Z
Zatzat
Guest
If you disagree with me…I’m a troll?
I’ve well over a thousand posts, you have 4 posts. You spend your 4th post calling me a troll?
- Status
I’ve well over a thousand posts, you have 4 posts. You spend your 4th post calling me a troll?
L
limabeanerson
Guest
if your actions fit the definition of “troll” then you are a troll.If you disagree with me…I’m a troll?
I’ve well over a thousand posts, you have 4 posts. You spend your 4th post calling me a troll?
I actually spent my 4th post correcting your post that said you were not a troll AND answering your original post. Although I only have one chance to make a 4th post on CAF, I feel I spent it in a way I am satisfied with.
Just so I know, at what post count would my response have been valid?
Shoot - now I just wasted my 5th post clarifying my 4th post. Its all going down hill from here.
Z
Zatzat
Guest
Indeed.
M
Melchior_1
Guest
To the OP; The issue with your hypothetical scenario is there is a hypothetical child. And hypothetically speaking, that child is still a human being at conception according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. The question you pose cannot be answered by a practicing/orthodox Catholic with anything but a “both A and B are wrong” because any other answer would clearly contradict 2000 plus years of Christian teaching.
So the hypothetical answer to your hypothetical question is they are both clearly wrong in the eyes of the Church. This is not a dodge, and this IS confronting the question head on. because, if you have spent any more than five minutes reading this board, you would know the Church’s stance on the state-sanctioned murder of unborn childr…I mean abortion.
You knew this before you posted, so at this point (like limabeanerson) I must question your motives in why you’re posting here.
So the hypothetical answer to your hypothetical question is they are both clearly wrong in the eyes of the Church. This is not a dodge, and this IS confronting the question head on. because, if you have spent any more than five minutes reading this board, you would know the Church’s stance on the state-sanctioned murder of unborn childr…I mean abortion.
You knew this before you posted, so at this point (like limabeanerson) I must question your motives in why you’re posting here.
God bless you for doing this. And not to belittle your efforts here…but if you do this offline as well you would be one of the bravest people I ever met.
M
Marc_Anthony
Guest
Okay, fair enough.
You don’t consider “blinded by emotion or dogma” mocking and demeaning? Because I certainly do.
R
rwillenborg
Guest
Some. I am not as open about it in real life, that’s for sure. It’s really, really hard to be. Online is sort of my ‘warm-up’ if you will. If I have the guts to type, that leads to the guts to SAY it, and that leads to the guts to live it.
I just sort of came ‘out’ about all this a year ago. It’s really hard. And people judge you. And not the people who you THINK will judge you.
I have stood outside abortion facilities since coming ‘out’, with a sign that reads ‘I regret my abortion’. First I was just willing to say it verbally if asked. Then I was willing to wear a pin. Then I was willing to carry a sign. Still, I’m only willing to do it during dusk hours. I still would probably be terrified if my boss, or one of my friends saw me, so, admittedly, I only go in the evening hours. Even if someone knows about my abortions, it’s really hard to say ‘And it was the worst thing I could have ever done’. REALLY hard.
I don’t think I could ever be one of those people who speak up about their abortions at rallies and the such. I’m not that brave!It’s interesting, though, maybe the cover of night is helpful, because women, and some men, both of varying age ranges, some as old as 50, some as young as teenagers, have stopped and, often without even telling me their name, poured their hearts out to me about the pain their abortion caused. I listen, give them resources, we say a prayer, and they drive off, and I can only wonder if they found the healing they so desperately needed.
Many people drive by and cuss me out, and call me names.
I’m carrying a sign that reads I regret my abortion, and I get called names. Like whore. And slut. And ‘should have kept your legs closed’ and ‘Eff off!’ and ‘Woman-hater!’ (odd, since I am one, but anyway…) It’s okay. I used to be one of them, so I know where they are coming from. They have good intentions.I thought it was the pro-life people who would be calling me names. Exact opposite.
I remember the first time I went to an abortion facility to pray. There’s one woman who has paced that place for I don’t know how many years. And every time I drove by, I would yell things out my window while I was driving. (really brave, huh?
