Anybody out there "pro-choice"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NCSue
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
limerick said:
**

Somewhere along the line, pro-life people might want to consider that abortion does not plunge every woman into a lifetime of grief.

Limerick**
Click to expand...
True, but pro-choice people should also concede that many women do suffer incredibly after an abortion. And that their suffering is real.
 
limerick said:
**Actually, it was not traumatic. It is not currently troubling. Many, many people over the last year have suggested rachael’s vineyard to me. I wrote to the priest there just for kicks and he wrote me back and said, “What is it that you expect us to do about anything?” In other words, it is a site for practicing and conservative Catholics only.

Please visit “Fetal Pain” A Systematic Multidisciplinary Review of the Evidence", Journal of the American Medical Association**, August 24/31, 2005, Vol. 294, No. 8; Susan J. Lee, JD; Henry J. Peter Ralston, MD; Eleanor A. Drey, MD, EdM; John Colin Partridge, MD, MPH; Mark A. Rosen, MD. You can click on this link for some very enlightening facts with regard to fetal pain:

serendip.brynmawr.edu/local/scisoc/brownbag/brownbag0506/fetalpain.pdf

They cannot feel pain at 10 weeks. Nor can they wave at us via ultrasound and say, “Hi, Mom!”

Limerick
Click to expand...
Can you feel pain?
 
Mary_Gail_36 said:
True, but pro-choice people should also concede that many women do suffer incredibly after an abortion. And that their suffering is real.
Click to expand...
**I can’t speak for every pro-choice person, but I would never deny that many women suffer as a result of their abortion experiences.

Limerick**
 
orignal said:
The ‘tart and dismissive’ response you received appears to mimic your attitude toward the pre-born child you lost during your abortion. I’m sorry for both you and your child, perhaps one day your approach to reach out for help will be more open to the infinate forgiveness God has in store.
I work with post abortive woman and truthfully, their is not much that I can do if the individual is not willing to open up to the reality of what took place and how that has affected them. All I can do is offer the truth of what happened, offer referrals to places like Rachels Vinyerd, and offer my own compassion and prayers. One can observe in cases of PAS or any post traumatic stress disorder, individuals who build up walls of defense to hide their repressed feelings. They do this for a variety of reasons, regardless one cannot begin the healing process if they as yet are unable or unwilling to come to terms with what took place. And that makes it very difficult if not impossible for others to help, as is in the case with Rachel’s Vineyard. *A person unwilling to help themselves, makes it impossible for others to help them. ie: A person who breaks their arm, convinces themselves that their arm is not broken, & refuses to go to a doctor, will not receive help. You cannot blame the doctor for being dismissive of a patient who obstinately denies a broken arm and refuses to come in for treatment - that would be misplaced blame.

I think the important thing is that you have a ministry that can and will help you once you let them.
Click to expand...
RV seems suited for women who have come to realization that what they did was wrong and need help dealing with the guilt. I guessing they have less to offfer someone who is still in denial and is just looking for people to agree that the attocity they committed was OK. I am sure if you walked into AA and tried to argue with them that there was nothing wrong with drinking they wouldn’t be much help either. But that is speculation.
 
Sailor_Kenshin said:
Can you feel pain?
Click to expand...
Of course she can not feel pain, she is only a bunch of letters on a screen, you can’t hear her scream can you? Out of sight and out of mind right?. Why should we be inconvienenced by her. But we are decent people so we care even though we have no reason to.
 
royal_archer said:
Of course she can not feel pain, she is only a bunch of letters on a screen, you can’t hear her scream can you? Out of sight and out of mind right?. Why should we be inconvienenced by her. But we are decent people so we care even though we have no reason to.
Click to expand...
but that bunch of letters on a screen must have come from somewhere, right? 😉
why are you so hateful towards anybody who doesn’t agree with you?
 
ceciliatherese said:
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.
Click to expand...
This is why the ‘fetus’ (Latin for little one) needs sane adults to protect it from being murdered silently in the womb. If it is such a need for women to have this option why is it always done in the secret like all sinful acts? Why not film her abortion to put in the album of the baby that never was.

Is this being ‘over the top?’ Well, I don’t think it is any worse than murdering a person just because you can.
 
ceciliatherese said:
but that bunch of letters on a screen must have come from somewhere, right? 😉
why are you so hateful towards anybody who doesn’t agree with you?
Click to expand...
According to the darwinist and the big bang advocates they could have just spontaneously appeared… The problem with letters on a screen is it is hard to tell when someone is being sarcastic or when they are just trying to make a point by taking a line of logic to the full range of the spectrum.

I really am too old to hate. over the years, I have learned that it is one of those emotions that has never proven to add any value.
 
