A New Approach to Pro-Life

  • Thread starter Thread starter jrgiancola
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“Thou shall not kill” does not carry with it qualifiers or exceptions. Sentience is a arbitrary measure imposed by those who support abortion to justify killing an innocent unborn child. You could easily replace sentient with blue-eyed, female, male, short, tall, white, black, blond haired, black haired… anything.
 
Thats not the answer Christ gave us, Christ did not want us to Change the world by force, but by Love.
No, Christ tells us, through his Church, we are to oppose these terribly unjust laws. To claim we ought not to is unloving.
 
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.
Yes and you are the one being lied to. You are not allowed to go accross that line becuase of your staunch feeding of your conscience.
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?

Ok, lets just go from this unfactual point and move on. There was never a culture of life, never, read the beginning of the Gospels in which multitudes of babies where slaughtered 2000 yrs ago, we do not even need to move into the OT to go over the genocide, and killings there. This is only in the Bible, through history we had countless wars, human sacrifice, murderous conversion conquests, disabled children being slaughtered for sport, slavery, total lack of human rights, so on and so on. To state that there was a culture of life before at sometime is a false statement based on history.

As for the history of abortion, yes it was easy to have an abortion, there was either some form of oral or procedure. Before RvW it was simple a matter of going to the drug store or closet and picking up some supplies and go off the advice of others, since it was hidden one could do it pretty cheap and not recorded, since the lack of valid statistics.
 
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.:rolleyes:

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.
We are supposed to have sympathy for those in need, this has been a basic tenet of Christ message fro 2000yrs now.
 
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.
Irony?
 
Let’s stop with the personal attacks. Any topic can be discussed in a mature manner. If not, the thread will be shut down.
 
Its 2010.

Most people I’ve spoken too who have gone for abortions, the first thing they did when they discovered they were prego was go online. Plenty of pro-life clinics come up in the various searches.

In my widdle country, when I went looking for "CPC"s to assist my sister, you know what I found? The only homes for unwed pregnant women were run by the Catholics!

As for that rubbish you mentioned about how keeping abortion legal will be the safest bet for women is, well, rubbish. As mentioned, do some research, particularly on who was getting illegal abortions pre-Roe, and who were doing them. 95% were done by doctors. Not in back allys with coat hangers and pervs in trenchcoats. Women died from illegal abortions in higher numbers before the advent of blood transfusions and antibotics.

And quite frankly, if you hurt yourself doing something illegal, are we really supposed to have sympathy for you? If a rapist falls down a cliff while running from the police will we say “oh, that poor man, if only rape was legal, this woud never have happened”.

Making abortion illegal will stop a lot, if not the majority of abortions. Providing more support for women who are in crisis pregnancies will stop the majority of abortions.

There will always be women who will commit criminal acts. And if such a woman goes at herself with a coat hanger or a douche of meths, then she doesn’t need an abortion, legal or otherwise, she needs mental health care.
 
We are supposed to have sympathy for those in need, this has been a basic tenet of Christ message fro 2000yrs now.
Pray tell who is the one in real need?

The utterly helpless child in the womb (couldn’t even cry out) about to be killed by her mother or the mother who is about to kill her child?
 
Its 2010.

Most people I’ve spoken too who have gone for abortions, the first thing they did when they discovered they were prego was go online. Plenty of pro-life clinics come up in the various searches.

In my widdle country, when I went looking for "CPC"s to assist my sister, you know what I found? The only homes for unwed pregnant women were run by the Catholics!

As for that rubbish you mentioned about how keeping abortion legal will be the safest bet for women is, well, rubbish. As mentioned, do some research, particularly on who was getting illegal abortions pre-Roe, and who were doing them. 95% were done by doctors. Not in back allys with coat hangers and pervs in trenchcoats. Women died from illegal abortions in higher numbers before the advent of blood transfusions and antibotics.

And quite frankly, if you hurt yourself doing something illegal, are we really supposed to have sympathy for you? If a rapist falls down a cliff while running from the police will we say “oh, that poor man, if only rape was legal, this woud never have happened”.

Making abortion illegal will stop a lot, if not the majority of abortions. Providing more support for women who are in crisis pregnancies will stop the majority of abortions.

