Can someone help me come up with a response to pro-choice attacks?

[celticsfan1983]

Your case and those of your sister are hardly typical of rape cases. Should the law be made permissive just to to fit cases that are so unusual? Far more common are the cases of very young girls hot on by boys just a few years older, or even young men. Everyone concerned just wants rid of the unwanted child. but mainly the fathers/the parents.

You know, I’m not nearly as angry with the women who get abortions as I am with the mothers, fathers, friends and boyfriends who drive the girls to abortion clinics. The pregnant girl is obviously not in a good mental state. They are thinking clearly, and they help carry out this atrocity instead of giving the needed help and encouragement to these women who really need it.

 

[fix]

**In what context? The narrow context of presumption and crystal balls and divining a woman’s future behaviors and decisions?

Limerick**

The term “choice” in this context means abortion. It is a word game meant to hide the truth.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

And the original poster asked for help in countering the argument FOR abortion, not clouding the issue of why it’s sometimes okay and you don’t want to be ‘judgmental.’

Failing to make a moral decision regarding an evil act is collaboration with evil.

 

[limerick]

Limerick, I am curious if you read my post which was directed to you before. I have read many posts by you in the past and I have read how you have lived a very unfortunate life. I truly am sorry that you had to experience what you did in your life and I mean that. However, I must take out the emotions and tell you that because of your experiences in life, it has severely jaded your perception of reality. I mean that in no offensive way, and it is truly unfortunate because I hate to see anyone’s life ruined by others. This is the sad state of affairs of our world because of Free will. Your right, people have free will but just having free will does not give you the right to do whatever you want. You post how God gave us free will and we should exercise our free will but you fail to see that God gave us our free will in hope that we would always choose him, not the opposite. Choosing to abort a child may be someone exercising her free will but it does not make it right. You are definitely not choosing God regardless of whatever the circumstances. I have nothing but sympathy for those who suffer in their lives, but I respect those who suffer and rise above it, not those who fall under its’ weight and delude themselves into thinking they can continue the cycle of evil that put them in that circumstance to begin with. That may sound harsh but that is the reality of our world. We suffer so that we grow in love, in faith and in life. Without suffering we could never change, never learn. It is a terrible price to pay but no less then what Jesus himself paid for us. You can let your suffering and pain crush you or you can bear the weight of your cross and follow God. Those are the choices we have whether we may like it or not.

**I do not believe in an objective reality. Like every other human being on earth, I am a product of my experiences. They have shaped me and formed me, for better or worse. I would not trade the wisdom I have gained through pain and torment. The knowledge gained is legitimate and has served me fairly.

I do not believe that God hopes. I believe that, because He is omniscient, He has no need to hope, as He already knows every detail past, present and future of the entire universe. God gave us free will, not a decision-making ability with strings attached.

I have not said that a woman who chooses abortion is choosing something that is “right”. I defend her right to choose, although I may be saddened by the choice that she makes. Her decision, again, is none of my business.

Not every woman who chooses abortion continues “in a cycle of evil”.

“Without suffering we could never change, never learn,” you say and, as you can see, I do not disagree with you. But this: “We suffer so that we grow in love, in faith and in life” - this has not been my experience, nor do I expect it ever will be.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

Remind him that the “choice” is the same regardless of the child’s location. What if she chooses to carry the child, then is about to give him/her up for adoption, then changes her mind and decides to keep the baby, then throws the baby under a bus in a fit of panic or rage one day? Is that her business? Is that inevitable? Is that a matter of deciding what to do with her body? Suppose the child is breastfeeding at the time she pulls him/her away and throws him/her under the wheels? It’s the same decision after the baby leaves the mother’s body as it is before.

a) Yes, it is solely her business, morally speaking, as only God can judge her.
b) Is that inevitable? Who can say? And how does this relate to the matter?
c) If she throws the baby under a bus in a fit of panic or rage, that is not a matter of what to do with her own body, but what to do with the baby’s body.
d) What does it matter if she is breastfeeding when she throws him under the wheels?

