A new cause of immorality exposed sorry conservatives this one is enviromental

[vz71]

john ennis:

BUT, I think there’s definitely a causal relatinship between lack of self-discipline/self-control and the number of conventional abortions.

Peace.

True that lack of self-discipline/self-control does contribute to abortions, is it really the cause, or is there something further up the food chain that causes both.

 

[john_ennis]

LiberalSaved: a lot of those causes could certainly be put forth as reasons not to condemn abortion.

Or slavery.

Peace.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Liberalsaved:

You miss the point that what pills people are on is not your business to decide, even if your laughably high estimate is true. You don’t get to force your religious beleifs on people. An un-realized possibility is not, scientifically, a child.

Liberalsaved:

The “Laughably High Estimate” is easy enough to validate. Take the number of babies being born to couples who don’t use Artificial Contraception (somewhere around 3), extrapolate that out to the total number of babies per year for the general population. Take the number of babies born to couples who use Artificial Contraception (Europe has a Birthrate of about 2 babies per couple), extrpolate that out to the total number of babies per year for the toal population.

The figure of 5,000,000 is probably laughably low, which is why Europe will be Islamic in less than 20 years.

Marriage is a Sacrament hich confers grace on the couple. The means by which that grace is confered is the marital act between the husband and wife. The Holy Spirit who congfers that grace is “The Lord and Giver of Life”. When couples use Contraceptives, they lock hiHis ability to confer grace to the couple and on their relationship.

That’s why Catholics who use contraception have the same divorce rate as the secular world, while those who don’t and who faithfully follow the Teachings of the Church and attend Mass together at least once/week divorce at a rate of 4%.

Those who’ve seen the devastation divorce causes on children and on the people who divorce know what a benefit the lower divorce rate would be.

The Church doesn’t “force it’s beliefs”, as you seem to think. The Church tries to pursuade, knowing the benefits for those who follow the Teachings and the pitfalls for those who decide otherwise.

I would think that Liberals would sinterested in anything that would ease suffering and make people’s lives easier.

In Christ, Michael

 

[john_ennis]

vz71:

True that lack of self-discipline/self-control does contribute to abortions, is it really the cause, or is there something further up the food chain that causes both.

Good point.

Further up the chain…how about a culture in which pre-marital sex is taken for granted?
And…how about a FAR greater unwillingness today than ever before to turn over one’s life to the baby–whether we were expecting her or not?

Peace.

 

[Liberalsaved]

john ennis:

A lot of those causes could certainly be put forth as reasons not to condemn abortion.

Or slavery.

Peace.

My beleifs are that just because something bad has the potential to come from a beleif in true freedom doesn’t mean that freedom should be restricted and all the potential good made to never happen, just because somethign bad MIGHT come out of it. Slavery is not in line with those ideals. It is a perversion of them. It does not allow people to be who they are, and here we are talking people who are clearly people and not still non-existant, or in the gray area of life inside the womb. It violates the right of people to say, to do, what they want. Therefore it, like nazism, fascism and telling people what they can and cannot do in the bedroom is a perversion of those ideals and is not in line with them.

 

[adrift]

Liberalsaved:

THAT is my cause.

I hope somewhere in your cause you can also champion the defenseless. Specifically those humans that cannot speak for themselves. That the pill causes abortion is a fact acknowledged by the manufactors themselves. That the pill is unhealthy for women is born out in many studies. I believe in free will as long as your excerciseing of free will hurts only you. When it hurts others, it is tyour duty your cuase to defend against it.

Therefore it, like nazism, fascism and telling people what they can and cannot do in the bedroom is a perversion of those ideals and is not in line with them.

God gives you a free will to do good or evil. Your ideas are a perversion of truth and also comes from a very young mind.

 

[Liberalsaved]

adrift:

I hope somewhere in your cause you can also champion the defenseless. Specifically those humans that cannot speak for themselves. That the pill causes abortion is a fact acknowledged by the manufactors themselves. That the pill is unhealthy for women is born out in many studies. I believe in free will as long as your excerciseing of free will hurts only you. When it hurts others, it is tyour duty your cuase to defend against it.

