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

[limerick]

**Your assertion that the topic “should not be simply not discussed” presents readers with a double negative; I assume you mean that the topic should be discussed. So who discusses the topic? Parents with their children? Okay. Parents with their 10-year-old children? Parents with their eight-year-old children? My daughter entered puberty at age 9 - she needed all the facts, not just that abstinence would make the heart grow fonder.

In the original post there are no facts, only cardboard cut-outs. No one can evaluate a mock-up like that; there is no risk, no emotion, no connection, no investment. It can only be thoroughly evaluated when the situation is actually at hand. Education is the best thing to derail an unwanted pregnancy, but the educators need to have a fair hand in dealing out the information and not just play ostrich with the facts about birth control and methods of abortion. This also means deliberate exclusion of the lies about abortion bringing on breast cancer and certain mental and emotional illnesses; some women may experience such difficulties post-abortion, but there is absolutely no scientific link between abortion and breast cancer, and mental and emotional problems are not to be expected of even a majority of women who opt to have abortions. Those who do suffer grave emotional and mental problems due to the abortion process and the loss itself can be helped by mental health professionals.

People must develop their own opinions and beliefs without succumbing to the chameleon-like attitude I see in small groups everywhere. “Yeah, what HE said!” Mob mentality has no place in morality, and it excuses the individuals who comprise the mob from actually doing the legwork and exploring the subject in depth. This is a case where there simply is no safety, for anyone, in numbers.

In this case, the choice is clear, and it is precisely that: choice. I don’t know one single woman who has had an abortion, myself included, who would ever try to con you into thinking she believes the fetus is not** a living thing. Come back to this thread once you or your sister or your girlfriend conceives accidentally, through rape or not, and tell us just how wrenching, how difficult, how grievous choice truly is.

Limerick

 

[crazzeto]

Your assertion that the topic “should not be simply not discussed” presents readers with a double negative; I assume you mean that the topic should be discussed. So who discusses the topic? Parents with their children? Okay. Parents with their 10-year-old children? Parents with their eight-year-old children? My daughter entered puberty at age 9 - she needed all the facts, not just that abstinence would make the heart grow fonder./

Or how about in public forums like this one, where mature adults can debate the issues? This is incredibly more useful than having your parents tell you their views when you’re 8, or 10, or 12 would you not agree? And how about the Priest tells his congregation durring Mass? I wouldnt’ be supprised if you don’t like that idea, but again I must remind you that this is a Catholic Moral Teaching. Unlike many other Churchs out there, Moral Teachings still strike to the very core of what it means to be Catholic. Because with out the Moral Teaching the Church could not accomplish it’s job, leading soles to heaven.

In the original post there are no facts, only cardboard cut-outs. No one can evaluate a mock-up like that; there is no risk, no emotion, no connection, no investment. It can only be thoroughly evaluated when the situation is actually at hand.

So what? In the OP a senario was presented with abortion as it’s only possible solution. Do you disagree with this? Just because you want to say “well from a perspective it’s kind of vege…” no no no no… You don’t just say well “I didn’t get every little peice of information so I can’t respond”, you do respond and you respond to the facts at hand.

Education is the best thing to derail an unwanted pregnancy, but the educators need to have a fair hand in dealing out the information and not just play ostrich with the facts about birth control and methods of abortion.

The point, I think you’re missing is that abortion is always an aboration. It’s always evil, it’s always the wrong choice. So the point, the OP’s point is that abortion isn’t an option, even in the case of rape.

Nobody is saying a rape victem has to keep that child if they don’t want to. You can give it up for adoption. In many cases there are waiting lists of several years for couple who want a baby but can’t have one. So why not adoption? Let me ask you this specific question, how does the fact that the child was raped change anything? How does this change the fact that this is a living child, already in it’s mothers womb?

This also means deliberate exclusion of the lies about abortion bringing on breast cancer and certain mental and emotional illnesses; some women may experience such difficulties post-abortion, but there is absolutely no scientific link between abortion and breast cancer, and mental and emotional problems are not to be expected of even a majority of women who opt to have abortions. Those who do suffer grave emotional and mental problems due to the abortion process and the loss itself can be helped by mental health professionals.

And while we’re at it tell every woman considering an abortion that they’re getting ready to kill a whole, seperate human being who is, by the way their own child. A whole, seperate already living human being, you know if we’re being completely honest here. Sort of like South Dakota already requires, a law upheld by the Federal appelett system because when you break this down to the core issue the fact remains, this is a living human being inside the womb.

People must develop their own opinions and beliefs without succumbing to the chameleon-like attitude I see in small groups everywhere. “Yeah, what HE said!” Mob mentality has no place in morality, and it excuses the individuals who comprise the mob from actually doing the legwork and exploring the subject in depth. This is a case where there simply is no safety, for anyone, in numbers.

You really seem to dislike the idea of discussing the issues behind abortion, I really question why that is. I hate leaping to conclusions but I also really do wonder why it is you seem to not want people talking about it. Just keep it quite, sweep it under the rug. Why is that? Would you agree this is a very imporant issue? You act as if it is given how much you’re posting about it. I would suggest to you that the more imporant an issue then the more imparitive it is to discuss that issue.

In this case, the choice is clear, and it is precisely that: choice. I don’t know one single woman who has had an abortion, myself included, who would ever try to con you into thinking she believes the fetus is not a living thing. Come back to this thread once you or your sister or your girlfriend conceives accidentally, through rape or not, and tell us just how wrenching, how difficult, how grievous choice truly is.

