Discussing Abortion: Is Civility the Best Approach?

[blackforest]

We assemble those things as a collective because they seem to be good ideas on their own merit. The same goes for single-payer healthcare. It seems to be the only real way to administer it from where I sit.

Apologies - I haven’t studied Hume since college philosophy, and it’s (ahem!) been a few years.

So in the car accident scenario, using your philosophy, would I be stopping to help the victims out of moral obligation? Or simply because “it’s a good idea?”

Regardless their reasoning, they can remove an unwanted visitor from their body if they so choose.

A guest-visitor relationship is voluntary on the part of both parties. In this case, a human embryo or fetus can’t be a “visitor” because s/he is there based on the choices of others.

If someone really wants to be pro-life in a free society, the answer isn’t the enslavement of the woman.

First of all, speaking as a woman, (clarifying because an unusual number of CAFers think I’m male . . . ), I cannot fathom equating helping a woman carry a pregnancy to term and raise a child with forcing marginalized peoples into hard and unpaid labor. Slavery therefore sounds like an overly dramatic reference.

The answer lies in the destruction of those reasons driving it. Give mom and baby heathcare. Give mom a year of maternity leave. Create public pre-schools than run from 1yo to kindergarten.

Expensive? Sure! But it usually separates the wheat from the chaff when they’re asked to actually put their money where their mouths are.

As a member of Feminists for Life, I agree with you and favor removing obstacles to carrying a pregnancy to term and raising a child.

 

[Hume]

Apologies - I haven’t studied Hume since college philosophy, and it’s (ahem!) been a few years.

No worries. My views and his don’t align completely. I just needed to come up with an avatar and his name was the 1st the the ole hamster wheel spit out.

A guest-visitor relationship is voluntary on the part of both parties. In this case, a human embryo or fetus can’t be a “visitor” because s/he is there based on the choices of others.

That’s a hard negative. Even if I invited you into my house on purpose, the minute I want you out, you gotta go. Same goes with me at your house, right?

I cannot fathom equating helping a woman carry a pregnancy to term and raise a child with forcing marginalized peoples into hard and unpaid labor. Slavery therefore sounds like an overly dramatic reference.

It might surprise you that there is a veritable ocean of women who feel exactly that way. “My body, My choice” etc.

My wife’s one of 'em.

As a member of Feminists for Life, I agree with you and favor removing obstacles to carrying a pregnancy to term and raising a child.

:fist_right:
fist bump

Right on, sister.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

That’s a hard negative. Even if I invited you into my house on purpose, the minute I want you out, you gotta go. Same goes with me at your house, right?

Parent’s can’t just kick their children out on the streets because they don’t want them anymore.

 

[Hume]

Hume:

That’s a hard negative. Even if I invited you into my house on purpose, the minute I want you out, you gotta go. Same goes with me at your house, right?

Parent’s can’t just kick their children out on the streets because they don’t want them anymore.

Well…

#1 There is a substantially greater level of intrusion when the unwanted visitor is inside your body and…

#2 Yeah, they probably could. Now, they can’t endanger the welfare of their children, but if they decide they don’t want to be parents anymore, can they surrender their parental rights over the young ones? Yes. Most assuredly.

This is why I told you repeatedly on the other thread, pregnancy most be the sole dominion of the willing.

Very little, if anything, in this world requires a greater sacrifice than having and raising children.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

#2 Yeah, they probably could. Now, they can’t endanger the welfare of their children, but if they decide they don’t want to be parents anymore, can they surrender their parental rights over the young ones? Yes. Most assuredly.

If the welfare of the fetus is assured then I don’t really care what they do.

 

[Hume]

Hume:

#2 Yeah, they probably could. Now, they can’t endanger the welfare of their children, but if they decide they don’t want to be parents anymore, can they surrender their parental rights over the young ones? Yes. Most assuredly.

If the welfare of the fetus is assured then I don’t really care what they do.

The act of removal in the above was ultimately for the benefit and welfare of the “property owner”. It’s her concerns that come first. None else’s.

But I agree. If there was a way to immediately terminate an unwanted pregnancy that didn’t involve killing the fetus, I’d support outlawing abortion tomorrow.

