A New Approach to Pro-Life

[warpspeedpetey]

Oh yes, definitely. I would never murder a child. But fetuses aren’t even sentient.

a fetus is sentient, as evidenced by their reactions to stimuli.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

1. If women have to go ‘underground’ and/or self-abort, it make the process significantly more dangerous, thus creating another incentive for women not to abort: it may kill or seriously injure you.

i figure if someone is injured or killed during the murder of a child. they kind of got what deserved.

 

[Schn]

a fetus is sentient, as evidenced by their reactions to stimuli.

Reaction to stimuli is no indicator of sentience. Plants respond to stimuli. Computers respond to stimuli.

 

[elts1956]

I wonder how the mothers actually feel about aborting a fetus.

I suppose you could go to www.rachelsvinyard.com or www.silentnomore.com and find out. That is if you are truly interested.

 

[Schn]

I suppose you could go to www.rachelsvinyard.com or www.silentnomore.com and find out. That is if you are truly interested.

YADA beat you, and I repeat again that the post was in response to someone saying that women feel good about aborting.

 

[elts1956]

My post was in reply to benedictus2, who stated that correct medical and scientific terminology is used to allow mothers to “feel good about killing them (‘babies’)”. (“They’ (babies) count, because the truth counts: the truth that they are babies, and they are being called anything but, so that their mothers will feel good about killing them.”)

It is lucky, then that the whims of 5 year olds do not run the world. If you asked them what to eat for every meal you may be forced to eat nothing but ice cream for the rest of your life.

It hurts the men and women that can now go to college instead of being stuck at McDonalds bringing up an unwanted child. It hurts the children that never have to go through the twisted adoption system. It hurts the society that is having to deal with overpopulation. Yes.

Apparently you are a floundering Faith Seeker. Focus, focus.

 

[Schn]

Apparently you are a floundering Faith Seeker. Focus, focus.

Have you considered replying properly?

 

[elts1956]

Have you considered replying properly?

I have given it some thought. But sometimes I find myself being direct. Sorry about that.

 

[benedictus2]

There is no diversion, you said “But who says that this debate is about helping any one? This debate is about what is right and wrong.”

Okay this is how this particular train went:
Jermosh: This is why you will always be on the otherside of the fence, you cannot help anyone from that side of the fence.

Ben2: But who says that this debate is about helping any one? This debate is about what is right and wrong.

Jermosh: So its not about the babies then? Is it really only about your conscience?

Ben2: Of course it is about the babies. But our discussion in this thread is not so much about the babies but whether we should or should not protest the legalized murder of these babies.

*Jermosh: *There is no diversion, you said “But who says that this debate is about helping any one? This debate is about what is right and wrong.”

So what exactly is the point of your final reply?

Yes the diversion is the devil telling you that you need to have this staunch and hardened heart that you are forced outside the clinic,

If the picketers were to be allowed inside the clinic they would be IN the clinic. Don’t you get that at all?

They would be IN the clinic talking to these women and these doctors, trying to convince them that they are about to commit murder. As a matter of fact, I think there is nothing they would like more than to go one and one with those inside the clinic.

But can you actually see that happening? Do you really think the clinics will let them in?

much like the pharisees were forced outside the tax collectors and prostitutes.

Hardly. The Pharisees were concerned about legalistic unnecessary rules. I think you need to read a little bit more scripture and understand what Jesus was about before you start applying here something that does not apply at all.

Are you really classifying murder with eating with unwashed hands and other legalistic stuff that Pharisees cared about?

Let me ask you this: Do you think if Jesus was here he would be on the side of those who voted for legalized mass murder of babies? Do you think He would be in the clinic, telling these prospective murderers to “go ahead, I am here supporting you?” Get real my friend.

 

[benedictus2]

I am really at a loss why you cannot see this crystal clear truth.

As a matter of fact you are the one who is not seeing the truth because you keep buying into the devil’s reasoning. They are lies, my dear, lies. Once you start to see them for what they are – a careful manipulation of the truth – then perhaps the blinkers will fall off.

Back to? When has there ever been a culture of life?

Well how about the Christian west prior to 1930.

Back then it was not considered okay to stop God’s hand in pro-creation. A few years later and WvR and wham, all of a sudden it is OKAY TO MURDER YOUR OWN CHILD.

Do you really think that the situation prior to RvW is the same as it is now?

Was it as easy to procure abortion before WvR? Were there as many abortions prior to WvR as there are now?

Did women regard their babies as “a blob of cells” then as they do now?

Or do you believe in the facade of the good ole yesterday living in a life of bliss, you know what they say about bliss dont you.

See here, you always get muddled with your thinking.