There will always be women who will commit criminal acts. And if such a woman goes at herself with a coat hanger or a douche of meths, then she doesn’t need an abortion, legal or otherwise, she needs mental health care.
What a wonderful and sensible post totally in touch with reality and truth! 👍👍👍
 
“Thou shall not kill” does not carry with it qualifiers or exceptions. Sentience is a arbitrary measure imposed by those who support abortion to justify killing an innocent unborn child. You could easily replace sentient with blue-eyed, female, male, short, tall, white, black, blond haired, black haired… anything.
Good post 👍
 
We are supposed to have sympathy for those in need, this has been a basic tenet of Christ message fro 2000yrs now.
I forgot to ask you, how do you apply the Christian message of “sympathy for those in need” in terms of a woman about to kill her own child?
 
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.
Erroneous reasoning.

What about the right to life? Do we disciminate? Oh by the way, you are only a toddler so if there should be a choice between your life and that of a teenager, then I am afraid you will have to go.

Isn’t it a fact that in any dangerous situation we look out for the children first?

The rights associated with age had nothing to do with with the basic right to existence. For example, we do not take someone’s right to life when their eyes fail but we do that to their right to drive a car.

We precisely give them the right to do something when they can exercise that right responsibly and not endanger someone else by their actions.

The right of a mother to kill one’s child should not be there because it goes against the principle of why rights are given in progressive capacity for responsibility that they may not inflict harm on another.

What do we think of mothers who smokes and drinks when they are pregnant? Don’t we think that they are downright irresponsible?

Isn’t it more so then for those who do not only endanger the life in their wombs but willfully extinguish the life in their wombs?
 
I am a devout Catholic, but I do not support a ban on abortion. I will tell you my reasons and offer what I believe is a better suggestion. Banning abortion will not stop abortion. The wealthy will go to other countries to have it done; those who cannot afford this, will return to underground abortion clinics or self-abort; it’s been going on for centuries and will continue. I do NOT want to see women going underground. My idea is this: My church needs to start spending some of its vast resources to combat abortion in other ways. I suggest we start opening pro-life clinics, just as there are Planned Parenthood Clinics. We need places where women and men, not just Catholics, can go and get spiritual, emotional and educational support, and funds they need to bring a child into the world. Twenty years ago, my wife and I, unable to support a fourth child, were led by God to a small, underfunded clinic called “Womankind.” It was not a Catholic organization, but they not only helped us realize that we did not want to kill our child, but they provided the financial assistance we needed to get pre-natal care, deliver the child, and care for it after she was born. They provided diapers, formula, a stroller, a car seat, and the many things we could not afford to buy, until we were able to do this ourselves. It was quite an investment they made in our family. I thank God daily that we did not abort my beautiful daughter. But He used this small clinic to give us what we needed. We did NOT need a lot of religious dogma telling us about hell. What we needed was what I outlined above. I hear a lot of talk against Congress and abortion doctors. What I do NOT see is my church spending any real money to take a pro-life stand like I have described above. Talk is cheap. In the end, it means nothing. We need a massive undertaking by the Catholic Church to open pro-life clinics nationwide, to help financially those who want their children but cannot afford to have them. Let’s start putting our money where out mouth is. My church’s second collection every week is for a new hall it built; I would rather they had built a pro-life clinic. Joe Giancola P.S. I AM glad we stopped “partial birth abortion;” but this is not abortion , it is simply infanticide. If we really want to stop abortion, we need to be active as I’ve suggested, not merely stating a lot of platitudes, and attempting to derail health care reform. We Americans NEED health care reform; many of us cannot afford to take our children to the doctors office; I have my children on Medicaid. I do work, but am not provided health insurance. I cannot see a doctor when I need one, but thank God at least my children can. Do not derail health care reform in a hypocritical and futile attempt to stop abortion. Money needs to be spent on people who need help; let’s see some real pro-life activity, not mere words. Sincerely, Joe Giancola
It’s called Project Gabriel, and it can work in conjunction with our opposition to abortion as faithful Catholics. I think my parish helped about 50 mothers last year…mothers who were considering ending the lives of their children but were aided with funds, medical care, supplies, and job search assistance.
 
Yes and you are the one being lied to.
Well then, tell me what is that lie?
You are not allowed to go accross that line becuase of your staunch feeding of your conscience.
Which line is it that we are supposed to cross? If you are talking about the picket line at the abortion clinics, tell me, one abortion clinic that will allow the picketers to cross the line and the picketers will be inside that clinic like a shot.
Code:
 By the way, you are not making sense here. First you tell us we are not helping because we choose to remain outside, then now you are telling us we are outside because they won’t let us in because of our conscience?  So which is it really?
And are you saying we should abandon our consciences just so we can get inside the clinic? Don’t you see that if we are allowed in the clinic because we have abandoned our consciences then there is no need for us to be in the clinic anymore? Can you see how irrational that line of thinking is?
Ok, lets just go from this unfactual point and move on. There was never a culture of life, never, read the beginning of the Gospels in which multitudes of babies where slaughtered 2000 yrs ago, we do not even need to move into the OT to go over the genocide, and killings there. This is only in the Bible, through history we had countless wars, human sacrifice, murderous conversion conquests, disabled children being slaughtered for sport, slavery, total lack of human rights, so on and so on. To state that there was a culture of life before at sometime is a false statement based on history.
You are side-stepping the question here. We are talking only about abortion. And I am referring in particular to the years after the west was Christianized and before 1930 (Lambeth Conference) and before WvR.

