Tis_Bearself
Patron
Examples, please.
I have not seen Catholics on this forum expressing this. If you are going to allege it, please link the posts where Catholics have said this on here, as it’s a serious accusation.
Last edited:
- Status
I have not seen Catholics on this forum expressing this. If you are going to allege it, please link the posts where Catholics have said this on here, as it’s a serious accusation.
F
Freddy
Guest
Good luck. I hope you have some success in being able to reduce the numbers.
C
Cirdan_XII
Guest
With all respect, you are the one arguing past others. You are here on a Catholic forum yet playing light with principles of catholicism. I don’t know what you are, but if you are say a feminist, this would be like me going onto a feminist forum and telling people there that the fact that women should have the same rights as men is a matter of opinion and the people there need to come to terms with the fact that they are clinging to an opinion that is not fact. I would probably be thrown out of the forum.
Furthermore, you have introduced the word person. I don’t think that word appears in the bible, at least not in its modern meaning. Yes, a baby does not have a birth certificate or an ID or a passport. So you think that killing somebody who does not hold a passport or an ID does not constitute legal murder because there is some doubt over their legal personhood?
You are splitting hairs to the extreme. If you would be honest with yourself you would know you are wrong. Instead you chose to peddle this ridiculous nonsense.
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
I have no problem with Catholic principles. I just don’t believe some of them.Freddy:
With all respect, you are the one arguing past others. You are here on a Catholic forum yet playing light with principles of catholicism.
And you are still talking about killing ‘somebody’. Most people don’t consider what a woman is carrying shortly after conception to be a ‘somebody’. You don’t have to agree with this. But you have to understand that people don’t agree with you. And you need to argue from a point of mutual understanding. You need common ground.
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
Because the woman wants to give birth.
P
puer.dei
Guest
It doesn’t seem so. You don’t seem to have thought through everything that needs to be in place for your “simple” “lock 'em all up for life” plan to work.
Lots more police for all these arrests, to start with. More jails to hold everyone pre-trial, and/or tons more parole officers to monitor them all if they’re out on bail.
How many more courtrooms for all these trials? How many more qualified judges, bailiffs, court reporters, etc., etc. Plus salaries & benefits for years to come.
How many more prisons? Government-run, or private businesses? Thousands of prison personnel who have to be hired, trained, monitored. And their salaries & benefits for years to come,
Don’t forget the appeals – how many more appeals courts, judges, and other personnel?
And then there’s the cost of maintaining all these prisoners for the rest of their lives. With more & more health care costs as they age.
Not to mention the economic impact of pulling hundreds of thousands of women out of the workforce.
Who is going to take care of these women’s other children? How much will this expand the welfare state?
You’re talking about billions of dollars. Whose taxes are you going to raise by that much? The rich could afford it, but you won’t raise their taxes if you’re a Republican. The middle & lower classes can’t afford that much.
How are you going to pay for all this?
farronwolf
New member
There is punishment for murder because the act of the aggressor is against another individual who has rights, is recognized by the Constitution as having such rights and thereby murder is illegal.
The same applies to rape, incest, neglect, you name it.
Were slave owners punished for doing any of the above mentioned horrific acts before slavery was outlawed by a Constitutional amendment. NOPE. Why because the slaves didn’t have rights.
Before women were given the right to vote and given most of the rights of men, if they were white women, crimes against them were recognized and punishment was given, but not in the same fashion as if those crimes were committed against a white male. In many cases if a married woman’s husband died, even though she own the property of her husband, she had to get permission from his male family members to do certain things with that property.
Based on the founding fathers wording and actions, white males were the only persons with all the rights granted by our constitution. Others had to have an amendment passed before their rights were granted.
So, the reason why justices simply saying abortion is illegal one day won’t cut it, is because the fetus has no rights established under our Constitution. Period, end.
If blacks, women, immigrants weren’t recognized with full rights in the Constitution, how can anyone claim a fetus’ rights are stated there. Maybe based on the Constitution wording, white male fetus’ rights are established but not so much all the rest of our society.
The same applies to rape, incest, neglect, you name it.
Were slave owners punished for doing any of the above mentioned horrific acts before slavery was outlawed by a Constitutional amendment. NOPE. Why because the slaves didn’t have rights.
Before women were given the right to vote and given most of the rights of men, if they were white women, crimes against them were recognized and punishment was given, but not in the same fashion as if those crimes were committed against a white male. In many cases if a married woman’s husband died, even though she own the property of her husband, she had to get permission from his male family members to do certain things with that property.
Based on the founding fathers wording and actions, white males were the only persons with all the rights granted by our constitution. Others had to have an amendment passed before their rights were granted.
So, the reason why justices simply saying abortion is illegal one day won’t cut it, is because the fetus has no rights established under our Constitution. Period, end.
If blacks, women, immigrants weren’t recognized with full rights in the Constitution, how can anyone claim a fetus’ rights are stated there. Maybe based on the Constitution wording, white male fetus’ rights are established but not so much all the rest of our society.
Last edited:
farronwolf
New member
Again, before amendments were passed how did this apply to others besides white males?
Look at the actual history of how the Constitution was interpreted by the SCOTUS.
Look at the actual history of how the Constitution was interpreted by the SCOTUS.
farronwolf
New member
If we know better today then it is clearly defined in our Constitution how to codify that or any other thing we want to change or define.
That way it isnt up for interpretation or discussion. Until then the problem will persist.
That way it isnt up for interpretation or discussion. Until then the problem will persist.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
Practically speaking that’s not going to happen.
R
Riman643
Guest
Says who exactly? Someone already resigned to not caring about the unborn? Luckily there are people determined to see justice in this world.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
That’s what those people on Twitter like to say about their social justice causes, but nothing really changes.
I do care about the unborn, I just don’t think something a little vindicative is the way to do it.
Last edited:
R
Riman643
Guest
Cool. I and many other pro lifers are actually willing to put in effort to make change.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
So far you’re the only one here mentioning this.
F
Freddy
Guest
The people who vote. They decide. As they did in Ireland. The majority want it legal. And you need to know that the proportion of people who want it legal has always and is always rising.
If you want to make it illegal you will fail. There is no doubt about that. But if you want to put a lot of time and effort into reducing abortions, then you will always be onto a winner. You will always find people of all political stripes who would be willing to help.
How you spend your time is up to you. You can spend it on a battle already lost or fight in one that is already making headway.
Your call.
R
Riman643
Guest
You are right. The people should vote. Each state should make laws that determine whether abortion should take place in their state. Reversing Roe v. Wade will do that. It will then be on us to motivate sate legislators and start the ratification of an amendment to the right to life. All of this is reasonable and doable. I will never cower on my stance of outlawing the genocide of the unborn. The most efficient and effective way of reducing the crime is outlawing it and that is exactly what any moral society should do. Until we do that, we are not a moral society.
P
Polak
Guest
Many of those millions of abortions were almost certainly carried out on babies a good few months old in the womb. It’s hard to argue against them being human. In those cases the women clearly understood they were killing the child, because their body their choice.
X
Xarto
Guest
They’re the exception not the norm. There are more people who do good in the world than evil.
F
Freddy
Guest
I have no objection to what you say.Freddy:
Many of those millions of abortions were almost certainly carried out on babies a good few months old in the womb. It’s hard to argue against them being human. In those cases the women clearly understood they were killing the child, because their body their choice.
I
Inquisitor85
Guest
How did the Prohibition of Alcohol work out? The same thing will happen with this, you’ll be allowing organised crime to have a new, incredibly lucrative market.
- Status