) anyway, the first time I went there, SHE was there!! And she said to me ‘Do I know you? You look familiar’ and I said ‘Kind of, I usually drive by and scream F-bombs at you.’’ and she said ‘Oh yes! I see you got the crack in your windshield fixed. Good. I was worried you would get a ticket’. HA! That woman did not even FLINCH when she realized that I had been cussing her out almost weekly. Can you imagine? Here is someone who has shouted expletives at you for who knows how long, and your reaction upon meeting her, is, to just pretend like that didn’t happen. Talk about an example! And it’s funny, too, though I’ve known pro-life people in the past, I never really asked about their views. I made many, many assumptions about their views, but to get to the source, nope, that wasn’t necessary. Anyway, so I’m out there talking to these pro-life people, and my ASSUMPTION was ‘They are judging. They just sit out here, and think these women are terrible people. These people don’t have anything BETTER to do with their time. They’re only here because their religion tells them to be. Maybe they should be willing to take in a pregnant unwed teenage mother, but I bet they aren’t!’ All sorts of stuff like that, and what I learned VERY quickly (amazing what actually asking questions and not making assumptions gets you!) was that not only were these the LEAST judgmental people I’d ever met (certainly less so than my friends who continually explained how non-judgmental they were), but they absolutely LOVED these women and men going into the abortion facility. And of course, they weren’t judging them! Many of the people out there had abortions themselves!! And as far as doing something better with their time? I learned these people had jobs, and families and hobbies, and all sorts of WONDERFUL things to do with their time, but, though they might not WANT to be here, they felt they SHOULD be here. And as far as religion? Well, for many, their turning around to BECOMING pro-life is what BROUGHT them to their faith, not the other way around! And finally, my last ‘certainly’ about how these people wouldn’t be willing to help out someone with ACTUAL need - HA! Almost all of them volunteered at a crisis pregnancy center, and several had adopted, or had foster children, and several also had pregnant unwed women (the exact kind of people I assumed they would shun) living with them through a program at the center!! And these were women they treated like their own children!
Anyway, so, the point is, no, I’m not terribly brave, but I’m working on it.
S
st_lucy
Guest
Wow, thank you so much for all your sharing.Some. I am not as open about it in real life, that’s for sure. It’s really, really hard to be. Online is sort of my ‘warm-up’ if you will. If I have the guts to type, that leads to the guts to SAY it, and that leads to the guts to live it.
I just sort of came ‘out’ about all this a year ago. It’s really hard. And people judge you. And not the people who you THINK will judge you.
I have stood outside abortion facilities since coming ‘out’, with a sign that reads ‘I regret my abortion’. First I was just willing to say it verbally if asked. Then I was willing to wear a pin. Then I was willing to carry a sign. Still, I’m only willing to do it during dusk hours. I still would probably be terrified if my boss, or one of my friends saw me, so, admittedly, I only go in the evening hours. Even if someone knows about my abortions, it’s really hard to say ‘And it was the worst thing I could have ever done’. REALLY hard.
It’s interesting, though, maybe the cover of night is helpful, because women, and some men, both of varying age ranges, some as old as 50, some as young as teenagers, have stopped and, often without even telling me their name, poured their hearts out to me about the pain their abortion caused. I listen, give them resources, we say a prayer, and they drive off, and I can only wonder if they found the healing they so desperately needed.
Many people drive by and cuss me out, and call me names.
I thought it was the pro-life people who would be calling me names. Exact opposite.
I remember the first time I went to an abortion facility to pray. There’s one woman who has paced that place for I don’t know how many years. And every time I drove by, I would yell things out my window while I was driving. (really brave, huh?
Anyway, so I’m out there talking to these pro-life people, and my ASSUMPTION was ‘They are judging. They just sit out here, and think these women are terrible people. These people don’t have anything BETTER to do with their time. They’re only here because their religion tells them to be. Maybe they should be willing to take in a pregnant unwed teenage mother, but I bet they aren’t!’ All sorts of stuff like that, and what I learned VERY quickly (amazing what actually asking questions and not making assumptions gets you!) was that not only were these the LEAST judgmental people I’d ever met (certainly less so than my friends who continually explained how non-judgmental they were), but they absolutely LOVED these women and men going into the abortion facility. And of course, they weren’t judging them! Many of the people out there had abortions themselves!! And as far as doing something better with their time? I learned these people had jobs, and families and hobbies, and all sorts of WONDERFUL things to do with their time, but, though they might not WANT to be here, they felt they SHOULD be here. And as far as religion? Well, for many, their turning around to BECOMING pro-life is what BROUGHT them to their faith, not the other way around! And finally, my last ‘certainly’ about how these people wouldn’t be willing to help out someone with ACTUAL need - HA! Almost all of them volunteered at a crisis pregnancy center, and several had adopted, or had foster children, and several also had pregnant unwed women (the exact kind of people I assumed they would shun) living with them through a program at the center!! And these were women they treated like their own children!
Anyway, so, the point is, no, I’m not terribly brave, but I’m working on it.
Z
Zatzat
Guest
I said ’ I wasn’t" blinded…not you or anyone else.
E
estesbob
Guest
Yes. They got suckered into feeding your ego.
E
estesbob
Guest
You didnt tell us your hypothetical woman lived in Africa. More misdirection .
E
estesbob
Guest
Even if his statistica are correct It would seem that if tens of thousands of women are dying in Africa from unsafe abortions then the solution is for women to stop having abortions.
R
rwillenborg
Guest
No, zatzat specifically said that our hypothetical woman lived in a ‘state’. But apparently, by ‘state’ Zatzat meant ‘country in Africa’. I know, I was confused too.
I suppose by ‘state’ zatzat could have meant someplace like australia, which also has states, but I would have NEVER guessed Africa as a whole that’s for sure.
R
rwillenborg
Guest
Zatzat,
You were given the number of maternal deaths in the US due to complications from abortions (I think it’s peculiar that you use the term ‘safe’ in refernce to a procedure which killed everyone who was being operated on, but that’s beside the point). You then compared it to the number of women who die worldwide, citing specifically women in Africa, from abortions.