Limerick

There is only one valid choice one you fairly weigh the issues, even with out God in the equeation. This is a whole, seperate living human being. That says it all right there, I ask you, under what circomstance does a whole, complete, seperate, living human being have no rights. Make no mistake, that’s exactly what the “pro-choice” position puts forward. It puts forward the notion that a class of human beings have no rights, because if you have no right to life, then you have no rights. And further, at what point is some one granted that right to life? Or do we even consider life a right? Has it become more of a privilege these days?

 

[newbetx]

There is only one valid choice one you fairly weigh the issues, even with out God in the equeation. This is a whole, seperate living human being. That says it all right there, I ask you, under what circomstance does a whole, complete, seperate, living human being have no rights. Make no mistake, that’s exactly what the “pro-choice” position puts forward. It puts forward the notion that a class of human beings have no rights, because if you have no right to life, then you have no rights. And further, at what point is some one granted that right to life? Or do we even consider life a right? Has it become more of a privilege these days?

My browser won’t let me put the applause icon here. This is exactly the argument between “pro life” and “pro choice.” At what point does the person have rights? Let me demonstrate. Today, depending on the law and the desire to believe what people want, a baby is generally a “person” once born. Is the baby any less of a person 5 min prior to birth? Some say yes. In fact some say as long as the feet are still in the vagina, it’s not a person and may be killed. (see partial birth abortion.) Now is that same baby still a person or a life a day before it’s born? A week, a month? You get my drift her. When is a person a person? Science knows the answer. But that is not what was presented to the Supreme Court. What was presented to the court wasn’t science. It was “reproductive rights.” Two very different issues. Science knows that life is created when the two halves make a whole. That cell is life. The cell may be only a potential living breathing human being after much more effort. But it is life. So it basically comes down to whether one believes they have the right to kill a life or not based on their own personal view of their circumstances. After all, sex is a right, isn’t it? And if one doesn’t like the outcome? “Kill it. It’s inconvenient! You don’t have to live that way.” Personal responsibility is the real issue IMO. If we were responsible in our actions, there wouldn’t be a need for abortion. But sexual responsibility has been reduced to taking precautions to not get pregnant or spreading an STD. Even if the only precaution someone executes is “wishful thinking.” Most abortions have nothing to do with rape. Or a Mother that has six kids. They have to do with selfishness. The inability to give. The desire to not “suffer.” What are the ramifications of not following “From conception to natural death?” Someone gets to decide for you whether you live or die, based upon the criteria they set. How’s that for freedom?

 

[crazzeto]

My browser won’t let me put the applause icon here. This is exactly the argument between “pro life” and “pro choice.” At what point does the person have rights? Let me demonstrate. Today, depending on the law and the desire to believe what people want, a baby is generally a “person” once born. Is the baby any less of a person 5 min prior to birth? Some say yes. In fact some say as long as the feet are still in the vagina, it’s not a person and may be killed. (see partial birth abortion.) Now is that same baby still a person or a life a day before it’s born? A week, a month? You get my drift her. When is a person a person? Science knows the answer. But that is not what was presented to the Supreme Court. What was presented to the court wasn’t science. It was “reproductive rights.” Two very different issues. Science knows that life is created when the two halves make a whole. That cell is life. The cell may be only a potential living breathing human being after much more effort. But it is life. So it basically comes down to whether one believes they have the right to kill a life or not based on their own personal view of their circumstances. After all, sex is a right, isn’t it? And if one doesn’t like the outcome? “Kill it. It’s inconvenient! You don’t have to live that way.” Personal responsibility is the real issue IMO. If we were responsible in our actions, there wouldn’t be a need for abortion. But sexual responsibility has been reduced to taking precautions to not get pregnant or spreading an STD. Even if the only precaution someone executes is “wishful thinking.” Most abortions have nothing to do with rape. Or a Mother that has six kids. They have to do with selfishness. The inability to give. The desire to not “suffer.” What are the ramifications of not following “From conception to natural death?” Someone gets to decide for you whether you live or die, based upon the criteria they set. How’s that for freedom?

Thank you so much for your kind comment, and for so very beautifully taking the next logical step in the debate

 

[limerick]

PART ONE

Or how about in public forums like this one, where mature adults can debate the issues? This is incredibly more useful than having your parents tell you their views when you’re 8, or 10, or 12 would you not agree? And how about the Priest tells his congregation durring Mass? I wouldnt’ be supprised if you don’t like that idea, but again I must remind you that this is a Catholic Moral Teaching. Unlike many other Churchs out there, Moral Teachings still strike to the very core of what it means to be Catholic. Because with out the Moral Teaching the Church could not accomplish it’s job, leading soles to heaven.

**Mature adults can and should debate the issues of abortion, sex education and reproductive rights. But how many girls and boys have entered puberty without a clue as to how their bodies work and what loving relationships look like? How many have been given any tools to work with as they negotiate love and lust, sex and responsibility? If they wait until they are mature adults they are behind the reproductive 8-ball; the time to begin orienting them is not when they are 21. They need to begin to grasp the gravity of the situation long before they are able to create life.

I don’t know how I feel about a priest addressing an entire congregation with facts about eggs and sperm. Although I am not a practicing Catholic, this does not sit well with me. Catholic moral teaching can be addressed in CCD classes, but I don’t think that approach is appropriate at mass. And the parents of these children are the front line of communication - it is one of their primary responsibilities and they must be willing to assume the duty. **

So what? In the OP a senario was presented with abortion as it’s only possible solution. Do you disagree with this? Just because you want to say “well from a perspective it’s kind of vege…” no no no no… You don’t just say well “I didn’t get every little peice of information so I can’t respond”, you do respond and you respond to the facts at hand.