The point you are making is one of morality. I view the issue primarily from the standpoint of legality. This woman would, of course, be apprehended, jailed, arraigned, sent to trial, and either be convicted or acquitted. The difference, legally speaking, is that an unborn fetus does not have those protections of the law.

I understand your point. But it is a losing point in view of the fact that abortion is legal in the United States at this time.

Limerick

 

[limerick]

Your case and those of your sister are hardly typical of rape cases. Should the law be made permissive just to to fit cases that are so unusual? Far more common are the cases of very young girls hot on by boys just a few years older, or even young men. Everyone concerned just wants rid of the unwanted child. but mainly the fathers/the parents.

What, pray tell, is atypical of our rape cases? I’ll tell you what. Absolutely nothing. And what do you mean when you say, "very young girls hot on by boys . . . "?

As far as “everyone concerned”, you say it’s mainly “the fathers/the parents”. Which fathers? The fathers of the girls/women who were raped or the fathers of the fetuses conceived during those rapes? The parents of the girls raped or the parents of the fetuses conceived?

Limerick

 

[limerick]

The term “choice” in this context means abortion. It is a word game meant to hide the truth.

**Just goin’ by what Webster tells me and not buyin in to the convenience of rhetoric.

A woman already has her feet in the stirrups, the IV drip going, the nitrous mask on, the headphones playing sounds of nature in her head, and then gets up, gets dressed and leaves the abortion clinic before the procedure begins - this is called “choice”.

The woman whose friend drives her to the abortion facility, walks her in, helps her fill out paperwork - and then sees the spirit change in this friend, and then walks her back to the car and drives her to Dairy Queen for a sundae and a re-evaluation of circumstances - this is called “choice”.

The woman who sees specialist after specialist and is told over and over that the fetus she is carrying has anencephaly and may live only an hour or two after birth, but she decides to see the pregnancy through to the birth - this is called “choice”.

In my support of “choice” I also defend these choices. Any one of these women could have made a different choice, and more women than you will ever know actually do make these choices, as dramatic as they sound. I see them as strong women with strong support, regardless of the participation of the men involved in the conceptions. Unfortunately this is not the case for so many women today. The immorality of abortion begins in not educating women about how their bodies work, about sexuality, about how men’s bodies work, about the mind games that are played when women surrender their bodies for “love” and men feign “love” to get sex. There are innumerable “choices” to be made long before the couple has intercourse or the woman considers abortion. That is where to concentrate the vitriol that appears as high-and-mighty judgment on this forum. How can this be turned around to be productive and supportive?

Limerick**

 

[Des]

Simply put, limerick gives the right to any woman to have a ‘Choice’ to either allow her children to live outside of her womb or be killed while still in her womb and has convinced herself that it is none of ‘our’ business because somehow, magically, a new distinct human life is still part of that woman’s body.

But if the baby lives outside of her body, that’s a different story and this ‘Choice’ which she defends so adamantly suddenly disappears because now the ‘Choice’ a woman has to kill her own child is somehow wrong.

 

[BRZ]

Limerick, what you say really doesn’t make any sense. Think about it. You say that it is a choice, you disagree with the choice but nonetheless the woman is making a choice. We understand that, I don’t think anyone is saying it is not a choice. The problem is, that choice is immoral. Now according to your logic, there should be no laws then. Everyone should be able to make whatever choices they want. That is basically what you are saying. Who should stop me from making the choice to kill someone? Who should stop me from making the choice to steal, hurt, maim, or whatever else I want to do?

This is what you are saying. Why is abortion an exception? Please tell me that. Do you feel that a fetus(baby) in the womb is less deserving of life or any form of rights? Do you think a fetus(baby) is nothing more then just a finger or an arm that can be cut off at will? Although I would argue then that a police officer is not going to sit by while someone cuts their own arm off, but I digress.