Did you even read the examples I wrote? Can you please tell me whether the examples I mentioned were common prior to the say the 1930s in the the Christian West?

Here are my questions again:
  1. Was it as easy to procure abortion before WvR? (And I mean here openly go to a hospital and have it done)
  2. Were there as many abortions prior to WvR as there are now?
  3. Did women regard their babies as “a blob of cells” then as they do now?
As for the history of abortion, yes it was easy to have an abortion, there was either some form of oral or procedure.
The example you have given are illicit activitities.
Can any one just front up to any hospital and have the procedure done? Was it considered okay?
Was it an accepted option for women?
Before RvW it was simple a matter of going to the drug store or closet
Well you’ve just answered my question there. Going to the drug store and going to the CLOSET. So you are agreeing with me that it was illicit. And why was it illicit? Because people were of one mind that it was evil.
and picking up some supplies and go off the advice of others, since it was hidden one could do it pretty cheap and not recorded, since the lack of valid statistics.
Even with lack of valid statistics, anecdotally, it was still a pretty small number compared to the mass murder we have now.

And the reason it is so prevalent now is because, with its legalization, the stigma has been removed. The stigma that rightly applies.

If we recoil at the thought that someone has murdered someone, the same recoil (even more so) should be there when we think that someone has actually murdered her own child.
 
**If anyone here has not heard of Stojan Adasevic then I would suggest reading his full story here

http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/11/stojan_adasevic.html

But here is an exerpt**
Waiting for him upon his arrival at the hospital that morning was a cousin along with his girlfriend. They had booked an abortion with him. Four months pregnant, the woman was about to do away with her ninth consecutive child. Adasevic refused, but his cousin was so importunate that he gave in: OK, but this was the very last time. On the USG monitor he clearly saw the child with its thumb in its mouth. Stretching the uterus, he inserted the forceps, took hold of something, and pulled. In the jaws of the forceps was a little arm. He placed it on the table, but in such a way that one of the limbs’ nerve endings touched a drop of spilled iodine. Suddenly, the arm began to twitch. The nurse standing beside him almost screamed out. Just like frogs’ legs in a physiology lab! Adasevic shuddered, but went on with the abortion. Again he inserted the forceps, gripped, and pulled. This time it was a leg. Just as he was thinking: “Better not let it touch that drop of alcohol”, a nurse standing behind him dropped a tray of surgical instruments. Startled by the crash, the doctor released the forceps, and the leg landed right beside the arm. It too began to move.
The staff had never seen anything like it: human limbs twitching on the table. Adasevic decided to mash up what was left in the womb, and pull it out in a formless mass. He began mashing, squashing, crushing. Upon withdrawing the forceps, now certain that he had reduced everything to a pulp, he produced a human heart! The organ was still beating. Weaker and weaker it beat, until it stopped altogether. It was then that he realized he had killed a human being. The world turned dark around him. He cannot recall how long this lasted. Suddenly he felt a tug on his arm. A nurse’s terrified voice called out: Doctor Adasevic! Doctor Adasevic! The patient was bleeding. For the first time in years, the doctor began praying earnestly: “Lord! Save not me, but this woman”. Normally it could take up to ten minutes to clean the womb of all remaining embryonic matter. This time two insertions of the instrument through the vagina were enough to complete the task. When Adasevic removed his gloves, he knew this was the last abortion he would ever perform.
 
That is a challenge that I usually don’t accept. I am not an apologist and have little time to develop the required skills. If someone can look at a developing infant and convince themselves that the unborn baby is not human, I am not capable of forcing them to believe otherwise.
Put in the the context of 150 years ago:

“If someone can look at a negro and convince themselves that the negro is not human, I am not capable of forcing them to believe otherwise.”
 