Until then…

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

The act of removal in the above was ultimately for the benefit and welfare of the “property owner”. It’s her concerns that come first. None else’s.

Not when it affects someone else in a negative manner.

 

[Johann_du_Toit]

I concur wholehearted;y. We have a duty to be witnesses to the truth and to set and example. Just because pro-aborts are uncivil and disrespectful does not excuse to act the same, as that is not the Christian thing to do. In fact their uncivil and downright despicable conduct has probably turned a lot of people off the pro-abortion cause.

The pro-life cause is not only about saving lives, but also about love and compassion.

 

[tweedlealice]

I’m only speaking as a Christian, speaking to those going in for abortions. Yelling never solves anything. Our free speech can’t be stopped. They’ll try but not succeed. Love your enemy is a tough call.
Thank You , Father for helping us win this fight, to save babies lives this time. In Jesus name. Amen

 

[vz71]

There is a substantially greater level of intrusion when the unwanted visitor…

It has already been shown that the fetus is not a ‘visitor’.

 

[Hume]

It has already been shown that the fetus is not a ‘visitor’.

Oh? How so?

 

[Hume]

I concur wholehearted;y. We have a duty to be witnesses to the truth and to set and example. Just because pro-aborts are uncivil and disrespectful does not excuse to act the same, as that is not the Christian thing to do. In fact their uncivil and downright despicable conduct has probably turned a lot of people off the pro-abortion cause.

The pro-life cause is not only about saving lives, but also about love and compassion.

In truth, the overwhelming majority of the violence and vitriol I’ve observed in the debate has come from the religious groups.

But I agree that love and compassion is the way through - especially love and compassion for the woman who wants the abortion.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

How about addressing abortion the way we address smoking? The number of deaths due to smoking are about the same order of magnitude as the number of abortions. We have various campaigns to encourage people not to smoke. To some extent we have that with abortion too, with the various crisis pregnancy centers that give assistance to women who might otherwise choose abortion. But these could be stepped up and made more widely available. That is something that might bring people together who otherwise would be on opposite sides.

 

[vz71]

Oh? How so?

Several posts back.
Here is the perinent quote.

A guest-visitor relationship is voluntary on the part of both parties. In this case, a human embryo or fetus can’t be a “visitor” because s/he is there based on the choices of others.

 

[blackforest]

It might surprise you that there is a veritable ocean of women who feel exactly that way. “My body, My choice” etc.

Comparing this situation to an African-American slave with whiplashes all over his/her backside just seems a step in a wrong and inflammatory direction . . .

That’s a hard negative. Even if I invited you into my house on purpose, the minute I want you out, you gotta go. Same goes with me at your house, right?

I see two ways in which this analogy crumbles. First, if a visitors in your home overstay their welcome, do you pull out a machine and start crushing them to death? (Brutal - but that’s abortion).

Second, I cannot be a “visitor” unless I consent to visit you. Embryos and fetuses never consented to their presence in the womb.

Yeah, they probably could. Now, they can’t endanger the welfare of their children, but if they decide they don’t want to be parents anymore, can they surrender their parental rights over the young ones? Yes. Most assuredly.

Granted, but remember that abortion has that whole killing thing involved. Surrendering children over to another family isn’t the same as crushing and/or dismembering them.

I need to move on with what promises to be a busy day. You’ve been a worthy opponent and perfect example of how this debate can indeed be a civil one.

 

[OKComputer]

I agree. I tried to open up discussion and, notably, no one even commented on my attempts to show why a woman might seek abortion and how to address those issues. Civil discourse has everything to do with the issue–no one wants to listen to anyone talking with distain toward them whilst not having their issues addressed. It is shocking how hateful and condescending prolifers can be, completely unwilling to address the actual issues, and that will forever be ineffective.

Yes, absolutely. Occasionally I’ll see people either on the internet or in real life who have claimed to change minds with just their argument skills, but I don’t believe them. After all, if you were that good at persuasion you should go into politics. Or marketing.

