Anybody out there "pro-choice"?

[limerick]

I truly do not understand you. Enjoy your world.

Eddie Mac

**
Right.

L**

 

[royal_archer]

Yet, the option to see and have an abortion stands. I obviously didn’t vote for it if none of us did.

L

It was an illegal activity (Row Vs Wade decision) that aligns with political motivations of a powerful loby and hence politicians have been looking the other way. This does not make it legal. I for one do not approve of illegal activity whether it be a couple of rogue judges or those who bomb abortion clinics. While they may be on differing extremes in their personal involvement in the violence they share the same trait of disregarding the law.

 

[royal_archer]

Here are my exact words: the law protects my life insofar as it can. The law currently does not protect an embryo or a fetus from being sucked out, cut out, or dragged out of a woman’s uterus. I don’t make the law. I do not vote anymore.

You think my calling you on putting words in my mouth is BS? Then you and I are done here.

Limerick

I ask again: Why do you feel the law should protect your life but not that of a child?

 

[royal_archer]

It was a good decision because it was my only option. …
L

There are other options, those options may be painful, sorrowful, or require great efforts but there are other options.

I know you have spent a lot of time here trying to get someone to endorse this failed line of thought. But it will not happen.There is no room for a reasonable person to ever agree with your line of thought on this matter. I am sure it would help put the mind of a hypothetical person who murdered their own child at ease if others were to say its OK you did the right thing. But no rational person will ever say it is OK to murder children. The right thing to do for a person who committed such an act would be to seek absolution. Although, absolution will not say the act was right, it will only grant them forgiveness.

 

[Eddie_Mac]

Matthew 18:10 "See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my heavenly Father. "

Eddie Mac

 

[ceciliatherese]

The choices are made for them by people who want what is best for them. There is never a choice to kill them. Do you think the baby would say please kill me?

Um, I have no idea what the fetus would say. Neither do you. The fetus can’t even consciously recognise that it’s ‘living’ while it’s inside the woman.

 

[teak421]

Um, I have no idea what the fetus would say. Neither do you. The fetus can’t even consciously recognise that it’s ‘living’ while it’s inside the woman.

Does that matter? Because the fetus will ALWAYS be born and become a person unless the body determines that something is wrong… So, if you stop the process of life one day after conception or 8.5 months, it doesn’t matter, the life is still stopped.

• Michael

 

[ceciliatherese]

Does that matter? Because the fetus will ALWAYS be born and become a person unless the body determines that something is wrong… So, if you stop the process of life one day after conception or 8.5 months, it doesn’t matter, the life is still stopped.

• Michael

Yes, but that life never even recognised that it was alive. And people on this site are saying a woman has to die so that this life will continue. There’s something very wrong about that.

 

[teak421]

Yes, but that life never even recognised that it was alive. And people on this site are saying a woman has to die so that this life will continue. There’s something very wrong about that.

Do you think the abortion issue would be an hot topic issue if we ONLY talked about abortions done when a woman’s life is in danger? I think not. Its the blatant disregard for life when abortion is used a birth control that is an intrinsic evil. Can you agree with that?

• Michael

 

[fix]

Um, I have no idea what the fetus would say. Neither do you.

Do you think many rational persons seek to be murdered? Perhaps you can show us how that is consistent with reason or good mental health?

The fetus can’t even consciously recognise that it’s ‘living’ while it’s inside the woman.

The baby does not have to “recognize” anything to be regarded as worthy not to be murdered.

 

[fix]

Yes, but that life never even recognised that it was alive. And people on this site are saying a woman has to die so that this life will continue. There’s something very wrong about that.

No one is saying anyone has to die. What we are saying is no one should be killed.

 

[limerick]

Do you think many rational persons seek to be murdered? Perhaps you can show us how that is consistent with reason or good mental health?

A fetus is not a rational person. However, you will find among women seeking abortion rational people who have given a great deal of thought and prayer to their dilemma and have decided to proceed. No one is telling you that you have to approve of it or respect it.

The baby does not have to “recognize” anything to be regarded as worthy not to be murdered.

**A fetus is regarded from outside the uterus by multiple people with different agendas. The last word on the issue, in this world, is that of the woman on the table. Fifty people may regard the fetus as “worthy not to be murdered”. Their opinions and wishes are not the controlling factors in the case of abortion.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

No one is saying anyone has to die. What we are saying is no one should be killed.