The good old days as in “it was not legal to murder your baby” was indeed the good old days. The good old days when few unborn children would actually be killed by those to whom their life and their care was entrusted by God.

The good old days as in everything was blissful , no. You come up with generalizations that don’t apply.

We never ever said it was generally blissful back then. But back then, the law said that what was evil was evil and therefore wrong and therefore unlawful.

Now you have the law saying what is evil is good and therefore lawful. Now only the devil could have crafted something like that. So whoever buys into that buys into the devils own thinking.

That is a very simple concept that I thought was very easy to understand.

Utterly false, they have had abortion techniques and condoms as far back as mankind could write down history

Quite the contrary. Utterly true! As far back as the beginning of Christianity we have always said abortion was wrong.

Some did kill their own babies but people knew it was wrong to do that and they had not avenue for rationalization. It was wrong and the law said so. And while there were abortions then, it was small and regarded as a criminal act (as all murders should be don’t you think?) compared to the mass slaughter we face now.

The thousands of doctors who routinely perform murder on a daily basis were not a fact of life then.

Doctors like Stojan Adasevic who performed 48,000 abortions (sometimes 35 a day) was not a fact of life then.

**The hundreds of dismembered bodies of babies dumped in a dumpster behind a hospital was not a fact of life then. **

All these things became possible only because with its legalization came the notion that it was good.

For goodness sake, wake up to the truth.

 

[benedictus2]

] Heck I just did a study on the Temperance movement in the US and they spoke of this as well, this was over a 100yrs ago.

Heck, this is totally unrelated to what we are discussing.

Well you just did, and how can anyone hear it from a football field away due to the actions of certain “Pro-Life” protesters?

Huh! That does not come within cooee of what I asked you. My question was “Is the condoning of legalized abortion (which judging by your posts seems to be your camp) part of living out God’s word?”

So I am the reason why its still happening? Little me against how many staunch chest pounders? Yeah ok.

Is this a case of comprehension impairment? Where did I say that you are the reason?

Please re-read my post.

I said “your position” not “you. “Your position” that says legalized abortion is okay is what perpetuates this culture of death.

 

[benedictus2]

There is no overturning the Culture of Death, where did this concept ever come from? Only the 2nd coming of Christ will do such a thing.

Ahh, man of little faith. Might as well go dig a hole and bury your head there because we area all doomed.

BTW the Culture of death is the way our culture is currently inclined and you see this in the morality that society exhibit with contraception, abortion and euthanasia.

When those who believe in life, believe passionately enough about life and about God’s will, then we will see change. When those who walk about with blinders firmly in place trying to rationalize away a great evil finally see and follow the truth, then there will be change.

You should perhaps read up on the story of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

 

[benedictus2]

I wonder how the mothers actually feel about aborting a fetus.

As I said before ’ devil-speak. Don’t call them babies. Call tehm foetus or blob of cells, but don’t call them babies.

Helloo, a stage in the development of a human is just that, a stage.

Perhaps we can also rationalize in like manner killing infants but not toddlers? Or children but not teenagers?

BTW, badly put by someone who was a foetus himself at one stage were it not for the mother who actually allowed him to come to full term.

 

[benedictus2]

Gosh, benedictus seems to think they’re actually happy and carefree after abortion instead of having to agonize over the decision for a long period of time.

Wow agonizing over killing my own child, poor me. Then I go to the doctor so that she/he will be torn to pieces. Poor me.

I wonder if you will feel so sympathetic towards a mother who takes her new born child to a doctor so that he can first chop off her arms, then her legs, then the rest of her into bits and pieces and put all the bloody mess in the dumpster. Poor woman.

And all for what? Self-centredness. As Mother Theresa put it so well: to kills ones own child so that one may live as one wishes.

 

[benedictus2]

It hurts the men and women that can now go to college instead of being stuck at McDonalds bringing up an unwanted child.

Rubbish. As I have been saying from day one, this is not about economics. This is about morality. But I must say, well put like a true atheist

It hurts the children that never have to go through the twisted adoption system.

That is right, better dead the adopted. Hmmm, What a wonderful choice. Interesting, we can’t really ask them now whether they would have prefered to have gone through the adoption process. And I suppose if your reasoning is true, all adopted children should have commited suicide?

It hurts the society that is having to deal with overpopulation. Yes.

Another load of rubbish. The problem is not overpopulation. The problem is greed. And you know what that is closely linked to the reason for abortion in the first place. Self-centredness. Yup, buying into the devil’s reasoning again.

 

[benedictus2]

Oh yes, definitely. I would never murder a child. But fetuses aren’t even sentient.

And how do you know that for a fact? Would the DNA of the “foetus” be the were it allowed to progress to its normal course?