I did not read the original post with the assumption that abortion would be the only possible solution. In my estimation, under the circumstances presented, the original poster would have had an opportunity to offer solutions to the antagonist, such as birth and raising the child, or birth with an arranged adoption. Instead she resorted to referring to the possible worth of the life involved, which weakens her case and allow an opportunity for the respondent to get even uglier. The only true answer to the question “What would you do?” is “I don’t know. I have convictions; I would have to see how well they stand up in the face of such a situation.”

The point, I think you’re missing is that abortion is always an aboration. It’s always evil, it’s always the wrong choice. So the point, the OP’s point is that abortion isn’t an option, even in the case of rape.

Nobody is saying a rape victem has to keep that child if they don’t want to. You can give it up for adoption. In many cases there are waiting lists of several years for couple who want a baby but can’t have one. So why not adoption? Let me ask you this specific question, how does the fact that the child was raped change anything? How does this change the fact that this is a living child, already in it’s mothers womb?

I’ve already addressed the adoption issue, so I think we’re done with that. For you, abortion is always a wrong choice. For the woman who has an abortion, it is sometimes a matter of convenience, sometimes a matter borne of economic desperation or compromised health. I didn’t think twice. I was pregnant, then I was not pregnant. And yes, there is a significant spiritual price that some of us pay for our actions; but many women are unfazed and continue on with life as if their abortions were just a speed bump. All women are not the same, all faiths and beliefs are not the same (i.e., we are not all Roman Catholics). And there is one God who will judge us, as He is neither you nor me nor the original poster. Conscience, faith, circumstances all play a part in the decision-making here. If the fetus and the pregnant woman involved are not you, in my opinion her decision and the toll she pays for it are none of your business.

And while we’re at it tell every woman considering an abortion that they’re getting ready to kill a whole, seperate human being who is, by the way their own child. A whole, seperate already living human being, you know if we’re being completely honest here. Sort of like South Dakota already requires, a law upheld by the Federal appelett system because when you break this down to the core issue the fact remains, this is a living human being inside the womb.

The world is quite a bit bigger than South Dakota. And, yes, this is a living human being inside the womb - someone else’s womb. Someone else’s situation. You make decisions on your own behalf daily, and also perhaps for your loved ones. But you are not in a position to make decisions for women across the globe who are pregnant, scared, broke, beat up, homeless, risking passing genetic anomalies, and so forth. I am willing to bet that you will find none of these circumstances warrants an abortion; but you have no authority to decide that for anyone but yourself or a minor child, and even then your hands could be tied by judicial bypass.

See PART TWO ….

 

[limerick]

PART TWO

You really seem to dislike the idea of discussing the issues behind abortion, I really question why that is. I hate leaping to conclusions but I also really do wonder why it is you seem to not want people talking about it. Just keep it quite, sweep it under the rug. Why is that? Would you agree this is a very imporant issue? You act as if it is given how much you’re posting about it. I would suggest to you that the more imporant an issue then the more imparitive it is to discuss that issue.

**You misunderstand me completely. I encourage discussion of abortion and of all the issues behind abortion, but I acknowledge the fact that many people will disagree with me. It matters not. I will not be swayed. I have lived the abortion experience and I speak to the topic with my own hard-won wisdom. My abortion took place before Roe v Wade and was not the experience women have in clinics today. I, too, would love to see the need for abortion diminish and eventually disappear, but until boys and girls, men and women can come to regard one another with respect and love and a complete comprehension of biology and options, abortion will remain an available solution for unplanned conceptions. Whether it remains a legal option or not will be determined in the future. So you can pray, you can lobby, you can evangelize, you can vote, you can do whatever you think of within legal means to turn the tide, and I do not discourage you from doing so. I just happen to feel that when a woman is considering abortion, she should hear her own voice, perhaps the voice of the father of the fetus, and the voice of God in her head and heart and soul. She should not hear your voice. **

There is only one valid choice one you fairly weigh the issues, even with out God in the equeation. This is a whole, seperate living human being. That says it all right there, I ask you, under what circomstance does a whole, complete, seperate, living human being have no rights. Make no mistake, that’s exactly what the “pro-choice” position puts forward. It puts forward the notion that a class of human beings have no rights, because if you have no right to life, then you have no rights. And further, at what point is some one granted that right to life? Or do we even consider life a right? Has it become more of a privilege these days?

**A fetus is not whole until it is viable. A fetus is not separate because it depends completely upon the mother for nourishment and development. So the question in every debater’s mind is, when is the “right” to life granted to the embryo or fetus? And I don’t have to tell you that the answer lies within the souls of the women considering abortion. You have 100 women, you may have 100 answers.

Limerick**

 

[newbetx]

Sorry for the formating problem. My web browser is really messed up or something. Blue is Limerick, black is me.

**You misunderstand me completely. I encourage discussion of abortion and of all the issues behind abortion, but I acknowledge the fact that many people will disagree with me. **

I don’t misunderstand you. I definitely understand you. And I agree that we have look at the bigger picture.

**Y It matters not. I will not be swayed. **

So why discuss it if you won’t accept there may be a concept you have missed? I’ve heard this many times before. “Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up.” Not a really fair “discussion” is it?

** I just happen to feel that when a woman is considering abortion, she should hear her own voice, perhaps the voice of the father of the fetus, and the voice of God in her head and heart and soul. She should not hear your voice. **

She should hear your voice? But what is the voice of God? Free will? No, God allows us free will. Like having sex in the first place. (rape excluded for now.) Does God want us to abort just because a pregnancy is “inconvenient?” I doubt that.

