Anybody out there "pro-choice"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NCSue
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The self described pro choice crowd primarily advocates for one option (choice) and that one thing they seek is to allow mothers to kill their babies. While they acknowledge the mothers option to choose to allow the child to live and be raised or adopted, do you see these groups openly promoting those options?

The so called pro choice groups also advocate that a woman should not be held accountable for a bad choice. But do you see these same groups advocating for the father to have the same option? Do you see them advocating that a father should be able to choose after the fact to not be the father and avoid child support?

Do you see any of these so called pro choice groups advocating for the fathers of these death row babies, advocating for the fathers right to keep and raise his child?
 
AHapka said:
And treason.
Click to expand...
Yes, and treason, but we’ve only even considered prosecuting a few dozen cases of that in the entire 200+ year history of US so it isn’t even worth mentioning. But yeah, for the people that are into trivia…👍
 
Arthur001 said:
I’m an ex-Protestant. …I think sperms, fetuses and some uneaten carrots are alive. I think the right question is whether they’re alive in the way that qualifies them for the same responses that happen if a civilian kills another civilian.

If fetuses are alive in that sense:
  • if someone miscarries, should there be a fatal accident enquiry?
Click to expand...
Yeah, the crux of the issue is whether they’re alive in the way that that qualifies them for the same responses that happen if a civilian kills another civilian. I believe they become a civilian at conception. When do you believe the child become a civilian? At some point convient for you to give you time to get an abortion?

As for miscarriages getting a fatal accident enquiry, yeah, they get a fatal accident enquiry. Don’t you think that we want to know why the child died of miscarriage?

How do you think we try to learn about the reasons for miscarriage if we didn’t do a fatal accident inquiry?

To learn more:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscarriage
 
Palm_Tree said:
Yeah, the crux of the issue is whether they’re alive in the way that that qualifies them for the same responses that happen if a civilian kills another civilian. I believe they become a civilian at conception. When do you believe the child become a civilian? At some point convient for you to give you time to get an abortion?

As for miscarriages getting a fatal accident enquiry, yeah, they get a fatal accident enquiry. Don’t you think that we want to know why the child died of miscarriage?

How do you think we try to learn about the reasons for miscarriage if we didn’t do a fatal accident inquiry?

To learn more:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscarriage
Click to expand...
I believe you mean the term “citizen”. A civilian is a non-military citizen.

Eddie Mac
 
royal_archer said:
The self described pro choice crowd primarily advocates for one option (choice) and that one thing they seek is to allow mothers to kill their babies. While they acknowledge the mothers option to choose to allow the child to live and be raised or adopted, do you see these groups openly promoting those options?

The so called pro choice groups also advocate that a woman should not be held accountable for a bad choice. But do you see these same groups advocating for the father to have the same option? Do you see them advocating that a father should be able to choose after the fact to not be the father and avoid child support?

Do you see any of these so called pro choice groups advocating for the fathers of these death row babies, advocating for the fathers right to keep and raise his child?
Click to expand...
Another good example of why their self-description of ‘choice’ is both wrong and harmful.
 
Eddie_Mac said:
I believe you mean the term “citizen”. A civilian is a non-military citizen.

Eddie Mac
Click to expand...
Actually, the term I wanted to use was “human,” but I just used the same word as the guy I was responding to because I didn’t feel like getting involved in making petty points regarding his decision to use the term “civilian”
 
Arthur001 said:
I think sperms, fetuses and some uneaten carrots are alive. I think the right question is whether they’re alive in the way that qualifies them for the same responses that happen if a civilian kills another civilian.
Click to expand...
Your argument of which humans are human enough to earn human rights is one that we have dealt with for millenia. That is the argument to keep blacks and women from voting. It was part of the answer to the indian problem the first settlers dealt with. It is also the same argument used by Hitler. and I am guessing that argument may have been dealt with in the extinction of the neanderthals. If you believe that these humans are not worthy of the same protection of other members of our society, how do you justify standing up against those who would kill others whom the murderer felt were somehow inferior?
 
