Anybody out there "pro-choice"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NCSue
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
FanChan said:
Ah. You misunderstood my question. When, in the life of a person, is the killing of that person considered murder, and who makes that decision?
Click to expand...
I don’t know. Different cultures have different standards. Different beliefs have different standards.

Anyone can make the decsion of what is murder.
 
Sailor_Kenshin said:
Anyone who advocates for abortion advocates murder. But there are those who will never accept nor humble themselves enough to see that a fertilized egg is a human being.

They have their president; you have to wonder why they are not happier.
Click to expand...
If they are not accepting the fertilized egg is a human being, they are not advcating murder.

What is a human being?
 
WillieWonka said:
I don’t know. Different cultures have different standards. Different beliefs have different standards.

Anyone can make the decsion of what is murder.
Click to expand...
No, he can not. Moral relativism is a failed policy, the lies of Satan, and in the end it will consume those who embrace it.

Even a small child knows what a human being is. Those who claim otherwise are either being deliberately obtuse or have no moral center.
 
Sailor_Kenshin said:
No, he can not. Moral relativism is a failed policy, the lies of Satan, and in the end it will consume those who embrace it.

Even a small child knows what a human being is. Those who claim otherwise are either being deliberately obtuse or have no moral center.
Click to expand...
Anyone can indeed decide what murder is. Nothing stops him from doing that. Neither Satan nor failed plicies stop him.

Good point. Think that small child would recognize a single cell as a human being?
 
Oreoracle said:
This is the case, I’m sure.

To the Church, however, it is black and white-- “I should not kill (humans)” is held as a moral absolute (meaning that it is true in all cases). This is because the Church believes humans have inherent value, and inherent value cannot be removed, mitigated, or disrespected in any way, no matter how dangerous the person is. In short, we cannot kill one to save many.

I agree Oreoracle, (such as it’s worth.) There is never a grey area in the Church. It stands for truth in teaching and as such, it is not open to discussion on what is moral. It is absolute. Murder is wrong 100% of the time. No grey area. Whether it is illegal, with a gun, knife etc. or ‘legal’ with a scalpul or vacuum. No grey area.

God be with all who fight the ‘legal’ murder of innocents. This is no different than the Slaughter of the Innocents by Harrod. It all comes down to pride, power, and money. Abortionists do not kill for free and out of love for women. I pray these women that are considering this act will be turned away from the doors by the ‘silent’ screams, blood and smells of death in the abortuaries.

The crime is not mitigated in the Church’s eyes, as I said above.
Click to expand...
Never.
 
limerick said:
**No one has forced you to sit down at your computer and hammer out responses to my posts. If you find it frustrating or painful, just put me on Ignore. That should remove the burrs from under your saddle and you can live happy, happy, happy.

Limerick**
Click to expand...
No burrs here. No frustration or pain, just compassion and sadness. For you, for babies who are dead and for all who do not know the love of Christ through the remittance and the ammendment of their lives. That’s all. I have no desire to live just a happy life. I live a life in Christ and do as He wills, not I.

In prayer, c.
 
fix said:
Is that how reality works? So, if one does not accept you as a person does that make you a non person?
Click to expand...
Their acceptance or rejection of me has no effect on what I am. However, if they do not consider me to be a person, advocating killing me is not advocating murder. Murder demands one know the target is a person. If one does not know that, it’s not advocacy of murder.
 
WillieWonka said:
Their acceptance or rejection of me has no effect on what I am. However, if they do not consider me to be a person, advocating killing me is not advocating murder. Murder demands one know the target is a person. If one does not know that, it’s not advocacy of murder.
Click to expand...
And behold, moral relativism and the decay of humanity.

To each and every individual, let there be a unique set of truths, a unique compass of morality, …and Satan laughs as he collects all the souls we struggle to bring into the light of Christ.
 
SteveGC said:
And behold, moral relativism and the decay of humanity.

To each and every individual, let there be a unique set of truths, a unique compass of morality, …and Satan laughs as he collects all the souls we struggle to bring into the light of Christ.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Under Catholic teaching, does one commit murder if one does not think the target is a person?
 