**
This is inaccurate. Throughout this forum there are many threads which address the issue of ectopic pregnancies, a mother hemorrhaging faster than a birth is occurring, and other situations where most Catholic posters have chastised the mother of the ectopic or the laboring mother for allowing action to be taken to sacrifice the embryo or fetus so that the mother might live.

This is not the only thread where the question has been brought up. Members of CAF surf and sift through other threads to get a taste of the prevailing attitude with regard to this particular type of moral dilemma. Most of what I have read from posters herein is that the mother should be willing to die to save the life of the embryo/fetus, and should go down to the wire with it no matter what. Check it out. See what your compadres are saying about these matters.

Limerick**

 

[teak421]

Yes, but that life never even recognised that it was alive. And people on this site are saying a woman has to die so that this life will continue. There’s something very wrong about that.

What if a person is mentally ill and does not recognize that they are alive, can we kill them?

• Michael

 

[limerick]

What if a person is mentally ill and does not recognize that they are alive, can we kill them?

• Michael

**People will do what they are compelled to do, right or wrong, legal or illegal, moral or immoral. Your question revolves around the morality of the act. You are not asking a question referencing free will because, although free will can drive an individual to do things that are abhorrent to others, in its raw state it is not restricted by morality.

What if the mentally ill person were killed by another mentally ill person? What if the mental illnesses were not the same? Then what? Would it have to be exactly the same mental illness, with exactly the same level of deterioration or brain damage, to call it a draw?

Limerick**

 

[fix]

A fetus is not a rational person.

By that standard niether is a 1 year old but we protect them because if they were more mature they would choose life as any rational person would. We do not kill immature people because they have not reached the age of reason.

**

However, you will find among women seeking abortion rational people who have given a great deal of thought and prayer to their dilemma and have decided to proceed. No one is telling you that you have to approve of it or respect it.

**
But, they are not asking to be killed. They seek to kill. I find no analogy here. Would these rational, mentally competent women seek to be murdered and if so would that mean such a decision is rational?

**

A fetus is regarded from outside the uterus by multiple people with different agendas. The last word on the issue, in this world, is that of the woman on the table. Fifty people may regard the fetus as “worthy not to be murdered”. Their opinions and wishes are not the controlling factors in the case of abortion.

**

So, the “choice” is only a choice for one person, never the baby? The use of medical terminology is for scientists, and medical staff, to be precise. That is not a problem. The problem is adopting those terms in an attempt to dehumanize the baby.

 

[fix]

**This is inaccurate. Throughout this forum there are many threads which address the issue of ectopic pregnancies, a mother hemorrhaging faster than a birth is occurring, and other situations where most Catholic posters have chastised the mother of the ectopic or the laboring mother for allowing action to be taken to sacrifice the embryo or fetus so that the mother might live. **

This is not the only thread where the question has been brought up. Members of CAF surf and sift through other threads to get a taste of the prevailing attitude with regard to this particular type of moral dilemma. Most of what I have read from posters herein is that the mother should be willing to die to save the life of the embryo/fetus, and should go down to the wire with it no matter what. Check it out. See what your compadres are saying about these matters.

I am interested in what the Church teaches on the matter as that is the objective moral truth that binds all of us. The Church does not teach we must kill innocent persons for any reason, nor does she teach a mother must die to save her child.

 

[limerick]

fix:
By that standard niether is a 1 year old but we protect them because if they were more mature they would choose life as any rational person would. We do not kill immature people because they have not reached the age of reason.

---

But, they are not asking to be killed. They seek to kill. I find no analogy here. Would these rational, mentally competent women seek to be murdered and if so would that mean such a decision is rational?

---

So, the “choice” is only a choice for one person, never the baby? The use of medical terminology is for scientists, and medical staff, to be precise. That is not a problem. The problem is adopting those terms in an attempt to dehumanize the baby.

Essentially, yes: the choice is only a choice for one person (usually - sometimes a father may be involved) and never for the HUMAN fetus. That is status quo in these United States.

Limerick

 

[limerick]

I am interested in what the Church teaches on the matter as that is the objective moral truth that binds all of us. The Church does not teach we must kill innocent persons for any reason, nor does she teach a mother must die to save her child.

**The Catholic Answers Forum is nothing but a receptacle for misconceptions and a distribution system for inaccuracies?

Limerick**

 

[fix]

Essentially, yes: the choice is only a choice for one person (usually - sometimes a father may be involved) and never for the HUMAN fetus. That is status quo in these United States.

Limerick

Yes, but that says nothing of the correctness of such a law.