And who says that what defines a human being is that it has to be sentient? Would you consider comatose patients non humans?

Yep, keep rationalizing the evil away. Devil-speak.

 

[benedictus2]

1. The way you help stop wealthy individuals from getting abortions in other countries is the same we tackled wealthy perverts going to other countries to commit acts of pedophilia: you basically state that, regardless of the other country’s laws, the person will be charged with the crime in our country when they return AS IF they had committed the crime on our soil.
2. If women have to go ‘underground’ and/or self-abort, it make the process significantly more dangerous, thus creating another incentive for women not to abort: it may kill or seriously injure you.
3. Start convicting abortionists and women who get abortions both for first degree murder and getting sentenced to life without parole will also serve as another incentive not to get abortions.

BRAVO :clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[Schn]

As I said before ’ devil-speak. Don’t call them babies. Call tehm foetus or blob of cells, but don’t call them babies.

Helloo, a stage in the development of a human is just that, a stage.

It’s mystifying why you’re against correct medical and scientific terminology.

Perhaps we can also rationalize in like manner killing infants but not toddlers? Or children but not teenagers?

These are all sentient. However, we do rationalize based on brain development and maturity the date at which many rights are given, such as driving and drinking. Discriminating by age is nothing new.

BTW, badly put by someone who was a foetus himself at one stage were it not for the mother who actually allowed him to come to full term.

If I was aborted, I wouldn’t have known I ever lived. I would be in the same position as a person who was never conceived at all. Therefore every moment spent outside of sex is bad.

Wow agonizing over killing my own child, poor me. Then I go to the doctor so that she/he will be torn to pieces. Poor me.

Apart from being derogatory towards women, it may not be possible to determine sex so early, when most abortions occur.

I wonder if you will feel so sympathetic towards a mother who takes her new born child to a doctor so that he can first chop off her arms, then her legs, then the rest of her into bits and pieces and put all the bloody mess in the dumpster. Poor woman.

Of course not. Babies are sentient, fetuses aren’t.

And all for what? Self-centredness. As Mother Theresa put it so well: to kills ones own child so that one may live as one wishes.

To be truly not self centred, one would have to give away their property and live as a monk.

Rubbish. As I have been saying from day one, this is not about economics. This is about morality. Is it moral to limit the potential of a person? It is sad to see someone that could have had a full career relegated to fast food service. Obviously, this is better than murder, but as you can see, I am arguing abortion is not murder.

But I must say, well put like a true atheist

Thank you.

That is right, better dead the adopted. Hmmm, What a wonderful choice. Interesting, we can’t really ask them now whether they would have prefered to have gone through the adoption process. And I suppose if your reasoning is true, all adopted children should have commited suicide?

You might find, if you looked, statistics that show the suicide rate among adopted children are far higher than that of the general population.

Another load of rubbish. The problem is not overpopulation. The problem is greed. And you know what that is closely linked to the reason for abortion in the first place. Self-centredness. Yup, buying into the devil’s reasoning again.

I’m interested into your theory of how the number of organisms can increase past the bounds of natural resources. This could be a real scientific breakthrough.

And how do you know that for a fact? Would the DNA of the “foetus” be the were it allowed to progress to its normal course?

If your second sentence is along the lines of “what would the fetus be if allowed to progress normally”, then the answer is probably a human being. However, wood is no more than wood, whether inside or outside a carpenter’s shop.

And who says that what defines a human being is that it has to be sentient? Would you consider comatose patients non humans?

No, but they have been sentient before, and should be assumed to be only temporarily comatose. They have memories, they have loved ones, they have lived life up until that point. A fetus has not, and the brain would never develop to ever know it even existed. Comatose patients who are brain dead are breathing corpses and should only be kept alive if the family wishes.

 

[woodland_poet]

catholicsforchoice.org/about/default.asp

Catholics for choice? Can you imagine? There are many who call themselves Catholic. Beware of them, for they bring lies.

I am new here. I am pro-life. I was going to post in the meet and greet then I saw this. If you find the link I posted reprehensible, you should. So did I. I have been begun to make people aware of this group. I would eventually like to see the Catholic Church do some speaking out against this group. They are not marginal by any means. They have an annual budget of 3 million dollars. I wouldn’t doubt that the original poster would fit in quite nicely with a group like this one, or perhaps already belongs to the group. Yes, these types put out trolls to forums that are Catholic to woo the moderate and weak and ignorant. Again, beware of them.

 

[vz71]

Oh yes, definitely. I would never murder a child. But fetuses aren’t even sentient.

Interesting that you utilize non-measurable means to determine the morality of murder.

The truth of the matter is that you cannot prove sentience anywhere.

So what is the real criteria?