Ah- of the better dead than underfed defense! Should women be allowed to shoot her three-year-old in for quality-of-life declines to such an extent shefeels she can no longer afford the child?
If he participated in the abortion, yes. That would make an accessory or crime, As far as whether mutilation should be punishment for a crime I think not.
Did you ever visit the South when racial segregation was in effect? You make the claim that racial discrimination is still rampant shows a profound ignorance of history.
I don’t know where you live but where I live, any pregnant women can get medical help and food by the gov’t. I know from personal experience, of having a guy leave me empty handed. So bad argument there. There is WIC and there is medicaid for pregnant women specifically, I can attest to that. So abortion should not be done because a women ‘thinks’ she can’t get food or medical help, that right there is not a bright woman IMO.Quite a few men seem to think women aren’t human beings either, and don’t give a rip if a woman they got pregnant can’t get food or medical help through the pregnancy. Nor do they apparently think their children are human either, if they aren’t interested in helping to raise them. Even if no one coerced an abandoned pregnant woman into terminating a pregnancy directly, in many cases, she may feel there was no alternative. If only people valued other people more, and had genuine love and compassion, perhaps these painful choices would happen far less often.
Oh, there’s more than enough blame to go around, and women and children, as usual, get more than their share of suffering. Can’t we do better, all of us?
And rpp, I had directed those first two paragraphs at Hastrman, but I agree, some lightening up would be a fine thing.
And Hastrman, do tell me where I implied that you or anyone in this thread is a misogynist?
Is this a post-modernist argument?
So?
I’m making no such defense. I put the word need in single quotes to note that this is what they profess, not what I believe.
What agenda would that be? Social Justice and service to the poor? For me, there is no connection to abortion at all. I have to pursue that ‘agenda’ because I’ve been instructed to by God, via his son. The fact that pursuing it appears to help on other moral areas that concern me just reinforces my Faith.
That would encourage the argument that the legalization of abortion is a form of genocide, since minority women, caught in never-ending poverty, (you imply) abort at a higher rate. However, given the close-knit extended families of many of these cultures, adoption by a relative, or a relative providing extensive support for the young woman, happens frequently. I would encourage you to look deeper into the statistics before you present that argument.
Yes, I have seen the south several times. I admit, some changes seem miraculous. For example, you can go to Ol’ Miss and see black and white students sitting at tables together talking. Quite remarkable when you consider that some of the white student’s parents and/or grandparents were almost certainly knocking over school busses full of young children and wearing white hoods just decades ago.
So you think Jesus would agree that it is okay to kill our children if social justice is not equal to what you think it should be? Can you show me where the church has taught that the end of abortion is contingent upon a certain level of social justice? And who determines that level? How can a child that has been dismembered and thrown out with the trash enjoy any justice at all?
I am afraid that nearly everyone who claims there is still rampant discrimination believes the solution is more money for minorities and more discrimination against those who do not belong to a minority.
Yes, but is that because discrimination is diminished or because laws specifically require it? If discrimination is significantly diminished, that proportional disparities should decrease in most metrics. Conversely, if discrimination is not a factor, removing legal requirements should not cause percentages to shrink, but it does.
Close-knit, extended families? I don’t know–maybe 40 years ago that was true. But the thread appears to be way off topic in any case.
I’m sorry, I can’t be your straw man. I cannot argue a point of view I do not hold.
Speaking of patently racist comments. Looks like you have a bit if bigotry to work on yourself.
Absent court rulings, laws and enforcement, nothing would have changed.
That doesn’t follow – for example, many things impact poverty (including some of the things that were supposed to reduce poverty.) Discrimination is only one of them. Drug and alcohol abuse, a culture that places a low value on education, and so on are all part of the equation.
Acutally, you’ve proved my point – laws changed people’s values and attitudes.
As opposed to someone who never even tasted grits?
You see discsrimination-I see dead babies-a disporportinate number who are Black , BTW. Much evil is done and/or supported under the guise of "Social Justice.
The statistics are clear. Blacks and Hispanics are over represented, significantly, in procurred abortions. This has a disturbing side effect of making self described “devout Christians” and even “devout Catholics” over represented in procurred abortions. What, exactly, this means I can’t say. Conjecture about the actual causal factors is the most I can do.
But the children also tend to fair better than their peers in areas like academic achievement, which would seem to suggest that poverty does tend to beget further poverty.
Funny how those who publicly proclaim their disdain for bigotry are often so ready to use it against someone else.
Racial discrimination is still rampant - I should know because I face it pretty often. The big difference is that it’s now so subtle as to seem like it’s all just a “complex” by people who want to be victims forever. There are such people, yes, but there are also real penalties for those endowed by their Creator with a dark skin.
Actually, there is evidence of social change preceding the legal changes. In fact, that was the opinion of many self described ‘moderates’ - better to let things continue to change naturally than create a backlash with a legislative solution.
Actually, I have. On the other hand, I have never lusted after my sister, so perhaps a more compelling argument would be that I can never truly understand the south because I am cursed with a family tree that actually forks. But why perpetuate regional and ethnic sneers?As opposed to someone who never even tasted grits?