 

[Hume]

Comparing this situation to an African-American slave with whiplashes all over his/her backside just seems a step in a wrong and inflammatory direction

Well, as human enslavement is at least as old as civilization itself, I don’t think equating the idea solely to 400 years of African enslavement in the Americas is completely justifiable.

Would “enthrallment” suit you better?

I see two ways in which this analogy crumbles. First, if a visitors in your home overstay their welcome, do you pull out a machine and start crushing them to death? (Brutal - but that’s abortion).

Of course not, but you have a right to have them leave. It’s just the unfortunate double-effect of asking the fetus to leave is its death.

Second, I cannot be a “visitor” unless I consent to visit you. Embryos and fetuses never consented to their presence in the womb.

If someone is on your property by accident, you’ve still the right to have them removed from it, we’d hopefully agree.

But I agree - the analogy breaks down. They all do at some point because an analogy is never completely identical to the situation it’s trying to describe.

Granted, but remember that abortion has that whole killing thing involved. Surrendering children over to another family isn’t the same as crushing and/or dismembering them.

Agree completely. However, it still requires the woman to undergo the perils of pregnancy and she may not wish to do that.

I need to move on with what promises to be a busy day. You’ve been a worthy opponent and perfect example of how this debate can indeed be a civil one.

Indeed. Should you wish to reply, I’ll promise the last word between us.

 

[tweedlealice]

God, put in my heart, a burden for the young girls& women. To stop abortions, we must elevate the Spirits of the women to realize they are treasures & not sex toys for selfish, rampaging testosterone. How does one discern the difference of LUST vs LOVE? Just say NO! Lust leaves b/c it wants immediate gratification. Love stays, works through issues & will marry. There are always precocious young girls trying to get into trouble. But, I lived by the rules. Other woman, also, lived by the rules.
It may be time to go back to separate boys & girls schools. It makes it harder to connect.
Just saying & thinking.
Blessings to all

 

[Cloisters]

I see this argument has gone on quite some time.

The Catechism states that each person is a charism – gift from God to the world, even if born of extra- or pre-martial sex. St. Louise de Marillac was “illigitimate,” as was St. Martin de Porres.

My new congregation’s pro-life outreach, known as the CCMM Holy Innocents Ministry, has a “third order” called Dr. St. Gianna’s Assistants for Life (DGAL). These members hope to eventually develop their own religious institute of sisters in the Dominican tradition. For now, they are considered our pro-life ministers.

One of the distinguishing characteristics of both DGAL and the proposed religious community is that they make a promise/vow of non-violence towards the pro-choice faction. We do this so that the other side realizes that we’re not there for battle, we are there to attempt to prevail upon their consciences.

Pro-life protesters would be more effective if they stood before the clinic with the address for the closest pregnancy resource center.

We also take into consideration that abortion is pure child human sacrifice for the occult. A French witch published – recently – a book called the Sacrament of Artemis. In this particular myth cycle, Artemis is promiscuous and childless. Some witches run abortuaries, and get deliberately impregnated so they can have abortions as worship. I would also recommend the online article “The Massacre of Innocence.”

Last I checked, human sacrifice was banned by any civilized country.

Blessings,
Mrs Cloisters,. O.P.
Lay Dominican
http://cloisters.tripod.com/charity/
http://cloisters.tripod.com/
http://cloisters.tripod.com/drgiannasassistantsforlife/

P.S. Please pray the first link will be able to be republished. Some weird glitch with the host.

 

[tweedlealice]

 There is a time, our Souls/Spirits realize God’s ways. Using the 12 commandments & scripture, it hits us like a tsunami. The grey areas of abortion, left us compromising b/c of the mothers pain & suffering of the child  But its all a sin & wrong.  
  They only to stop it is to change the values of women & society.  As my previous entry states, women/girls are treasures. They are the  receptacle of a new life. This message is important to teach. We are not sex toys. How many broken hearts do we need before realizing, we were just a brief encounter of passion??? 
   Uplift the females to beauty of Spirit.

We share in God’s creation. Children w difficulties, are Gods way of teaching us,
to love in His way, UNCONDITIONALLY.
It will come to good, eventually. The pendulum swings R & L then, centers.