R
revelations
Guest
Just a note, abortion is on the down trend. It was this year that we had the fewest abortions since the 70’s. So, it would seem the prayers and the pro-life rallies are actually getting something done. 
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
H
Hallelujahhh
Guest
*QUOTE=hasikelee;3299472]Hallelujahhh, secular sources use the term personhood to infer legal rights of citizenship upon humans.
This is seen during Hitler’s rule, when Jews were revoked of their personhood status as citizens in Germany and surrounding countries.
Many countries, and indeed for us, states, have differing legal statements of when citizenship and citizenship rights are applied to a human.
Thus, personhood is a popular debating topic for those who support abortion. It is a very arbitrary, irrelevant term. This would be similar to arguing about politics or religion and abortion. How could anyone be wrong with such subjective views?
*
Thank you for responding. I guess if these people are not “persons,” what are they?? Or if they no longer are “worthy” of receiving the term “personhood,” what term do they now receive? Alive, but not a person?
Ultimately, I guess our answer is, when in doubt, kill and hope your right.
This is seen during Hitler’s rule, when Jews were revoked of their personhood status as citizens in Germany and surrounding countries.
Many countries, and indeed for us, states, have differing legal statements of when citizenship and citizenship rights are applied to a human.
Thus, personhood is a popular debating topic for those who support abortion. It is a very arbitrary, irrelevant term. This would be similar to arguing about politics or religion and abortion. How could anyone be wrong with such subjective views?
*
Thank you for responding. I guess if these people are not “persons,” what are they?? Or if they no longer are “worthy” of receiving the term “personhood,” what term do they now receive? Alive, but not a person?
Ultimately, I guess our answer is, when in doubt, kill and hope your right.
H
Hallelujahhh
Guest
To everyone who has posted here against abortion: I encourage everyone to check out the STOPP website. I just saw it and really want to get involved with it - actually DOING something. I figure ACTION, combined with God’s help, is what it will take to override this genocide that is happening in our country. I have “talked” a great deal, but not “done” much - so it’s time to walk the walk!
H
hasikelee
Guest
The popular semantic flip of this decade appears to be the ability to call a living, unique organism a human, but not yet a person. Those who use this statement then go on to arbitrarily apply an unjustifiable marker to when personhood begins.QUOTE=hasikelee;3299472]Hallelujahhh, secular sources use the term personhood to infer legal rights of citizenship upon humans.
This is seen during Hitler’s rule, when Jews were revoked of their personhood status as citizens in Germany and surrounding countries.
Many countries, and indeed for us, states, have differing legal statements of when citizenship and citizenship rights are applied to a human.
*Thus, personhood is a popular debating topic for those who support abortion. It is a very arbitrary, irrelevant term. This would be similar to arguing about politics or religion and abortion. How could anyone be wrong with such subjective views? *
Thank you for responding. I guess if these people are not “persons,” what are they?? Or if they no longer are “worthy” of receiving the term “personhood,” what term do they now receive? Alive, but not a person?
Ultimately, I guess our answer is, when in doubt, kill and hope your right.
Popular arbitrary lines are 20 weeks, viable fetuses, 6 months in utero, 9 months in utero, at the birth canal, 2 weeks after birth, 6 months after birth…etc. Also, minority status, ethnicity, financial status, caste status, etc are all used as markers in some developing countries.
In the case of abortion, you will hear those who support legal approval of abortion says thing such as, “Well, it might be a human at conception, but it’s not a person until birth.” Or, “Abortion should be allowed because it’s a human, but not a person until it can have memories.”
Basically it is a relativistic and euphemistic way to force what should be a discussion of discovery into lockdown mode. History shows us it has worked very well in past cases of genocide and mistreatment. I wonder what history books will say about us.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Actually, it’s not legally a “person” until it can pay its own taxes.
But it’s a human being at the moment of conception, and has an inalienable right to life.
But it’s a human being at the moment of conception, and has an inalienable right to life.
H
Hastrman
Guest
Arguably the whole thing comes from errors in philosophy.Thank you for responding. I guess if these people are not “persons,” what are they?? Or if they no longer are “worthy” of receiving the term “personhood,” what term do they now receive? Alive, but not a person?
Ultimately, I guess our answer is, when in doubt, kill and hope your right.
They argue, for instance, that it’s a human life but not a human being, or that it’s a human but not a person.
Only, Being is a larger category than Life (things that are not alive exist) and Person is a larger category than Human, although it might have only one real kind of member (we can conceive of other kinds of persons).
J
JOEBIALEK
Guest
good points
- Status
- Not open for further replies.