It isn’t greed that kills – no plutocrat decreed that abortion was legal. No businessman overturned one pro-life law after another.
What you say is true but it seems that greed is always the bulk of the mix. IT is still the main motive.
Money is only a counting device. It is what money buys that is critical. And what it buys is power.
For Sure! And what people will do for it huh? kill, steal, sell their soul to the devil they dont care. How sad.
I’m not at all suggesting a death sentence. I just didn’t know that this kind of help was given a priority, I guess. I certainly did not know that it was available for free as hasikelee mentioned. If a child is born addicted to drugs, do the drugs leave the poor child’s system pretty quickly, or really, how does that work? Most people I’ve talked to (probably pro-choice) make it sound like if a child is born addicted to drugs, then the child is damaged for life. I don’t know anything about it except don’t do it. (Well, you’re not supposed to do drugs anyway, but you know what I mean.)There are many pro-life organization that could either help the addicted mother or direct her to were she can go for help. I know of quite a bit of adoptive parents that would adopt a child like this in fact I have two cousins who were born addicted to drugs. I am not sure where you are going with the mother who doesn’t want help, no we cannot force her to stop doing drugs but we can do everything in our power to help her and save the life of the child.
Also being addicted to drugs should not warrant a death sentence for either the mother or the child.
But the key is, money rules not because people want money for itself, but because they can buy power with it.
exactly! money, power, greed, its like a dog chasing his tail. around and around, Some people do learn, the hard way, and some never do, or never will! Go figure. And who do we trust! Can we trust dr, lawyers, it is so sad and awful to say this but who. It seems that all crooks are tied into one another, thats how they survive. And when you get and good dr, lawyer, they have a hard time lasting dont they? People keep crying the worlds going to end, I cant wait! God needs to come the sooner the better. IT is really bad. It really is. And what is worse we know how bad it is and we cant do a darn thing about it. People say vote! For who? Throw them out of office How?
I hate to tell you this, but we are the greedy crooks. We accept the morally unacceptable in return for more government “benefits.”
I read about a lot of these programs to reduce AIDS, just as an example, and condoms are always involved in these. I wonder just how much of it is simply ignorance and how much is denial. It may take a lot of convincing to sell somebody on the idea that condoms and the pill actually INCREASE the incidence of unwanted pregnancy because both of them give people a false sense of security. Of course the condom manufacturers in particular may realize this (denial) and bow to the almighty dollar like most other businesses. So, yes, a lot of people think that condoms are great, but is that just because they don’t know any better?
You know what though, Honestly not really. There really are good people in this world, its just there are so few of them, or they just dont know what they can do anymore. When you fight for the good and truth the WORLD is against you. And you ask yourself why? And then you remember where did i hear that before. And then you remember this world is not mine. If it were my people would not have let me be put to death. It all goes back to the beginning. But remember we were warned were we not!
You missed the great debate we had on condoms.
Do this:
I maintained a discussion with another user on this forum for quite awhile over the use of condoms. He was fully informed on the statistics, user rates, risks, etc of condoms. Yet he fully supported condom use, both in a regular marriage in America and in rape/impoverished conditions in Africa.
same thing, is that what you mean?
No, they are not the same thing.
Oh okay im with you now. Sorry just didnt understand what you were saying. Its been one of those days.
I would say that it is an undeniable fact that some sort of life begins at conception. And given the scriptural and penitential glosses I mentioned in my previous post, it is up for grabs whether that life is human or merely animal. Moreover, it is clear that that life is not separate from the mother (as the case of the pregnant cow makes clear).
If it is murder. You believe it is. I do not believe it is. This is why you believe what you do and I am torn with regard to my beliefs. Because I do not believe it is murder does not, to me, mean that abortion is therefore okay all day all the time–it remains an unfortunate practice because the fetus is a potential human and that potentiality represents something of value. How
To me, the first part of your question reads, “in what way is it unreasonable to defend the human lives of the not-yet-human?” Well, I don’t quite know how to answer that question. Would it be reasonable for me to argue that things which do not exist have a right to exist? Would it be reasonable for me to argue that a half-executed painting is a completely finished painting? Maybe. I guess what I’m saying is that I’m not yet convinced that the unborn possess human lives which are in need of defence. I understand that’s a position you find reprehensible, but the alternative is a position I find indefensible on all but sentimental or emotional grounds. Again, for me, there is enough gray area to keep the topic an open wound. But that’s not something I mind, particularly.
Often, it seems that it is. But I agree with you.
My point was not prescriptive–I wasn’t coming up with a solution, and I specifically stated that abortion is not a solution to the problem of abusive families, comfortless orphanages, etc. I’m saying that something needs to be done to help those who are actual real-life human children who are born to parents who do not want them, cannot or will not care for them, or actively despise them. My point was that the pro-life movement would look less like the pro-birth movement and more like a truly pro-life movement if it valued the lives of the born as much as it appears to value the lives of the unborn.
If the embryo has rabbit DNA, it is not a human being.
Moreover, it is clear that that life is not separate from the pilot (as the case of the airline passengers makes clear).
Whether something “is” or “is not” is not dependent on whether which way you believe. It either is or it isn’t.
It is very clear that that life is a completely different entity from the mother, having its own unique and separate human DNA. In the case of the cow, I have had embryo transplants performed from one animal to the next and can assure you, that recipient cow didn’t become partly the donor cow.
it is murder. You believe it is. I do not believe it is. This is why you believe what you do and I am torn with regard to my beliefs. Because I do not believe it is murder does not, to me, mean that abortion is therefore okay all day all the time*And one of the very reasons we need laws to protect the unborn from murder is because their lives are at the mercy of those who don’t believe it is murder. They need to be protected from people who believe it is okay to kill them.
Of course I assure you that is not what I wrote.
Again, the one does not in any way exclude the other. In fact, in our local and state pro-life organizations, I know of absolutely no one who holds the position “give birth, but afterwards let the woman fend for herself”. In fact the personal actions by each of these people totally contradicts that idea. I would suggest networking with your local pro-life organization and talking to some of the people and see how they feel about helping women who choose not to abort their children. It is a totally unfounded to say that pro-lifer’s miss the mark on that one.