**I, too, would love to see the need for abortion diminish and eventually disappear, but until boys and girls, men and women can come to regard one another with respect and love and a complete comprehension of biology and options, abortion will remain an available solution for unplanned conceptions. Whether it remains a legal option or not will be determined in the future. So you can pray, you can lobby, you can evangelize, you can vote, you can do whatever you think of within legal means to turn the tide, and I do not discourage you from doing so. **

We agree on so much. Responsibility for our actions, the desire to reduce the rate of abortion, because we know that abortion exists because we don’t truly love one another, nor respect others and we’re not doing a good job of teaching that to our kids or the general population. But why?

**A fetus is not whole until it is viable. A fetus is not separate because it depends completely upon the mother for nourishment and development. So the question in every debater’s mind is, when is the “right” to life granted to the embryo or fetus? And I don’t have to tell you that the answer lies within the souls of the women considering abortion. You have 100 women, you may have 100 answers.

Limerick**

Any baby is dependent on someone to feed it, clean it, care for it, etc even after it is born. The “viable” definition is arbitrary. Same can be said for the very elderly and infirmed. It’s not a valid test in our opinion. The logical conclusion is either all human life is valued or none is. It is pretty much a binary discussion which is why it’s so polarizing. There are exceptions, like an unviable pregnancy that threatens the life of the mother, self-defense and a few others. They have logical reasoning and are not arbitrary.

 

[crazzeto]

I don’t have time respond personally, I’m at the office and this is becoming long and elaborate but just wanted to say:

Sorry for the formating problem. My web browser is really messed up or something. Blue is Limerick, black is me.

I don’t misunderstand you. I definitely understand you. And I agree that we have look at the bigger picture.
She should hear your voice? But what is the voice of God? Free will? No, God allows us free will. Like having sex in the first place. (rape excluded for now.) Does God want us to abort just because a pregnancy is “inconvenient?” I doubt that.

We agree on so much. Responsibility for our actions, the desire to reduce the rate of abortion, because we know that abortion exists because we don’t truly love one another, nor respect others and we’re not doing a good job of teaching that to our kids or the general population. But why?

Any baby is dependent on someone to feed it, clean it, care for it, etc even after it is born. The “viable” definition is arbitrary. Same can be said for the very elderly and infirmed. It’s not a valid test in our opinion. The logical conclusion is either all human life is valued or none is. It is pretty much a binary discussion which is why it’s so polarizing. There are exceptions, like an unviable pregnancy that threatens the life of the mother, self-defense and a few others. They have logical reasoning and are not arbitrary.

Yes thank you very much, this is exactly right and so many pro-choicers and I do include Limerick here do not realize exactly how arbaturary they’re being.

A fetus does breath in the womb
It does have a heart beat
It does have brain waves
Any human can be sustained with oxignenated, nutriant rich blood (aka, umbilical chord) being supplied to the body

So what’s the difference? They say these fetuses are not viable on their own, but as pointed out here so many people in this world (quadraplegics for instance) are not viable on their own. What makes a fetus different? Or do quadraplegics, people in a coma, people who are alert and awake but require medical intervention for a period of time to survive (feeding tube, resperator etc). None of these people are viable, what gives them the right to life, or any rights at all under this standard?

 

[newbetx]

Yes thank you very much, this is exactly right and so many pro-choicers and I do include Limerick here do not realize exactly how arbaturary they’re being.

Thank you for the support. I’m still having editing problems with CAF. Haven’t found the key yet. When one classifies people, not ideals, one judges people. One may be against an ideal, but when one attaches people to those ideals, we judge them. I believe that much of the “debate” is not discussion but personal attacks. We won’t get anywhere while we attack each other. It is much better to converse with someone about a subject, not their belief in the subject. Ones beliefs can change. And we need to inspire people to do so. It is difficult but not impossible. Jesus could have converted everyone if he wanted. Why didn’t he? Most pro-lifers are attacked by those who don’t understand or don’t want to understand. Attacking back is a natural reaction. However, conversion doesn’t happen to those under attack. We must remember our mission.

 

[limerick]

crazzeto:

"First, we must understand that the fetus cannot breathe while in the womb. We all instinctively know this logically, but we’ve got to keep it in mind as we discuss the various aspects of this issue. Since the fetus cannot breathe within the womb, the mother has to deliver all the oxygen and clear away all of the carbon dioxide for the infant. This exchange is accomplished in the placenta. Oxygen from the mother’s blood is exchanged for carbon dioxide in the baby’s blood across the placental membrane. The umbilical cord contains the umbilical vein, that carries oxygenated blood from the placenta to the fetus, and the umbilical arteries, which carry deoxygenated blood from the fetus to the placenta. These vessels within the umbilical cord are essential for fetal gas exchange that takes the place of breathing while the fetus is inside the womb." Medical Legal Art, Benjamin Broome, M.A.
medicallegalblog.com/2009/05/nuchal-cord-its-cord-problem-not-neck.html
**
Is mere sustenance of life your criterion for quality living? Actually, this doesn’t make much difference to me. I understand your argument about quadriplegics and those in a vegetative state, as well as those with varying degrees of mental deficiency or illness. After experiencing two miscarriages I’m not sure I believe any one of us has a “right to life”. Some survive the journey through the womb into the world and others do not. Human intervention is the difference here; abortion can be considered human intervention and is brought about as a result of human error and a search for a solution to the error. “Approximately 26 million legal and 20 million illegal abortions were performed worldwide in 1995, resulting in a worldwide abortion rate of 35 per 1,000 women aged 15–44.”** (The Guttmacher Institute, “International Family Planning Perspectives, 1999, 25(Supplement):S30–S38”) That’s a lot of error. We can whine about it or we can formulate a comprehensive solution. I suggest unbiased, mandatory sex/sexuality and love education for children and teens (and adults if and when they want or need it), beginning with age-appropriate presentations for pre-adolescents and graduated, more detailed, and accurate, non-rhetorical, non-religion-based education as the kids grow older. Of course, all parents and guardians may opt to instruct their children in the ways of their faiths and beliefs in addition to this instruction.

