I did.
Many posts ago.
Your interpretation will be there no matter anyone’s answer.
How to re-educate so that people will understand about abortion?
- Status
Many posts ago.
Your interpretation will be there no matter anyone’s answer.
You ceded that argument a couple of days ago.
Why continue beating a dead horse?
Anyone that denies the humanity of the earliest stages of the human being needs the DNA evidence to prove them wrong.
This would include those in support of fetal stem cell research as well as those in support of abortion.
It is the worst kind of monster that recognizes the humanity therein and yet will still allow the decision to kill it.
You just defend the decision to kill human life.
Interesting that you want to make the distinction there.
D
Drawmack
Guest
And, if you are against a woman’s right to choose, you are anti-choice.
And, if you are against a woman’s right to choose, you are anti-women’s rights
etc.
You see how this game of semantics works, when we begin to engage in it. It doesn’t lead to any worthwhile debate. It’s useless and it detracts for the real point of the entire discussion – the baby.
D
Drawmack
Guest
Did you even read my post? That was my point.
D
Drawmack
Guest
If the only one here who is willing to stand up for their beliefs as pro-life is asking you to stop using the term anti-abortion (and BTW asking his compatriots to use better language too) do you think you could respect my wishes and refer to me a pro-life? After all, doesn’t good language underlie any rational debate or discussion?
D
Drawmack
Guest
pro-choice – no it’s a title the way you’re using it here.
D
Drawmack
Guest
You’re simply playing with semantics. The fact is everyone knows what you mean when you say pro-choice and everyone knows what you mean when you say pro-life – especially within an abortion debate. If we decided to call pro-choice donkey and pro-life elephant would that mean that people would think we were referring animals when used these words in an abortion discussion?
When someone uses the term gun-rights activist do you think that they are actually claiming the gun should have rights?
When someone says my house is on Market St. do you honestly think that their house in on market street?
Then someone says get on the plain, do you actually get on the plain instead of in the plane?
J
JRKH
Guest
St Francis,
It’s truly too bad that this thread has been so badly derailed.
It was a good idea to bring up - that is discussing ways to reeducate the public, (and public officials).
I’ve noteiced a couple of people, myself included have tried to put in some ideas and get back on track but it appears to be impossible.
Of course - perhaps we have learned something here.
Much of the difficulty in re-educating is that such a simple principle as the sanctity of Life has aready been so convoluted by politics and doublespeak and “political correctness” that clarifying the issues may be impossible. Some day the public is going to have to reawaken to the fact that there are things that are always right and things that are always wrong.
May God have mercy on us all for letting things get to this state.
And may those who support legalized abortion come to understand that they will one day be confronted by the ever growing army of the murdered innocents.
Peace
James
It’s truly too bad that this thread has been so badly derailed.
It was a good idea to bring up - that is discussing ways to reeducate the public, (and public officials).
I’ve noteiced a couple of people, myself included have tried to put in some ideas and get back on track but it appears to be impossible.
Of course - perhaps we have learned something here.
Much of the difficulty in re-educating is that such a simple principle as the sanctity of Life has aready been so convoluted by politics and doublespeak and “political correctness” that clarifying the issues may be impossible. Some day the public is going to have to reawaken to the fact that there are things that are always right and things that are always wrong.
May God have mercy on us all for letting things get to this state.
And may those who support legalized abortion come to understand that they will one day be confronted by the ever growing army of the murdered innocents.
Peace
James
D
Drawmack
Guest
I haven’t answered this question because I feel that the answer to it is embedded in my answer the question about the embryos.
Women’s right to choose what? You have to fill that in before you can label anyone with that term.
and again, they must answer for the rest of the sentence. The right to choose is a fragment of an idea and makes little sense without the rest of it to go along. So I then ask, “Right to choose what?”
I am glad you recognize ‘the baby’ too few do.
And it is my recognition of that as well that compells me to refuse to allow the vocabulary to be manipulated by the other side of the argument.
So we should give in and let people manipulate the language however they want?
I am sorry, but I refuse to address someone that defends abortion as pro-choice.
Abortion is the subject, not choice.
They are pro-abortion.
I figured a good way to do this would be to hash through the various arguments and answers to those arguments.St Francis,
It’s truly too bad that this thread has been so badly derailed.
It was a good idea to bring up - that is discussing ways to reeducate the public, (and public officials).
I’ve noteiced a couple of people, myself included have tried to put in some ideas and get back on track but it appears to be impossible.
D
Drawmack
Guest
You applying different rules to other word usage than your own.
I explained that in a previous post you seem to have overlooked.
It’s not a manipulation by the other side. It is recognizing proper phraseology. Their movement denotes itself as pro-choice, ours as pro-life therefore we should use these terms. Both sides!
A
allhers
Guest
If people truly want to educate themselves on this, I suggest the following sites.
It is important to distinguish between direct abortion, which is the intentional and willeddestruction of a preborn child, and a legitimate treatment a pregnant mother may choose to
save her life. Operations that are performed to save the life of the mother-such as the
removal of a cancerous uterus or an ectopic pregnancy that poses the threat of imminent
death-are considered indirect abortions.