WillieWonka said:
Interesting. Under Catholic teaching, does one commit murder if one does not think the target is a person?
Click to expand...
If that target is a person according to Catholic teaching, which will always directly correlate to the teaching of God, then absolutely…yes.

Truth does not come into existence when a person believes it. Truth is first. It always simply is.
 
SteveGC said:
If that target is a person according to Catholic teaching, which will always directly correlate to the teaching of God, then absolutely…yes.

Truth does not come into existence when a person believes it. Truth is first. It always simply is.
Click to expand...
So, the principal doesn’t think the target is a human, the Catholic Church does, therefore the principal is guilty of murder?

Suppose the principal never heard of the Catholic Church, has no idea what it says, or simply sees it as another religion among many? Remember, there are a one billion Catholics in a world population of nearly seven billion.

Isn’t it ncessary to fully understand the action and its gravity before guilt can be assigned?
 
royal_archer said:
and the klan did not accept blacks as humans, did that justify their actions?
Click to expand...
I don’t know. I’m not asking about justification. I’m asking if one is guilty of murder if they don’t think the target is a person.
 
WillieWonka said:
I don’t know. I’m not asking about justification. I’m asking if one is guilty of murder if they don’t think the target is a person.
Click to expand...
It seems as though you are leeding the discussion astray with an irrelevant question. A mother who kills her baby by default knows she is carrying a baby. Now, if a woman didn’t know she was pregnant and took a medicine that killed the baby but did not do so intentionally, it is not murder.
 
WillieWonka said:
So, the principal doesn’t think the target is a human, the Catholic Church does, therefore the principal is guilty of murder?

Suppose the principal never heard of the Catholic Church, has no idea what it says, or simply sees it as another religion among many? Remember, there are a one billion Catholics in a world population of nearly seven billion.

Isn’t it ncessary to fully understand the action and its gravity before guilt can be assigned?
Click to expand...
If a woman thinks she is pregnant with anything other than a human baby, she probably needs mental health assistance. (Ellen Ripley aka Sigourney Weaver excepted)😃
 
royal_archer said:
It seems as though you are leeding the discussion astray with an irrelevant question. A mother who kills her baby by default knows she is carrying a baby. Now, if a woman didn’t know she was pregnant and took a medicine that killed the baby but did not do so intentionally, it is not murder.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it;'s going astray. Lots of folks here are accusing people of murder and advocating murder. So, I sure didn’t introduce the idea of murder into the discussion. I’m asking about it.

So, I’ll answer my own quetsion. It is not murder unless one believes the target is a person. Lacking that knowledge and belief, the requisite conditions for murder are not present.
 
WillieWonka said:
I don’t think it;'s going astray. Lots of folks here are accusing people of murder and advocating murder. So, I sure didn’t introduce the idea of murder into the discussion. I’m asking about it.

So, I’ll answer my own quetsion. It is not murder unless one believes the target is a person. Lacking that knowledge and belief, the requisite conditions for murder are not present.
Click to expand...
If a woman thought she was impregnated by an alien, or had a major tumor, or was stung by a radiation tainted bee and was giving birth to some mutant insect and decided to have an abortion, I could see how your logic would apply. (hence the need for mental health assistance.)

If she went unconcious and the doctors performed an abortion with out her knowledge or consent, she would also be innocent.

Could you please give an example (sans mental illness or severe retardation) of how a woman who was pregnant (aka with child) could go into an abortion mill and request an abortion and not know she was killing a human?
 
royal_archer said:
If a woman thought she was impregnated by an alien, or had a major tumor, or was stung by a radiation tainted bee and was giving birth to some mutant insect and decided to have an abortion, I could see how your logic would apply. (hence the need for mental health assistance.)

If she went unconcious and the doctors performed an abortion with out her knowledge or consent, she would also be innocent.

Could you please give an example (sans mental illness or severe retardation) of how a woman who was pregnant (aka with child) could go into an abortion mill and request an abortion and not know she was killing a human?
Click to expand...
She doesn’t think the fetus is a person yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top