Limerick

 

[newbetx]

crazzeto:

"First, we must understand that the fetus cannot breathe while in the womb. We all instinctively know this logically, but we’ve got to keep it in mind as we discuss the various aspects of this issue. Since the fetus cannot breathe within the womb, the mother has to deliver all the oxygen and clear away all of the carbon dioxide for the infant. This exchange is accomplished in the placenta. Oxygen from the mother’s blood is exchanged for carbon dioxide in the baby’s blood across the placental membrane. The umbilical cord contains the umbilical vein, that carries oxygenated blood from the placenta to the fetus, and the umbilical arteries, which carry deoxygenated blood from the fetus to the placenta. These vessels within the umbilical cord are essential for fetal gas exchange that takes the place of breathing while the fetus is inside the womb." Medical Legal Art, Benjamin Broome, M.A.
medicallegalblog.com/2009/05/nuchal-cord-its-cord-problem-not-neck.html
**
Is mere sustenance of life your criterion for quality living? Actually, this doesn’t make much difference to me. I understand your argument about quadriplegics and those in a vegetative state, as well as those with varying degrees of mental deficiency or illness. After experiencing two miscarriages I’m not sure I believe any one of us has a “right to life”. Some survive the journey through the womb into the world and others do not. Human intervention is the difference here; abortion can be considered human intervention and is brought about as a result of human error and a search for a solution to the error. “Approximately 26 million legal and 20 million illegal abortions were performed worldwide in 1995, resulting in a worldwide abortion rate of 35 per 1,000 women aged 15–44.”** (The Guttmacher Institute, “International Family Planning Perspectives, 1999, 25(Supplement):S30–S38”) That’s a lot of error. We can whine about it or we can formulate a comprehensive solution. I suggest unbiased, mandatory sex/sexuality and love education for children and teens (and adults if and when they want or need it), beginning with age-appropriate presentations for pre-adolescents and graduated, more detailed, and accurate, non-rhetorical, non-religion-based education as the kids grow older. Of course, all parents and guardians may opt to instruct their children in the ways of their faiths and beliefs in addition to this instruction.

Limerick

Hate to break it to you but “quality of life” isn’t a right. It’s a selfish desire. In the US…“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

And what is “unbiased” education? The only “unbiased information” is that which one already believes. If you think science is “unbiased,” great because there is plenty of science to prove a baby in the womb is a living human being. There is plenty of science to prove sex should be reserved for marriage, too. As Simon and Garfunkel tell us “still the man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.”

Quality of life comes from within. It comes from faith. It comes from our ability to find truth among the lies, positives where negativity rules, and a desire to learn from our failures and try again. If we try to measure ourselves by how comfortable we are, we will find we’re never happy. Who we are is more important that what we have.

The faithful know what love is. Our fore-fathers did too. And they knew which side their bread was buttered on. There is a difference between self-governance and self-centeredness. As I finally figured out in my old age… the world does not revolve around me and what I want and how best for me to be comfortable.

Again, either everyone has the right to life or no one has. According to our Declaration of Independence, everyone has the right to life. It’s not just for the privileged few.

 

[limerick]

Hate to break it to you but “quality of life” isn’t a right. It’s a selfish desire. In the US…“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

And what is “unbiased” education? The only “unbiased information” is that which one already believes. If you think science is “unbiased,” great because there is plenty of science to prove a baby in the womb is a living human being. There is plenty of science to prove sex should be reserved for marriage, too. As Simon and Garfunkel tell us “still the man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.”

Quality of life comes from within. It comes from faith. It comes from our ability to find truth among the lies, positives where negativity rules, and a desire to learn from our failures and try again. If we try to measure ourselves by how comfortable we are, we will find we’re never happy. Who we are is more important that what we have.

The faithful know what love is. Our fore-fathers did too. And they knew which side their bread was buttered on. There is a difference between self-governance and self-centeredness. As I finally figured out in my old age… the world does not revolve around me and what I want and how best for me to be comfortable.

Again, either everyone has the right to life or no one has. According to our Declaration of Independence, everyone has the right to life. It’s not just for the privileged few.

**
What, then, is the wish to provide a quality life for one’s child? Is that a selfish desire as well? How would you guide those women who cannot afford to give birth, who will be beaten if they do give birth, who are in physical peril if they give birth? Will you be there to pay their medical bills and ward off danger and mop the blood off the surgery floor as the life drains out of them because they do try to give birth? If you have a gripe with the concept of a quality life, take it up with Madison Avenue and its advertising whores, not me.

Have you noticed that your forefathers’ document tells us that “all men are created equal”? Are women still lagging behind, longing for contentment and respect, but being used and abused for men’s selfish gain and pleasure? “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” indeed: you may want to chastise your precious forefathers for this happy little set-up, one which is out of reach of so many Americans today. Rap their knuckles a couple of times for the lie they perpetrated on us all, however well-intentioned it might have been.

Once again, no one is arguing that the cell growth within the uterus is not a living organism which will eventually develop into a baby if given birth to. Please don’t throw that up here again; it’s just a red herring and it’s the kind of distraction that makes discussion fruitless and frustrating.

You think your faithful forefathers knew what love was? You’re right - surf your net sometime and gather up information that spells out the multiple affairs and illegitimate children fathered by Jefferson and Franklin. And on down the road we had FDR and Jack Kennedy and Clinton - don’t make them out to be saints. They were and are sinners, just like the rest of us.