A baby, in the womb is no less important than any other living creature. It deserves no less in dignity and respect. Now if you just don’t see a baby in the womb as deserving of any form of dignity or respect then I will end this debate now because there is no way you could ever possibly understand our point of view.

 

[limerick]

Simply put, limerick gives the right to any woman to have a ‘Choice’ to either allow her children to live outside of her womb or be killed while still in her womb and has convinced herself that it is none of ‘our’ business because somehow, magically, a new distinct human life is still part of that woman’s body.

But if the baby lives outside of her body, that’s a different story and this ‘Choice’ which she defends so adamantly suddenly disappears because now the ‘Choice’ a woman has to kill her own child is somehow wrong.

**I have neither the power nor the interest in assigning “rights” to any individual.

Can you please clarify this statement, because to me it makes no sense: " [she] has convinced herself that it is none of ‘our’ business because somehow, magically, a new distinct human life is still part of that woman’s body." What does this mean? What’s your point?

Choice never disappears. Some choices that people make, men included, will go against the will of God. Free will is the guideline or the downfall for every human being. For the moral infraction there is Purgatory or Hell; for the legal infraction there is the “system” to serve society.

Limerick **

 

[fix]

**Just goin’ by what Webster tells me and not buyin in to the convenience of rhetoric.

A woman already has her feet in the stirrups, the IV drip going, the nitrous mask on, the headphones playing sounds of nature in her head, and then gets up, gets dressed and leaves the abortion clinic before the procedure begins - this is called “choice”.

The woman whose friend drives her to the abortion facility, walks her in, helps her fill out paperwork - and then sees the spirit change in this friend, and then walks her back to the car and drives her to Dairy Queen for a sundae and a re-evaluation of circumstances - this is called “choice”.

The woman who sees specialist after specialist and is told over and over that the fetus she is carrying has anencephaly and may live only an hour or two after birth, but she decides to see the pregnancy through to the birth - this is called “choice”.

In my support of “choice” I also defend these choices. Any one of these women could have made a different choice, and more women than you will ever know actually do make these choices, as dramatic as they sound. I see them as strong women with strong support, regardless of the participation of the men involved in the conceptions. Unfortunately this is not the case for so many women today. The immorality of abortion begins in not educating women about how their bodies work, about sexuality, about how men’s bodies work, about the mind games that are played when women surrender their bodies for “love” and men feign “love” to get sex. There are innumerable “choices” to be made long before the couple has intercourse or the woman considers abortion. That is where to concentrate the vitriol that appears as high-and-mighty judgment on this forum. How can this be turned around to be productive and supportive?

Limerick**

If you mean we each have the power to choose evil, then yes we can be pro abortion. But, if we are being genuine then “pro choice” on genocide, rape, arson, pedophilia, abortion, etc is wordplay in an attempt to disguise and obviate what is clearly an immoral decision.

 

[limerick]

limerick, what you say really doesn’t make any sense. Think about it. You say that it is a choice, you disagree with the choice but nonetheless the woman is making a choice. We understand that, i don’t think anyone is saying it is not a choice. The problem is, that choice is immoral.

Here is where we disagree, and the problem is one of rhetoric. Since I do not equate “choice” exclusively with abortion, and I allow the word “choice” to represent all options and not the singular option of abortion, it would be incorrect to say that “choice” is immoral. You may believe that abortion is immoral, but the exercise of free will (choice) is not immoral.

Now according to your logic, there should be no laws then. Everyone should be able to make whatever choices they want. That is basically what you are saying. Who should stop me from making the choice to kill someone? Who should stop me from making the choice to steal, hurt, maim, or whatever else I want to do?

I am saying no such thing. Choice exists whether there are laws or not! The jails and prisons are overcrowded with people who have made poor choices and immoral choices. Laws give us a framework with which to measure an offense and dispense punishment. But they do not stop anyone from committing a grave offense if that person is bound and determined to do so.