They are justified under a concept called the “principle of double effect.” Under this
principle, the death of the child is an unintended effect of an operation independently
justified by the necessity of saving the mother’s life.
Essentially, both mother and child should be treated as patients. A doctor should try to
protect both. However, in the course of treating a woman, if her child dies, that is not
considered abortion.
Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless
she suffers from a fatal disease such as cancer or leukemia, and if so, abortion would be
unlikely to prolong, much less save the life of the mother.
-Alan Guttmacher, former Planned Parenthood president
all.org/article.php?id=10216
D
Drawmack
Guest
then please do not refer to yourself as pro-life, abortion is the issue not life.
A
allhers
Guest
This is another good one. Education is the key, then you can educate others with the facts
When the life of the mother is truly threatened by her pregnancy, if both lives cannot
simultaneously be saved, then saving the mother’s life must be the primary aim. If through
our careful treatment of the mother’s illness the pre-born patient inadvertently dies or is
injured, this is tragic and, if unintentional, is not unethical and is consistent with the
pro-life ethic. But the intentional killing of an unborn baby by abortion is never
necessary.
www.prolifephysicians.org/rarecases.htm
When the life of the mother is truly threatened by her pregnancy, if both lives cannot
simultaneously be saved, then saving the mother’s life must be the primary aim. If through
our careful treatment of the mother’s illness the pre-born patient inadvertently dies or is
injured, this is tragic and, if unintentional, is not unethical and is consistent with the
pro-life ethic. But the intentional killing of an unborn baby by abortion is never
necessary.
www.prolifephysicians.org/rarecases.htm
A
allhers
Guest
Found this from someone else on here listing it once…
T. Murphy Goodwin, M.D., a distinguished professor of maternal-fetal medicine at the
University of Southern California, has written an eloquent article describing how women are
told they need abortions for their own health, when this is patently untrue. A major reason
for unnecessary abortion referrals is ignorance, to put it bluntly, especially on the part
of physicians in medical specialties inexperienced in treating women with high-risk
pregnancies. According to Goodwin, there are only three very rare conditions that result in
a maternal mortality greater than 20% in the setting of late pregnancy. Even in these three
situations there is room for latitude in waiting for fetal viability if the mother chooses
to accept that risk.
For fatal birth defects, abortion is sometimes presented as the only option. But a better
alternative is perinatal hospice. This involves continuing the pregnancy until labor begins
and giving birth normally, in a setting of comfort and support until natural death occurs.
bluewavecanada.blogspot.com/2…necessary.html
T. Murphy Goodwin, M.D., a distinguished professor of maternal-fetal medicine at the
University of Southern California, has written an eloquent article describing how women are
told they need abortions for their own health, when this is patently untrue. A major reason
for unnecessary abortion referrals is ignorance, to put it bluntly, especially on the part
of physicians in medical specialties inexperienced in treating women with high-risk
pregnancies. According to Goodwin, there are only three very rare conditions that result in
a maternal mortality greater than 20% in the setting of late pregnancy. Even in these three
situations there is room for latitude in waiting for fetal viability if the mother chooses
to accept that risk.
For fatal birth defects, abortion is sometimes presented as the only option. But a better
alternative is perinatal hospice. This involves continuing the pregnancy until labor begins
and giving birth normally, in a setting of comfort and support until natural death occurs.
bluewavecanada.blogspot.com/2…necessary.html
A
allhers
Guest
Priests for life web site is full of ways to get educated.
www.priestsforlife.org
This is just one example from their site.
…abortion is necessary to preserve the life and health of the mother. Is that ever true?
G: Actually it’s not. There is no such thing as an abortion to save the life of the mother.
As a matter of fact for a while… several years… I was very interested in that question in
my formative years and I would ask every obstetrician and gynecologist that I met anywhere.
And I said have you ever had a case where you had to do something to kill the baby to save
the life of the mother. I have not come across one case, you know. People think of in the
movie, the story the Cardinal, where the woman was delivering the child and got into
complications and they crushed the baby’s head. And that is just not a part of modern
medicine. That is not necessary to be done.
priestsforlife.org/media/interviewisajiw.htm
www.priestsforlife.org
This is just one example from their site.
…abortion is necessary to preserve the life and health of the mother. Is that ever true?
G: Actually it’s not. There is no such thing as an abortion to save the life of the mother.
As a matter of fact for a while… several years… I was very interested in that question in
my formative years and I would ask every obstetrician and gynecologist that I met anywhere.
And I said have you ever had a case where you had to do something to kill the baby to save
the life of the mother. I have not come across one case, you know. People think of in the
movie, the story the Cardinal, where the woman was delivering the child and got into
complications and they crushed the baby’s head. And that is just not a part of modern
medicine. That is not necessary to be done.
priestsforlife.org/media/interviewisajiw.htm
Proper phraseology means using the proper words for what they mean.
A wise man once said “Words mean things.”
Pro-life has taken to that because they advocate life.
Pro-Choice is attempting to take on that phrase to remove themselves from abortion in favor of a debate over women’s rights.
It doesn’t wash. The debate is not women’s rights, it is about basic human rights.
And the stakes are no less then life or death.
- Status