I am leaning into the notion that none of us actually has the “right” to life. Some of us make it and some of us don’t. No one will know in this life whether the aborted children narrowly escaped lives of terror and horror through having been aborted. Undoubtedly millions could have had happy and productive lives. But remember: energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Those souls are still extant in this Universe, perhaps to take another form to revisit us, perhaps to take their places at the hem of the robe of God.

It’s time we quit behaving as if we have all the answers.

Limerick **

 

[crazzeto]

crazzeto:

"First, we must understand that the fetus cannot breathe while in the womb. We all instinctively know this logically, but we’ve got to keep it in mind as we discuss the various aspects of this issue. Since the fetus cannot breathe within the womb, the mother has to deliver all the oxygen and clear away all of the carbon dioxide for the infant. This exchange is accomplished in the placenta. Oxygen from the mother’s blood is exchanged for carbon dioxide in the baby’s blood across the placental membrane. The umbilical cord contains the umbilical vein, that carries oxygenated blood from the placenta to the fetus, and the umbilical arteries, which carry deoxygenated blood from the fetus to the placenta. These vessels within the umbilical cord are essential for fetal gas exchange that takes the place of breathing while the fetus is inside the womb." Medical Legal Art, Benjamin Broome, M.A.
medicallegalblog.com/2009/05/nuchal-cord-its-cord-problem-not-neck.html
**
Is mere sustenance of life your criterion for quality living? Actually, this doesn’t make much difference to me. I understand your argument about quadriplegics and those in a vegetative state, as well as those with varying degrees of mental deficiency or illness. After experiencing two miscarriages I’m not sure I believe any one of us has a “right to life”. Some survive the journey through the womb into the world and others do not. Human intervention is the difference here; abortion can be considered human intervention and is brought about as a result of human error and a search for a solution to the error. “Approximately 26 million legal and 20 million illegal abortions were performed worldwide in 1995, resulting in a worldwide abortion rate of 35 per 1,000 women aged 15–44.”** (The Guttmacher Institute, “International Family Planning Perspectives, 1999, 25(Supplement):S30–S38”) That’s a lot of error. We can whine about it or we can formulate a comprehensive solution. I suggest unbiased, mandatory sex/sexuality and love education for children and teens (and adults if and when they want or need it), beginning with age-appropriate presentations for pre-adolescents and graduated, more detailed, and accurate, non-rhetorical, non-religion-based education as the kids grow older. Of course, all parents and guardians may opt to instruct their children in the ways of their faiths and beliefs in addition to this instruction.

Limerick

The baby does in fact “breath” while in the womb, though no, the lungs are not supplying oxagen they get that from the Umbilical chord. The lungs however, do operate as they do out side the womb, if they didn’t they would not develop properly.

books.google.com/books?id=R8tzBDhx31cC&pg=PA100&lpg=PA100&dq=do+lungs+function+in+the+womb&source=bl&ots=pyf14S8F64&sig=3MxgwgOoAgT5-Wmlh3rU1K50GJM&hl=en&ei=227gSp-PE56MtgeXj7QG&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CCwQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

So yes, the fetus does in fact “breath” while in the womb, even though I agree they don’t get O2 from the placental fluid. So basically, fetus’s breath in a sense greater than your average patient on a heart/lung bypass machine, or in a so called “iron lung”.

 

[newbetx]

**
What, then, is the wish to provide a quality life for one’s child? Is that a selfish desire as well? How would you guide those women who cannot afford to give birth, who will be beaten if they do give birth, who are in physical peril if they give birth? Will you be there to pay their medical bills and ward off danger and mop the blood off the surgery floor as the life drains out of them because they do try to give birth? If you have a gripe with the concept of a quality life, take it up with Madison Avenue and its advertising whores, not me.**
I’m not sure how many millions of women would get beat up for giving birth. Or being pregnant. But we do have homes and help for women to leave abusive relationships. No kid deserves to be raised in such an environment. I don’t see how killing it makes it better for the unborn.

All sorts of women from Mexico come to the United States for free medical help and to give birth in the US. Don’t tell me that’s a lie because our county has been complaining about it for years. We, the tax payers, pay for everyone who doesn’t have insurance, so I don’t know why we need government health care. It’s defacto, already.

And you know what? YOU should have a beef with the Madison Ave folks, too.
limerick;5849975:

Have you noticed that your forefathers’ document tells us that “all men are created equal”? Are women still lagging behind, longing for contentment and respect, but being used and abused for men’s selfish gain and pleasure? “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” indeed: you may want to chastise your precious forefathers for this happy little set-up, one which is out of reach of so many Americans today. Rap their knuckles a couple of times for the lie they perpetrated on us all, however well-intentioned it might have been.

I will grant you sexist attitudes are to blame for a lot of our historical problems. But being pregnant shouldn’t be considered a disease. I don’t think men thought up that concept.

I do wish to point out that the most highly revered person in history by our Church is a woman. I assure you, Mary can bring you peace if you get to know her.

If you don’t think you have it good in this country, please name the country you think you could have more freedom and opportunity in.

Once again, no one is arguing that the cell growth within the uterus is not a living organism which will eventually develop into a baby if given birth to. Please don’t throw that up here again; it’s just a red herring and it’s the kind of distraction that makes discussion fruitless and frustrating.

Please don’t throw that up here again; it’s just a red herring and it’s the kind of distraction that makes discussion fruitless and frustrating.

You think your faithful forefathers knew what love was? You’re right - surf your net sometime and gather up information that spells out the multiple affairs and illegitimate children fathered by Jefferson and Franklin. And on down the road we had FDR and Jack Kennedy and Clinton - don’t make them out to be saints. They were and are sinners, just like the rest of us.