This is what you are saying. Why is abortion an exception? Please tell me that. Do you feel that a fetus(baby) in the womb is less deserving of life or any form of rights? Do you think a fetus(baby) is nothing more then just a finger or an arm that can be cut off at will? Although I would argue then that a police officer is not going to sit by while someone cuts their own arm off, but I digress.

**A woman who has an abortion is not immune to God’s punishment, but currently abortion is an act which can take place in the United States without threat of legal repercussions. So there are really two arguments here. I understand your frustration with the moral consideration, but I am primarily concerned more with the legal aspect insofar as that impacts a woman’s options from which to choose a course of action. **

A baby, in the womb is no less important than any other living creature. It deserves no less in dignity and respect. Now if you just don’t see a baby in the womb as deserving of any form of dignity or respect then i will end this debate now because there is no way you could ever possibly understand our point of view.

**I understand it, I don’t disagree with it; I am simply not compelled to force that viewpoint on anyone. A woman’s life - and afterlife - are her concern, not mine.

Limerick**

 

[BRZ]

I see, then I understand you better now. Also, I think you misunderstood me on one point. I do not equate the word “choice” to abortion. When I said this “The problem is, that choice is immoral.”

What I meant was that, the choice to choose an abortion was an immoral choice. I did not mean choice in general is immoral. It is true that to exercise our free will may not be in and of itself immoral, but the choices that are made can be immoral or moral depending on what that choice is.

Your right, currently, in the US abortion is illegal but I think it is a good idea to educate people on why it should be illegal and the other options that people have other then abortion. Your right insofar as you say that it is not our place to judge the souls of others or condemn people but it is our responsibility to educate people on what is wrong and why and to try to help them in anyway we can to not do that thing which is wrong. I do feel that choosing to have an abortion is a grave evil and should not be socially acceptable under any circumstances. Of course not everyone would agree with me but I also feel there are lots of other things that should not be allowed or socially acceptable such as adultery and the list could go on.

 

[limerick]

I see, then I understand you better now. Also, I think you misunderstood me on one point. I do not equate the word “choice” to abortion. When I said this “The problem is, that choice is immoral.”

What I meant was that, the choice to choose an abortion was an immoral choice. I did not mean choice in general is immoral. It is true that to exercise our free will may not be in and of itself immoral, but the choices that are made can be immoral or moral depending on what that choice is.

Your right, currently, in the US abortion is (not) illegal but I think it is a good idea to educate people on why it should be illegal and the other options that people have other then abortion. Your right insofar as you say that it is not our place to judge the souls of others or condemn people but it is our responsibility to educate people on what is wrong and why and to try to help them in anyway we can to not do that thing which is wrong. I do feel that choosing to have an abortion is a grave evil and should not be socially acceptable under any circumstances. Of course not everyone would agree with me but I also feel there are lots of other things that should not be allowed or socially acceptable such as adultery and the list could go on.

Limerick

 

[BRZ]

Haha, oops, my mistake

 

[Des]

I have neither the power nor the interest in assigning “rights” to any individual.

You assigning them to have a right to their ‘choice’.

**

Convinced herself that it is none of ‘our’ business because somehow,

**
Yes or no, do you think it’s any of our business what a woman does regarding aborting her child?

Choice never disappears. Some choices that people make, men included, will go against the will of God. Free will is the guideline or the downfall for every human being. For the moral infraction there is Purgatory or Hell; for the legal infraction there is the “system” to serve society.

What you just said has zero to do with the situation of allowing someone a choice to murder. It’s just babble.
There is a basic moral law within each individual. Killing innocent people is pretty basic as in it’s a no no. You come in here saying quite the opposite. That people should be allowed, using their own free will of choice to murder the innocent. Your ‘choice’ involves slaughtering human beings while still in the womb. Using your logic it is ok for me to also say parents have the ‘choice’ to murder their newborns because they created them and it is ‘their’ child so they can do with them what they desire. And you should agree that punishment to this crime cannot be factored in here since you do support ‘Choice’ after all.