I think comparing mortality rates from almost any country in Africa to that in the US, for ANY procedure will show you, without a doubt, that the medical care overall in Africa is inadequate.
I would instead argue that the reason for the variance in maternal deaths would be more properly attributed to the overall quality of medical care available.
So, since you are in favor of comparisons, let’s do that.
Clearly, you put faith in the WHO, and, I would presume, other UN bodies.
I find them to be heavily biased in favor of population control methods, including abortion, but since you recognize them as a reliable source, let’s work with their data.
In the developed world, the decline in maternal mortality rates coincided “with the development of obstetric techniques and improvement in the general health status
of women” (from 1935 to the 1950s).
This took place well before the widespread legalization of abortion.
World Health Organization, Maternal Mortality: A Global Factbook
(Geneva: World Health Organization, 1991).
According to the United Nations Population Division (UNPD), there has been no substantial decrease in maternal mortality or child mortality since the 1994
International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo and the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing. This is true even though, in that same period, more women have had access to legal abortion than ever before.
The maternal mortality rate in Paraguay has been declining, despite the prohibition of most abortions and the fact that “clandestine abortion is common.”
“from 300 deaths per 100,000 live births in 1986 to the most recent 1995 government estimate of 190 deaths per 100,000 live births.”
United Nations, Abortion Policies: A Global Review (New York: United
Nations, 2002), Sales No. E.02.XIII.5, 29-31.
When Poland finally prohibited most abortions following decades of government funded
abortion on demand, evidence suggests that the total number of abortions (legal and illegal) fell dramatically.
Wm. Robert Johnston, “Data on abortion decrease in Poland,” Johnston’s
Archive, 26 May 2008, <johnstonsarchive.net/policy/
abortion/polandlaw.html> (22 April 2009).
The comparison of four countries in the developed world published by the United Nations Populations Division, shows that Russia, with one of the highest rates of abortion in the world, has a maternal mortality rate of 67 deaths for every 100,000 births. The United States, with almost no legal restrictions on abortion but better health care, has a rate of 17 deaths for every 100,000 births.
**Ireland, however, where abortion is illegal and with health care comparable to the US, has the lowest rate of the four countries with only 5 deaths for every 100,000 births. **In Poland, long under communist rule, the rate is 13 deaths for every 100,000 births.
The World Mortality Report: 2005, UNDP
You seem to suggest (please correct me if I am wrong) that it is the illegality of abortion which makes it unsafe. I would instead propose it is poor access and availability of quality medical care that makes abortion, legal or otherwise, along with ALL OTHER MEDICAL PROCEDURES, unsafe, particularly in developing nations. (that’s where 99% of all maternal deaths occur, btw).
Though I by no means think I have put forth an exhaustive argument, I would hope that you would consider the evidence, and understand how, based on reliable sources, one could logically conclude that access to a ‘safe’ abortion will not save women’s lives. Access to quality medical care, however, will.
Rather than dedicate resources, any resources at all, really, to providing women in developing countries with ‘safe’ abortions, I would rather see the quality of medical care overall, rise. It makes no sense to have the procedure of an abortion be safe, while the safety of other procedures which a woman is also likely to have (like, oh, I don’t know, BIRTH, since 100% of us came into the world that way), remains abysmal.
If you could show me data which attributes the decrease in maternal mortality to the legalization of abortion (rather than an improvement in medicine overall or other unrelated factors), and if that can be shown from an unbiased source, I think that would go a long way in convincing me, and others, of your reasoning.
Peace.
Edited to add: I see after i posted this that it’s all choppy. Sorry about that.
C
Cristiano
Guest
This is a red herring and has nothing to do with my statement. I think that you are intellectually dishonest and that you change the rules of the games as soon as someone starts to challenge you. That implies that you are here not to have a logical and/or open minded discussion but just to create confusion in people’s thinking.
You are not here to discuss morality but just trying to repeat your point over and over, and when someone is showing that your way of thinking might be wrong you just change things around. However, I am not saying that you are morally broken, just that the way you address the issue is intellectually dishonest. Your real point could still be valid, that it is independent from the way you address it.
R
revert_jen
Guest
Your response was a thoughtful response to the question. It answered it in exactly the terms that that the OP set, despite (as you pointed out) that the original post was a carefully designed incorrect statement. You were not abusive or heated. A good post.
Welcome to the board! (I’m hoping my welcome has value despite that I have less than 500 posts.
)–Jen
S
st_lucy
Guest
B
Bran_Stark
Guest
While either choice would obviously be a grave evil, I would much rather she went the “back alley” way, simply because there’s then a chance she and the “doctor” would be punished for their murderous act.
Past events do not change.
So one cannot be termed safer then the other because they are past events and the outcome is already known.
So again, what difference does it make?
No, you created a false dichotomy.
Z
Zatzat
Guest
What kind of punishment you like to see given to the woman?
- Status