Hmm. no mention of abortion even though it was available. Infidelity has always been a problem. So has fornication. Nothing new here. I laughed like crazy at the fallout of the Republican Leadership after going after Clinton for being unfaithful. What a waste of tax payer money. As Jesus said. Let those without sin throw the first stone. Picking up rocks and throwing them is never a good idea.

I am leaning into the notion that none of us actually has the “right” to life. Some of us make it and some of us don’t. No one will know in this life whether the aborted children narrowly escaped lives of terror and horror through having been aborted. Undoubtedly millions could have had happy and productive lives. But remember: energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Those souls are still extant in this Universe, perhaps to take another form to revisit us, perhaps to take their places at the hem of the robe of God.

Well,there are a lot of famous people that agree with that first statement. Stalin, Hitler, Mao. All of them thought some people were “disposable.”

This man seems to know what happens to aborted children. catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=30600

It’s time we quit behaving as if we have all the answers.

Limerick

We actually do have many answers if you care to look. You are correct, we are all sinners here. Some have found the freedom of confession. Some don’t want to admit to sinning and will say anything to justify their actions. And it consumes them. It’s human nature, I guess. Peace will only be theirs when they admit their faults and submit themselves to helping others.

I finally saw how my participation in the sexual revolution had hurt my pre-marital partners, my wife, and would hurt my kids. I never felt better than when I confessed my sexual sins and my pro-choice stubbornness. There IS another way to live if one chooses to do so. There is nothing wrong with our sexuality. It’s not dirty. It’s a gift from God. TOB is too broad and complicated to debate here, but it’s “door #3” and the winning combination of sexual well being and mutual respect for all men and women if they want it to be.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

**No, there are two other considerations: LIFE is of value; or LIFE is valueless. Innocence has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Limerick**

Life does have value—human life.

Some would confuse the issue further by equating human life with animal life, and by equating a convicted murderer with an innocent unborn baby.

 

[ExDeoVita]

PART TWO

…I, too, would love to see the need for abortion diminish and eventually disappear, but until boys and girls, men and women can come to regard one another with respect and love and a complete comprehension of biology and options, abortion will remain an available solution for unplanned conceptions…

Limerick

L. I’m glad you would like to see the need for abortion diminish. However I would like to respond to your latter comment about ‘boys and girls, men and women’ regarding each other with respect…

It’s hard to comprehend how something like respect for others or love could be created from such reckless violence. The love and respect that you hope for can never be bred from from a human conscience that deliberately chooses such grave evil.

In a letter earlier this week, Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh issued a strongly pro-life pastoral letter urging his flock’s active protection of life from conception to natural death. I would like to quote two passages from this letter as it pertains to the idea you put forth:

The damage done by legalized abortion and assisted suicide, said Zubik, is “not just the sheer volume of lives destroyed, more than 40 million over these last four decades. It is also the damaging effect on human consciences.” -LSN

Zubik also highlighted the evil of legally allowing physicians to directly kill their patients, which “especially weakens the moral fabric of society by allowing members of a profession whose vocation is healing to put to death lives they are entrusted to save.” -LSN

See: lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09102101.html

Sincere respect and love for others is diametrically opposed to what abortion is, what is does to ‘boys and girls, men and women’ and how it diminishes the moral fabric of our society rather then build it up. To think that love and respect could spring fourth from a society that embraces abortion would be tantamount to thinking one could cultivate a peaceful and welcoming environment on a tropical island by filling it with terrorist, serial killers, and rapists.

To desire an end to the ‘need’ for abortion is good, although I don’t know of any circumstances where the need’s of an individual require the taking to innocent human life. What about the needs of the precious, unique, unrepeatable infant yet to be born?

I have a sign from the Silent No More Awareness Campaign that reads: "Woman don’t need abortion, they need our support"

On this I presume we can agree? I volunteer at a crises pregnancy center that offer’s that very support to abortion minded women every day - temporary housing, PCAP, baby items, financial support, ect. and yet they still leave and choose to take the life within them. It goes without saying, if society permits it under law, people will inevitably use it regardless of how devastating it could in fact be. That is why it should be outlawed, but in the meantime I think we need to be staunch supporters of life at all its stages as this truly does cultivate the two things you spoke of: love and **respect **

 

[limerick]

The baby does in fact “breath” while in the womb, though no, the lungs are not supplying oxagen they get that from the Umbilical chord. The lungs however, do operate as they do out side the womb, if they didn’t they would not develop properly.

books.google.com/books?id=R8tzBDhx31cC&pg=PA100&lpg=PA100&dq=do+lungs+function+in+the+womb&source=bl&ots=pyf14S8F64&sig=3MxgwgOoAgT5-Wmlh3rU1K50GJM&hl=en&ei=227gSp-PE56MtgeXj7QG&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CCwQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

So yes, the fetus does in fact “breath” while in the womb, even though I agree they don’t get O2 from the placental fluid. So basically, fetus’s breath in a sense greater than your average patient on a heart/lung bypass machine, or in a so called “iron lung”.

**Breathing movements, and development of musculature to enable breathing, does not constitute breathing. Nice try.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

I’m not sure how many millions of women would get beat up for giving birth. Or being pregnant. But we do have homes and help for women to leave abusive relationships. No kid deserves to be raised in such an environment. I don’t see how killing it makes it better for the unborn.

Look around. Women and children suffer at the hands of men who think they were “trapped into a domestic situation”, never mind the fact that the men willingly removed their pants in the process. Of course no kid deserves to be raised in such an environment. But many are. You will never see how “killing it” makes it better for the unborn. None of us will ever see or know the outcome of any given abortion as it relates to the spirit of the unborn.