 

[limerick]

If you mean we each have the power to choose evil, then yes we can be pro abortion. But, if we are being genuine then “pro choice” on genocide, rape, arson, pedophilia, abortion, etc is wordplay in an attempt to disguise and obviate what is clearly an immoral decision.

**I do believe you overshot your mark.

We each have the power to choose evil or** good. That is the complete point, not just part of it.

Limerick

 

[limerick]

Limerick:
I have neither the power nor the interest in assigning “rights” to any individual.

Des:
You assigning them to have a right to their ‘choice’.

**
Limerick:
I am no one’s Higher Power. God has given each human being free will, and the essence of free will is choice. In the case of abortion, we choose to follow what you would call a moral or an immoral path. I did not bestow free will upon anyone: I have no power to do so.**​

Limerick (partial):
Convinced herself that it is none of ‘our’ business because somehow,

Des
Yes or no, do you think it’s any of our business what a woman does regarding aborting her child?

Limerick:
**I have made myself abundantly clear on this point. I DO NOT think it is any of my business what a woman does regarding choosing to have an abortion. Did you just get here?
**

---

Limerick:
Choice never disappears. Some choices that people make, men included, will go against the will of God. Free will is the guideline or the downfall for every human being. For the moral infraction there is Purgatory or Hell; for the legal infraction there is the “system” to serve society.

Des:
What you just said has zero to do with the situation of allowing someone a choice to murder. It’s just babble.
There is a basic moral law within each individual. Killing innocent people is pretty basic as in it’s a no no. You come in here saying quite the opposite. That people should be allowed, using their own free will of choice to murder the innocent. Your ‘choice’ involves slaughtering human beings while still in the womb. Using your logic it is ok for me to also say parents have the ‘choice’ to murder their newborns because they created them and it is ‘their’ child so they can do with them what they desire. And you should agree that punishment to this crime cannot be factored in here since you do support ‘Choice’ after all.
Today 7:20 am

**
Limerick:
a) My remarks are completely applicable to the situation of abortion. As I said, free will can be the downfall of a human being. A woman who chooses to have an abortion of her own free will is sure to have immediate and afterlife consequences. And, as I have said perhaps a hundred times here, choice does not equal abortion. Choice allows for options of all shapes and sizes, including but not limited to abortion. I select my words as carefully as I can to convey precisely what I mean. It’s unfortunate that you let your emotions sabotage your post.

b) Killing innocent people is a “no no”? What did Jesus say about killing guilty people?

c) It is** okay for you to say whatever you want.

d) Parents have as much choice to murder their newborns as they have painting the nursery all in blue. Choice is not abortion. Choice refers to the entire palette of decisions we are called upon to make day in and day out: choose what tie to wear, choose what to have for breakfast, choose what route to take to work . . . Yes, sometimes men and women do choose abortion as their solution to an unexpected or unwanted pregnancy. But this is not where choice begins and ends.

I have already factored in punishment - guess you glossed over it. I will paraphrase a section of my earlier post so perhaps you can consider what I have been trying to convey: “For the moral infraction there is Purgatory or Hell; for the legal infraction there is the “system” to serve society.” Because abortion is legal in this country, for the most part there is no legal infraction; hence, no arrest, arraignment, trial or sentencing.

Limerick

 

[Des]

Limerick:
I have neither the power nor the interest in assigning “rights” to any individual.

**So basically you wish for others to make the laws for you? Or would you prefer to live in a jungle where each person carries their own moral law? And bascially if we ever happened to overturn this abortion law, you’d sit quielty and just accept it since to fight it, would be wanting to assign rights to an individual. **

God has given each human being free will, and the essence of free will is choice. In the case of abortion, we choose to follow what you would call a moral or an immoral path. I did not bestow free will upon anyone: I have no power to do so.

