the OP’s other posts in other threads, which lead me to the conclusion that he meant as you and I understood, but sloppy wording in the original post leaves it a bit ambiguous when taken out of the context of his other posts.
C
captbackfire
Guest
A
Awful_Things
Guest
Christians are generally charitable, but not perfect. Even the best of us get cranky, frustrated, or confused occassionally, but through these threads (including this one) you will often find apologies for such behavior. Though, on that note, as far as what “Christian” means with regard to language and behavior, I’m not sure if it is a cut and dry as to what that means. Even Christ and usccb.org/nab/bible/james/james2.htmPaul demonstrated this. I imagine someone overhearing Paul call a man an “ignoramus” or seeing some bearded guy (Jesus) attacking another man with a whip today would call that Christian, but part of me thinks the term has been a bit feminized over the centuries. Shrug.
My initial read to.
But if we are to do that as a determination, then wouldn’t logic dictate we should be comparing this imagined life to something?
And if we are drawing a comparison, then we must include the life should the abortion take place.
I take the OP in context of the other posts by this individual.
The person clearly favors death. But in attempting to show the logic of the decision, the point is clearly made that life is the best choice.
One need not take anything out of context. Just to the logical conclusion.
All Christians are susceptable to temptation. Else we would be saints.
Responses that are not charitable are not the norm for CA, but do find their way in with alarming regularity.
A couple of things to consider when looking at a response you believe is uncharitable…
- are you really reading it as it was intended? It is not always easy to write clearly the emotion that goes into a response. There may well be sarcasm written in that was not intended, or rudeness written where none was actually intended.
It is a limitation of the medium. - what is the context of the post?
There may well be frustration there that is justified.
Hope this helps.
Welcome to the Forums.
R
Robertsxxx
Guest
So wasn’t putting forth “Did you do this in high school, too? Asking the kid next to you to read the chapter and tell you what it was all about?” with a “subtle” hint of an insult intended to provoke.
+Even though this is a Catholic forum it is not limited to Catholics.
Anyway, back on to the thread:
Hm, that would make sense for what the commotion about him is about; I read it more as “pro-choice (sort of) BUT with consequence of karma biting you in the soft spot later if you actually chose abortion”; but yeah… I guess getting life-lessons from yugioh should have been a red flag & a give away to me as well.
That would still not explain how his/her position strengthened the argument(s) for pro-life, as I think you said.
Yeah, it makes sense what people were pointing out wrong with their position now.
L
LeroyCRHP
Guest
Maybe his religious declaration helps clarifies his position better.
Religion:
godless liberal
I can’t understand the “reincarnated” role either.
Religion:
godless liberal
I can’t understand the “reincarnated” role either.
Cartoons? Cartoons give you a perspective on abortion?
R
Robertsxxx
Guest
PS: to poster asking about my post being unChristian:
- I’m not
- Wouldn’t acting in a Christian way be acting in a way Jesus did? Yet in Matthew 23:17 (I think) Jesus called others fools, which I assume to the other side would be insulting & provoking + Matthew 15:um…21 till about 26 he refered to Pharisees, as I remember as gods. By today’s courtesy standards I wouldn’t really consider it… nice? Even if the other side deserved it.
& your perspective on abortion, as well as many other important issues, comes from a book, which is just another form of medium; so it’s not fair to shame them just for that. Many cartoons can actually have very good lessons, just not this one… That shows kills brain cells I swear.
R
ribozyme
Guest
So what if I do not like “life?” “Life” means plenty of poverty and suffering and I do not see anything inherently good about it.
The remark in my signature is what I want you to translate. I think it was mentioned about 3:20 in that clip (which was subtitled). Anyone want to attempt to translate it (using the subtitles)?
I love the Japanese version; the English dubbed version just kills brain cells.
M
mlchance
Guest
It is a grotesque error of thought to assume that reality conforms to one’s own limited vision of it.
– Mark L. Chance.
K
kage_ar
Guest
That is YOUR perception and as a human being with free will can make decisions based on that - including, to change your life.
What you are suggesting is that another person has the power to say that your life has nothing inherently good and to chop you up in little pieces.
Do you understand the difference???
R
Robertsxxx
Guest
Not everyone’s poor you know + I’m pretty sure you aren’t since you actually have access to the e-net + spend time watching yugioh instead of working your *** (huh?! That’s a cuss word???) of for food & basic securities.
R
ribozyme
Guest
I’ll spend my time listen to Paul Ehrlich talks.
- Status