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.
Hence the reason that groups like Feminists For Life are working hard to help women and men who are in college and have children. That’s their priority. Support the parents, and eliminate the need for abortion.
feministsforlife.org/resources/index.htm
feministsforlife.org/taf/2004/summer-fall/Summer-Fall04.pdf
It hurts the society that is having to deal with overpopulation. Yes.
NOW we can see where your TRUE ideals lie: eugenics. You’re another Margaret Sanger and Larry Lader. See the REAL facts on population:
pop.org/
c-fam.org/docLib/20080909_Fatal_Misconception_bk_rev…pdf
 
Oh yes, definitely. I would never murder a child. But fetuses aren’t even sentient.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient
Main Entry: sen·tient
Pronunciation: \ˈsen(t)-sh(ē-)ənt, ˈsen-tē-ənt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin sentient-, sentiens, present participle of sentire to perceive, feel
Date: 1632
1 : responsive to or conscious of sense impressions
2 : aware
3 : finely sensitive in perception or feeling
If they’re not sentient, why do they FIGHT for their LIVES in the womb?
silentscream.org/
prolifetraining.com/Abortion-Video.htm

Here are some articles, including one from the New York Times, saying that, yes, babies in the womb DO feel pain:
nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html
abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_14.asp
jillstanek.com/archives/fetal-pain/
 
It’s mystifying why you’re against correct medical and scientific terminology.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

Thank you.

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

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.

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.

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.
For the discussion of sentience, see my post above.
(BTW, how can you say that babies are sentient but a fetus is not? Do you think that neuron receptors don’t kick in until after they’re out of the womb? I really don’t understand this logic, so I’m really asking how you came to that determination)

Knowing that a child’s gender is determined from the point of conception is third grade biology (or maybe biology 101 for some who went to public school. I, however, went to private school, and learned it in 3rd grade). Women have eggs, which are represented by chromosome X. Men have sperm, represented by chromosomes X and Y. If the sperm that wins out is X, the offspring is female. If the sperm that wins out is a Y, the offspring is male. XX is female, XY is male. Just because we don’t have the technology to test the child in the womb, doesn’t mean the gender isn’t determined. I shouldn’t have to post links for this. However, here is one link about the science of this fact of life, and one link to an article on a study that was released just today about a scientific breakthrough in being able to test for gender at 5 weeks:
infoplease.com/askeds/determining-sex-offspring.html
news.com.au/national/baby-gender-test-after-just-five-weeks-is-research-holy-grail/story-e6frfkvr-1225818285842

And most women don’t usually know that they’re pregnant until that time, and most abortions occur around 10-12 weeks.

As for being able to ask any embryos as to whether they would be killed or not, let’s look at the cases of abortion survivors:
realchoice.0catch.com/dreadcomplication.htm
That link contains many links on the subject of survivors They were ALL rather offended when they found out that they were supposed to be aborted.

Your population theory is debunked, we have ways of helping women cope with living their lives while still giving life, we’ve asked the opinions of children who were aborted, are there any other objections you have?

Oh, and I’m a woman, and I’m offended by abortion. I see it as misogynistic, abusive to women, and a way for men to not cope with consequences of their actions. My aunt died because she had Post Abortion Stress Syndrome, which pushed her into alcoholism. It was all because her husband, who she later found out was cheating on her, forced her to get an abortion. Also, before you say that I shouldn’t let one case ruin it for the rest of society, it’s not just one case. It’s hundreds of thousands of cases.

64% of abortions are forced, & 80% of women who abort say they were never given any other option.
There are the health risks involved: post abortion stress syndrome, sleep disorders, anxiety/nervous disorders, grief, eating disorders, substance abuse, divorce, chronic relationship problems, self punishment, child abuse, suicide, breast cancer, cervical caner, ovarian cancer, liver cancer, uterine perforations, cervical lacerations, endometriosis, infection, excessive bleeding, embolism, ripping of the uterus, anesthesia complications, convulsions, hemorrhage, cervical injury, toxic shock, fever, chronic abdominal pains, second degree burns, Rh sensitization, vomiting, & gastro-intestinal disturbances. All of these can cause death, & most of these often do.

Abortion is anti-women. Do NOT use my fellow sisters and me as a means of justifying your agenda. Before you use women in your justification, you ought to look at some of the stories of women who have had an abortion:
feministsforlife.org/voices/index.htm
standupgirl.com/
theunchoice.com/coerced.htm
unfairchoice.info/intro.htm
feministsforlife.org/taf/2004/summer-fall/Summer-Fall04.pdf
gargaro.com/abortion/stories.html
realchoice.0catch.com/rapeandincest.htm
realchoice.0catch.com/personalaccounts.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top