CMP2 said:
This is why the ‘fetus’ (Latin for little one) needs sane adults to protect it from being murdered silently in the womb. If it is such a need for women to have this option why is it always done in the secret like all sinful acts? Why not film her abortion to put in the album of the baby that never was.
.
Click to expand...
Or why not publish the deaths in the obituaries.
 
limerick said:
**Pro-choice means pro-free will. This does not mean that everyone will choose the legal option, the reasonable option, the rational option, the moral option. It simply means that options exist.

So, yes, one can be pro-choice on rape, on genocide. It depends on the person and his or her moral code. And yes, I have been called a relativist, and I do not disclaim this description of my position so, you see, no use trying to modify my view here. It remains as it has always been: “choice” = free will. We are free to choose the least moral, the least reasonable or rational or legal option. If God did not give us free will and instead infused us with one immovable, unalterable moral code, where every individual behaved according to His wishes all the time, what would be the value or necessity of Judgment Day?

Limerick**
Click to expand...
One’s free will = ones responsibility to do and to ‘choose’ to do good things for our fellow brothers and sisters. And free will = one’s responsibility to protect and defend others from harm because it is good and ultimately grounded in reflecting the love of God.
(free will = responsibility)
& the responsibility it entails is not a responsibility to harm or deprive others, but to help them by doing good.

I suppose we could get in to a argument about the definition of what is ‘good’, but short of that I would like reiterate the responsibility free will entails is rooted in promoting goodness. *Even if ones perception of goodness is a false sense of what is good.

The ideas you put forward in this forum are aimed at the good (although a false good, because you don’t understand why abortion can never be good for any woman, fetal human, or man). You perceive ‘pro-choice’ to be good and you try to convince others (us) why they should adopt your reasoning. I doubt you would be spending so much time responding to all these threads if you thought the ideas you were proposing were grounded in the wicked notions and faulty premises. I’ll let you speak for yourself, but I assume (correct me if I’m off) that you believe the logic you proposed is innately good and without error. And you propose it for the good and benefit of others.

I’ll just ask you to describe for me the real world scenario where your notions of perceived ‘good’ are at work in society and everybody does whatever they want (carnal instinct), whenever they want to do it, without any governmental constraint. Let that scenario play out in your head and explain why you would want to live in a society like that. If the govermental structure follows the logic you propose than we have anarchy. Are you ultimately for a society where anarchy reigns?
 
ExDeoVita said:
One’s free will = ones responsibility to do and to ‘choose’ to do good things for our fellow brothers and sisters. And free will = one’s responsibility to protect and defend others from harm because it is good and ultimately grounded in reflecting the love of God.
(free will = responsibility)
& the responsibility it entails is not a responsibility to harm or deprive others, but to help them by doing good.

I suppose we could get in to a argument about the definition of what is ‘good’, but short of that I would like reiterate the responsibility free will entails is rooted in promoting goodness. *Even if ones perception of goodness is a false sense of what is good.

The ideas you put forward in this forum are aimed at the good (although a false good, because you don’t understand why abortion can never be good for any woman, fetal human, or man). You perceive ‘pro-choice’ to be good and you try to convince others (us) why they should adopt your reasoning. I doubt you would be spending so much time responding to all these threads if you thought the ideas you were proposing were grounded in the wicked notions and faulty premises. I’ll let you speak for yourself, but I assume (correct me if I’m off) that you believe the logic you proposed is innately good and without error. And you propose it for the good and benefit of others.

I’ll just ask you to describe for me the real world scenario where your notions of perceived ‘good’ are at work in society and everybody does whatever they want (carnal instinct), whenever they want to do it, without any governmental constraint. Let that scenario play out in your head and explain why you would want to live in a society like that. If the govermental structure follows the logic you propose than we have anarchy. Are you ultimately for a society where anarchy reigns?
Click to expand...
**
a) If free will is nothing but a call to responsibility and obedience, with numerous and sundry limitations and qualifications attached to its usage, then it is not free and it is not a gift. It is just another edict, all wrapped up in shiny paper with cascading ribbons to dazzle the naive. Not that there’s anything wrong with that …

b) I have never once in my many posts on this forum said that I believe an abortion is good for a woman, fetal human or man. It is not. No one knows better than the woman who is on my side of the abortion fence, although many women who share this plot of ground with me are moderately to severely damaged by the experience and I have not suffered as they have.

c) I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am sharing a different viewpoint. Last time I checked, that was allowed here.

d) I believe that the code by which I live is innately good for** me; it is not necessarily without error.

e) If I had options, I would prefer not to live in a society at all.

f) With or without governmental restraint, almost everyone does whatever they want. Those who break the law will be punished if apprehended. Those who offend God will discover upon their deaths how they are to suffer for their offenses.

g) I deliberately lived a good part of my life in total anarchy. It doesn’t thrill me like it used to, but I don’t fear it.

Limerick
 
Father Frank Pavone is on EWTN now. Sweet music in a time of dour combat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top