That other is both a potential, and inside another person. That other being inside another person’s body means you want to dictate what another person can or cannot do with their body. This is not freedom. This is rule by someone’s beleif.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Liberalsaved:

My cause is humanity. My cause is being able to write a story about abortion without condemning the subject if I so desire. My cause is to be able to write a book concerning Catholicism or Protestantism or Buddhism or Atheism and be able to write it the way I wish, without having to bow to the way the people in question see themselves, for only by writing the world the way you see it can a story be good. And only by writing the world the way you see it can a story be bad. It’s the only way to get ANY real truth out of a story.

My cause is for people who are told “You cannot live this way, someone you have never met who knows you only as an abstract concept says that it is wrong”. It’s for people who have to hide the only true beleifs and passions they will ever feel for a religion or a person or a thing or a place because those around them want them to be more like themselves. It’s for people who’ve been pushed around and made to feel like less because someone else somewhere decided they were the ideal of perfection and that everyone who didn’t measure up was to be discriminated against.

THAT is my cause.

Liberalsaved:

And, all along, I had hoped thought your cause was to make people’s lives a little easier and to mitigate their suffering by any means possible, and if that included religion and God, so be it.

I guess I was wrong. Our Lord’s cause was a fallen humanity which He loved enough to give His life in order to save us from sin and from death.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Liberalsaved:

That other is both a potential, and inside another person. That other being inside another person’s body means you want to dictate what another person can or cannot do with their body. This is not freedom. This is rule by someone’s beleif.

Liberaslsaved:

Please come up with a definition for human life which demonstrates that a baby inside of his mother’s womb is not a human being but does not do the same with any dependent person OUTSIDE the mother’s womb.

Geography can’t be and absolute determinant of humanity, even HYPOCRATES understood that.

Michael

PS: In their latest ruling upholding Rose v. Wade, the Supreme Court used logic which could allow me to say that you weren’t human and vice versa. I think that’s dangerous. Don’t you?

 

[Liberalsaved]

Traditional Ang:

Liberalsaved:

And, all along, I had hoped thought your cause was to make people’s lives a little easier and to mitigate their suffering by any means possible, and if that included religion and God, so be it.

I guess I was wrong. Our Lord’s cause was a fallen humanity which He loved enough to give His life in order to save us from sin and from death.

In Christ, Michael

You want to ease their suffering by foisting upon them things YOU THINK will do that. That’s the main difference between you and me; I want people’s lives to be both easier and free.

 

[vz71]

Liberalsaved:

Therefore it, like nazism, fascism and telling people what they can and cannot do in the bedroom is a perversion of those ideals and is not in line with them.

In other words, you want a place where ‘anything goes.’

 

[adrift]

Liberalsaved:

That other is both a potential, and inside another person. That other being inside another person’s body means you want to dictate what another person can or cannot do with their body. This is not freedom. This is rule by someone’s beleif.

This is the claim of those who support obortion it is POTENTIAL life.

That is not science. Life is there otherwise it could not grow. You are not dealing in reality. You can do what you want with your body but not another. You are than doing to that human what you are railing against taking the freedom away . That human has no chance of the freedom you misuse.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Liberalsaved:

My beleifs are that just because something bad has the potential to come from a beleif in true freedom doesn’t mean that freedom should be restricted and all the potential good made to never happen, just because somethign bad MIGHT come out of it. Slavery is not in line with those ideals. It is a perversion of them. It does not allow people to be who they are, and here we are talking people who are clearly people and not still non-existant, or in the gray area of life inside the womb. It violates the right of people to say, to do, what they want. Therefore it, like nazism, fascism and telling people what they can and cannot do in the bedroom is a perversion of those ideals and is not in line with them.

Liberalsaved:

According the the logic I’ve seen you use, Slavery is my FREEDOM to own and receive the profits from a bipedal non-human.

Could you please refine your logic so someone can’t justify that using the logic you uuse to justify Abortion?

Michael

 

[Liberalsaved]

Traditional Ang:

Liberaslsaved:

Please come up with a definition for human life which demonstrates that a baby inside of his mother’s womb is not a human being but does not do the same with any dependent person OUTSIDE the mother’s womb.

Geography can’t be and absolute determinant of humanity, even HYPOCRATES understood that.