Correct. God also assigns each person their ‘Right to Life’. You, myself, a child or a preborn child each has this basic right. You seem to love to pass over that part as if it didn’t exist.

Limerick:
I have made myself abundantly clear on this point. I DO NOT think it is any of my business what a woman does regarding choosing to have an abortion. Did you just get here?

I never asked about yourself. I asked if you think it’s OUR (as in Catholics) business.

Limerick:
Choice never disappears. Some choices that people make, men included, will go against the will of God. Free will is the guideline or the downfall for every human being. For the moral infraction there is Purgatory or Hell; for the legal infraction there is the “system” to serve society.

You mean a system you feel you have no right to speak up for regarding moral guidelines. This system in your world you feel shouldn’t even exist I would have to assume since you defend ‘choice’ so much.

a) My remarks are completely applicable to the situation of abortion. As I said, free will can be the downfall of a human being. A woman who chooses to have an abortion of her own free will is sure to have immediate and afterlife consequences. And, as I have said perhaps a hundred times here, choice does not equal abortion.

And as I have said many times over, choice in the context of this thread regarding a woman’s right to ‘choose’ means exactly that. If I were to say, I were for the ‘choice’ of pedophiles to molest kids without any kind of moral law stating it’s a crime yet persistently say as you do, I’m not for the molesting part, I’m for their choice. Do you not think that makes me part of that crime. To defend pedophiles ‘right’ to choose this act without a punishment attached to it? Please limerick, that is exactly what ‘prochoice’ does. It is saying, I’m all for allowing a woman the right to murder her unborn child if she wants to without attatching any kind of punishment to her crime. You are defending her murder and disguising it as some sort of ‘choice’. Of course it’s her choice. Of course a rapist can rape if he wants to. But should we say, he can have this choice and get off scott free. What kind of a world do you even live in to suggest this is acceptable thinking. You seem to love to confuse this issue over and over and as I read your responses, my jaw literally drops because there is no sense to it.

**

** Choice allows for options of all shapes and sizes, including but not limited to abortion. I select my words as carefully as I can to convey precisely what I mean. It’s unfortunate that you let your emotions sabotage your post. **

**
You seem to repeat it over and over again meanwhile skipping many things we say to use your examples against you.

I have already factored in punishment - guess you glossed over it. I will paraphrase a section of my earlier post so perhaps you can consider what I have been trying to convey: “For the moral infraction there is Purgatory or Hell; for the legal infraction there is the “system” to serve society.” Because abortion is legal in this country, for the most part there is no legal infraction; hence, no arrest, arraignment, trial or sentencing.

I never glossed over anything. It’s just more gibberish that seems to try to evade the points I’m making and comparing it to your own ideas of pro choice. What does abortion being legal or Purgatory or Hell have to do with if there ‘SHOULD’ be punishment to killing the unborn if it is indeed murder. And since we know ALL murderers make their ‘choice’ even many very complex choices, get jail, why are woman and men who partake in this same act not only getting away with it, but actually having the goverments allowing their own doctors to assist this evil.

 

[Des]

---

b) Killing innocent people is a “no no”? What did Jesus say about killing guilty people?

---

But unlike you, I believe killing people should come with a punishment.

**

d) Parents have as much choice to murder their newborns as they have painting the nursery all in blue. Choice is not abortion. Choice refers to the entire palette of decisions we are called upon to make day in and day out: choose what tie to wear, choose what to have for breakfast, choose what route to take to work . . . Yes, sometimes men and women do choose abortion as their solution to an unexpected or unwanted pregnancy. But this is not where choice begins and ends.

**
**Any sort of murder can have numerous choices leading up to the act itself. But when it comes down to it, it’s widely accepted as morally wrong. You again though totally skipped the message I was attempting to give you. **

**Yes or no, are parents allowed to kill their newborns and call it ‘choice’ as you suggest they do with thier pre-borns without being punished? **

And yes or no, do you believe a fetus is a human being like the rest of us, except in his/her earlier growth stage?