Palm_Tree said:
Actually, the term I wanted to use was “human,” but I just used the same word as the guy I was responding to because I didn’t feel like getting involved in making petty points regarding his decision to use the term “civilian”
Click to expand...
:tiphat:

Sorry.

Eddie Mac
 
ntenaglia said:
In my own case I would say that it begins at conception because I have with the exception of the first used contraception to prevent conception. But you see that’s where the choice part comes in. I can make decisions for me. If I screw up and **** off God, then that’s between me and God at the end of my life. Sorry, I didn’t see the question in your previous posts. We’re not that far off, just that I make decisions for myself and my soul and you make decisions for others.
Click to expand...
Please believe that EVEN WE Catholics have the freedom to make our own choices in any instance we want. But when we are dealing with matters of Intrinsic Evil, if we have a right formed conscience, we realize that if we take that step toward ignoring Church teaching, we are committing Mortal Sin. All sins are forgivable, if we are in a right state of Penance, but some require greater restitution than others. Also some sins of greater magnitude effect others in ways we may not be aware of.

As far as our making decisions for others, it is quite apparent that even if we wanted to do this, it would be an impossibility. Everyone has free will. No one can make a decision for another unless that person would be mentally incapable of making decisions. The evidence is in you yourself. We tell you the truth as given to us by the Church; it is your choice whether you accept it or not.
 
In response to the person who said that “it begins at conception with the exception of first used contraception,” I would just say that a person is a person whether contraception–which I as a Catholic believe to be immoral–was used or not. Just because someone decided to use contraception and it failed does not make their baby any less human. And making decisions “for you” is one thing, but to make decisions for another person is different. And abortion is the decision to end another person’s life. In most other cases, murder is illegal and it should be illegal in this case too. And Catholics do not make decisions for others. People have free will and we make our own decisions. However, there is an obligation to protect other people from harm.
 
The people who believe in pro-life,no explanation is necessary,and for those people who believe in pro-choice then no explanation is satisfactory.
 
The discussion about whether or not a fetus is alive or human is pointless. This is an OBJECTIVE reality, not a subjective belief. Open ANY modern anatomy or biology book and you will see that from the very moment of conception a human - note there is no discussion about whether or not it’s human - is alive, because it has metabolic processes, it grows by cellular division and contains ALL the inherent traits and characteristics of a human being.
So the discussion must center on whether we are going to admit what reality says is so or whether we think we have the moral right to dehumanize, kill and discard a being that is objectively fully and wholly human and alive for our own personal, selfish and subjective reasons. Note that I am not even touching on the relligious here, because as St. Thomas Aquinas taught, there is a Natural Law that is a direct result of God’s design and Law.
 
edward_leblanc said:
The people who believe in pro-life,no explanation is necessary,and for those people who believe in pro-choice then no explanation is satisfactory.
Click to expand...
It’s not ‘choice’ but abortion. We must never lie down and give up in this war on meaning.
 
Sailor_Kenshin said:
It’s not ‘choice’ but abortion. We must never lie down and give up in this war on meaning.
Click to expand...
**Look it up. You employ the rhetorical use of the word “choice”. That is but a modern colloquial interpretation, incendiary at best, and does not honor the total meaning of the word.

Limerick**
 
St_Francis said:
It’s not abstinence if they are not abstaining… It works for those who use it.
Click to expand...
limerick said:
**Look it up. You employ the rhetorical use of the word “choice”. That is but a modern colloquial interpretation, incendiary at best, and does not honor the total meaning of the word.

Limerick**
Click to expand...
The very bottom line is there is NO choice. That is my belief.
 
limerick said:
**Look it up. You employ the rhetorical use of the word “choice”. That is but a modern colloquial interpretation, incendiary at best, and does not honor the total meaning of the word.

**

Like those who use it to disguise the fact that it’s murder? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top