All sorts of women from Mexico come to the United States for free medical help and to give birth in the US. Don’t tell me that’s a lie because our county has been complaining about it for years. We, the tax payers, pay for everyone who doesn’t have insurance, so I don’t know why we need government health care. It’s defacto, already.

**Why would I tell you that’s a lie? No need for defensiveness here. And I will not discuss government health care in this thread. **

And you know what? YOU should have a beef with the Madison Ave folks, too.

**I do. **

I will grant you sexist attitudes are to blame for a lot of our historical problems. But being pregnant shouldn’t be considered a disease. I don’t think men thought up that concept.
**
This point compares apples to oranges. What are you trying to say? **

I do wish to point out that the most highly revered person in history by our Church is a woman. I assure you, Mary can bring you peace if you get to know her.

How have you concluded that I am not acquainted with Mary?

If you don’t think you have it good in this country, please name the country you think you could have more freedom and opportunity in.

**More defensiveness. I have it no better and no worse than the next guy further on down the block. I also have experienced the freedom of choice in this country, something millions of people seem to resent. **

"Please don’t throw that up here again; it’s just a red herring and it’s the kind of distraction that makes discussion fruitless and frustrating." Why have you included this without a response??

Hmm. no mention of abortion even though it was available. Infidelity has always been a problem. So has fornication. Nothing new here. I laughed like crazy at the fallout of the Republican Leadership after going after Clinton for being unfaithful. What a waste of tax payer money. As Jesus said. Let those without sin throw the first stone. Picking up rocks and throwing them is never a good idea.

I take it this is your response to my pointing out that the forefathers of this country, whom you claim Knew What Love Was, were philanderers, adulterers, and selfish, self-gratifying scofflaws? Yeah, man, that’s love all right; that’s love the way I’ve known it since I was 15 years old. When are men ever going to acknowledge the pain and shame and hopelessness they have caused women - and children - throughout the ages by thinking with their gonads?

Well,there are a lot of famous people that agree with that first statement. Stalin, Hitler, Mao. All of them thought some people were “disposable.”

Be good enough to refer to the statement so I don’t have to spend 18 minutes searching post after post for it. Thanks.

This man seems to know what happens to aborted children. catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=30600

We actually do have many answers if you care to look. You are correct, we are all sinners here. Some have found the freedom of confession. Some don’t want to admit to sinning and will say anything to justify their actions. And it consumes them. It’s human nature, I guess. Peace will only be theirs when they admit their faults and submit themselves to helping others.
**
One need not enlist the help of a priest in a confessional, with ritual and pomp, to pray to God for forgiveness of sins and for absolution. I feel no need for a middle man. God has ears; He can hear me just fine. Peace can be found in ways other than groveling in a confessional booth.**

I finally saw how my participation in the sexual revolution had hurt my pre-marital partners, my wife, and would hurt my kids. I never felt better than when I confessed my sexual sins and my pro-choice stubbornness. There IS another way to live if one chooses to do so. There is nothing wrong with our sexuality. It’s not dirty. It’s a gift from God. TOB is too broad and complicated to debate here, but it’s “door #3” and the winning combination of sexual well being and mutual respect for all men and women if they want it to be.

**TOB? 'Splain, please.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

Life does have value—human life.

Some would confuse the issue further by equating human life with animal life, and by equating a convicted murderer with an innocent unborn baby.

**So why muddy the waters of discussion with these trite distractions?

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

L. I’m glad you would like to see the need for abortion diminish. However I would like to respond to your latter comment about ‘boys and girls, men and women’ regarding each other with respect…

It’s hard to comprehend how something like respect for others or love could be created from such reckless violence. The love and respect that you hope for can never be bred from from a human conscience that deliberately chooses such grave evil.

In a letter earlier this week, Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh issued a strongly pro-life pastoral letter urging his flock’s active protection of life from conception to natural death. I would like to quote two passages from this letter as it pertains to the idea you put forth:

The damage done by legalized abortion and assisted suicide, said Zubik, is “not just the sheer volume of lives destroyed, more than 40 million over these last four decades. It is also the damaging effect on human consciences.” -LSN

Zubik also highlighted the evil of legally allowing physicians to directly kill their patients, which “especially weakens the moral fabric of society by allowing members of a profession whose vocation is healing to put to death lives they are entrusted to save.” -LSN

See: lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09102101.html

Sincere respect and love for others is diametrically opposed to what abortion is, what is does to ‘boys and girls, men and women’ and how it diminishes the moral fabric of our society rather then build it up. To think that love and respect could spring fourth from a society that embraces abortion would be tantamount to thinking one could cultivate a peaceful and welcoming environment on a tropical island by filling it with terrorist, serial killers, and rapists.

To desire an end to the ‘need’ for abortion is good, although I don’t know of any circumstances where the need’s of an individual require the taking to innocent human life. What about the needs of the precious, unique, unrepeatable infant yet to be born?

I have a sign from the Silent No More Awareness Campaign that reads: "Woman don’t need abortion, they need our support"

On this I presume we can agree? I volunteer at a crises pregnancy center that offer’s that very support to abortion minded women every day - temporary housing, PCAP, baby items, financial support, ect. and yet they still leave and choose to take the life within them. It goes without saying, if society permits it under law, people will inevitably use it regardless of how devastating it could in fact be. That is why it should be outlawed, but in the meantime I think we need to be staunch supporters of life at all its stages as this truly does cultivate the two things you spoke of: love and **respect **

**You missed my point: love and respect for other human beings should not just be turned on with the flip of a switch when one enters puberty. It needs to be reinforced in age-appropriate ways through all stages of a child’s life, by parents primarily, and then by extended family, educators, individuals and groups whom the parents of the children trust. This is simply not being done.

Limerick**