Michael

No, but whether it is a human or isn’t is a secondary issue. The primary issue is who has a right to a woman’s body, and the answer is, that woman. And that woman alone.

And here’s my answer, for all the people who somehow think despite laying it all on the line that I dodge questions: the ability to think and act is required for a life to be complete. At a certain point in a pregnancy the fetus gains this ability, contrary to the misinformed opinion that it gains it only at birth. This is scientific, proven, verifiable; that is what a human is. And yes, the Church and I have disagreed on this for as long as I can remember. I beleive both in powers greater than us and in the power of Science. If that forces you to a conclusion about me and my spirituality, so be it. I don’t see anything to defend myself for.

 

[Liberalsaved]

Traditional Ang:

Liberalsaved:

According the the logic I’ve seen you use, Slavery is my FREEDOM to own and receive the profits from a bipedal non-human.

Could you please refine your logic so someone can’t justify that using the logic you uuse to justify Abortion?

Michael

No, it certainly is not. Does slavery allow your freedom and not impugn the freedom of others? No. Therefore it is a perverted abuse of freedom.

 

[Liberalsaved]

vz71:

In other words, you want a place where ‘anything goes.’

Exactly what I said. I desperately want people to be able to shoot other people and walk away, to steal when they want something, to destroy other’s property, to run naked through the streets, to get behind the wheel drunk, to…

This is such an old and misleading tactic I feel as though I’ve been refuting it since i could talk.

 

[john_ennis]

Liberalsaved:

My beleifs are that just because something bad has the potential to come from a beleif in true freedom doesn’t mean that freedom should be restricted and all the potential good made to never happen, just because somethign bad MIGHT come out of it. Slavery is not in line with those ideals. It is a perversion of them. It does not allow people to be who they are, and here we are talking people who are clearly people and not still non-existant, or in the gray area of life inside the womb. It violates the right of people to say, to do, what they want. Therefore it, like nazism, fascism and telling people what they can and cannot do in the bedroom is a perversion of those ideals and is not in line with them.

The “gray area?” You don’t see how the humanity of persons of the African race was once a gray area (and still is, for certain bigots).

They could use your own very arguments about abortion against your disagreement with slavery.

You choose to call developing humans inside the womb “a gray area.” It’s convenient for your position, but it’s no comfort to them.

You, LiberalSaved were once in that gray area too.

My comparison to slavery is definitely a valid one against the argument that abortion is nobody else’s business.
Regarding birth control–agreed: trying to force people not to use it is wrong. However, discussing whether using it is wrong, and trying to convice others, is perfectly valid.

Peace.

 

[vz71]

Liberalsaved:

That other is both a potential, and inside another person. That other being inside another person’s body means you want to dictate what another person can or cannot do with their body. This is not freedom. This is rule by someone’s beleif.

No, this is not ‘rule by someone else’ it is the natural consequence of an action.
The time to make the free choice by this time has come and gone. It is now time to live with the consequences.

I cut myself shaving this morning. I will have a scar. Is this consequence an affront to freedom? Perhaps I should picket before the Gillette headquarters for taking away my freedom to not have a scar.

 

[Liberalsaved]

john ennis:

Not sure if you’re criticizing opponents of abortion, or of birth control.

Neither. People who feel their opinion should be law.

My comparison to slavery is definitely a valid one against the argument that abortion is nobody else’s business.

I said birth control was not anyone else’s business. I realize what you did here. No offense, but to slip a bit of playing with words by me, you’re going to need to try harder.

Regarding birth control–agreed: trying to force people not to use it is wrong. However, discussing whether using it is wrong, and trying to convice others, is perfectly valid.

Also wrong to force them TO use it. To force them to treat their bodies any way they do not want.

Do you want to discuss it with them and let them use the information as they see fit? Or force it on them? This is the issue.

 

[vz71]

Liberalsaved:

Exactly what I said. I desperately want people to be able to shoot other people and walk away, to steal when they want something, to destroy other’s property, to run naked through the streets, to get behind the wheel drunk, to…

This is such an old and misleading tactic I feel as though I’ve been refuting it since i could talk.

You are the one that made comments concerning the illegitimacy of legislating what goes on ‘in the bedroom.’
Were you not sincere?