How to re-educate so that people will understand about abortion?

[Traditional_Ang]

It’s half a phrase hiding the actual cause and intent that this ‘choice’ will bring about. It’s used to hide the shame that the term ‘pro abortion’ has with it where as a pro-lifer is fine if we are called both pro-life or anti-abortion.

Pro-choice doesn’t defend ‘all’ choices a woman will make unless it also includes the choice she could make to kill her new born.
However, pro-life does include defending all human life, from conception till it’s natural end.

Des:

Mayhaps, we need to add a word in your sentence - The Catholic & Orthodox Churches have since the time of the Apostles…
“Pro-life does include defending all INNOCENT human life, from conception till it’s natural end.”
Because the Catholic & Orthodox Churches have allowed for the Death Penalty in some cases. I don’t believe we should quibble and put in a stumbling block when the Catholic Church does not.

Otherwise, you can’t allow for DEFENSIVE WAR or for the use of DEADLY FORCE in SELF-DEFENSE, which the Church clearly teaches are OK.

Our job is to protect the INNOCENT, the VULNERABLE, the WEAK and the VOICELESS. Who are the MOST INNOCENT, VULNERABLE, WEAK & VOICELESS? and, Who are, therefore, most in need of defense?

Part of what the Forces of Death want is for us to be divided and dispersed. Remember, we are fighting a spiritual as well as a physical war, and the LAST THING we need to do is to be arguing over whether a position ALLOWED BY THE CHURCH is really PRO-LIFE.

If you really want to help those in prison, visit & pray for them. That’s what we’ve been told to do.

Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

 

[WillieWonka]

If doesn’t matter.
The here and now is a human life.

Can you elaborate? Are you under the impression that some fertilized egg is destroyed in the cloning process?

 

[WillieWonka]

Then I will repeat myself…
It does not matter.

I think it would matter a great deal. The Catholic Church teaches man is the composite of body and soul - immortal soul. If a clone did not have a soul, then it would not be human by that standard. If it is plausible to expect human clones, we might wnat to dtermine before they arrive if they should be treated like humans.

 

[WillieWonka]

Willie & vx:

Allow me to add - “Ensoulment” isn’t even an issue to be discussed - This is:
Priests for Life - Looking Abortion in the Eye - Go through ALL the LINKS
priestsforlife.org/images/index.aspx#galleries

This is the reality of Abortion - Those who claim to be “Pro-Choice” (I’m always amazed that’s the one sentence we NEVER finish) can defend THAT! and, I’m always amazed that those defending abortion NEVER want to acknowledge that we’ve done that to 48 MILLION of our fellow Americans since Roe v. Wade, and 2 BILLION of our fellow humans since Abortion was legalized in various countries, and made mandatory in others, beganing in the late 1960’s…

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

Any issue is worthy of civil discussion. Apparently the Church thought it was important enough to discuss over centuries.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Thanks for the reminder.
I was wondering just how far the train could stray from the tracks.

Vz:

You’re welcome. As long as we deal with terms and words, we’ll never get anywhere. As Priests for Life says, American didn’t get rid of Slavery & Jim Crow until America SAW Slavery & Jim Crow for the Abominations they were. Until then, first Abolitions and then Civil rights Activists could talk until they were “Blue in the Face”, and NO ONE, but NO ONE was going to do anything about these outrages.

ONLY when Americans SAW the pictures of old slaves with their backs torn open and Bull Conner’s dogs biting children were Americans outraged enough to endure the pain needed to uproot these abominations. In the way, ONLY when Americans SEE Aborted Fetuses and KNOW what it is ABORTION KILLS will AMERICANS be willing to endure the revolt, the social upheaval necessary to UPROOT this abomination and replace it with a Culture of Life where all lives, including those of the mothers and the disabled, will be treasured as gifts from the Hand of God.

That’s going to take a lot of work, and probably a lot of suffering.

Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

 

[WillieWonka]

Willie Wonka:

We enforce MORALITY on people all of the time - The LAWS AGAINST Murder, Rape, Theft & Perjury, for example, are all laws based on RELIGIOUS or MORAL LAW.

And, Today, NO ONE would ever get away with:

“I’m personally opposed to slavery, but I wouldn’t interfere with another man’s right to own a ******.”
“I’m personally opposed to rape, but I wouldn’t interfere with another man’s right to force himself on his wife, his girlfriend, or his slave-woman.”
“I’m personally opposed to murder, but I wouldn’t interfere with another man’s right to take another man’s, woman’s, or child’s, life.”
“I’m personally opposed to genocide, but I wouldn’t want my country to interfere with another country’s deliberate slaughter of an entire race or creed.”

Willie, NO ONE would get be ALLOWED in any rational or civilized society to get away with such obvious NONSENSE! so, Why are you spouting its equivalent here???

I’m asking you to think - Because ABORTION IS THE DELIBERATE TAKING OF INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE. THAT’S NOT RELIGION – THAT’S SCIENCE!!!

I’m sorry to be so hard, but some of here have dealt with cases where DISABLED ADULTS were treated as NON-HUMANS and LEGALLY killed, because they needed “extraordinary care”. One particularly appalling case involved a Grandmother who was being “spoon fed” her meals and given her fluids through a straw. That was called “Extraordinary Care” by a judge at the request of her Granddaughter, and the Grandmother was legally “Dehydrated” to death. The Grandmother never had any inkling this was being done until nutrition & hydration were removed by the staff per the court order.

We tried contacting lawyers, state Senators and even Congress, but it was too late. The Granddaughter just had too much of a jump on us - And, We just couldn’t catch up before the Grandmother died.

The Granddaughter had used the Precedent established by the Terry Schiavo case & had filed while we were still fighting for Terry.

Do you know someone who’s disabled or elderly or just poor? That person either has or will have the same rights as the fetus does now. As I am Disabled & Poor, I am that person.

Yours in Christ, Michael

Well, we can see for the last 39 years people have gotten away with saying, “I would not have an abortion, but I do ot support making it illegal.”

 

[allhers]

Would the cloned human have an immortal soul? If so, wouldn’t that mean God was involved in the process? How could he participate in grave evil? On the other hand, maybe the cloned human would be soulless.

It is the act of man that would be gravely evil, not the act of God.

This could be where you got messed up, (in particular on the other thread where we were discussing), we think it is probable that if it were possible that a child were cloned like a sheep that they probably would have a soul.

Again, this has nothing to do with abortion, however, I felt it might be a good idea to clear this up for you.

 

[allhers]

Well, we can see for the last 39 years people have gotten away with saying, “I would not have an abortion, but I do ot support making it illegal.”

Do or do not support?

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I think it would matter a great deal. The Catholic Church teaches man is the composite of body and soul - immortal soul. If a clone did not have a soul, then it would not be human by that standard. If it is plausible to expect human clones, we might wnat to dtermine before they arrive if they should be treated like humans.

Willie Wonka:

The teaching of the Catholic & Orthodox Churches, and the musings of various theologians, on the matter of “ensoulment” are simply NOT the topic of this thread. If you wish to discuss that topic, I would suggest you either ASK AN APOLOGIST or Start your Own Thread on the Issue.

This thread has a topic - How to re-educate so that people will understand about abortion?

Please post on that topic. “Ensoulment”, when an Unborn Embryo or Fetus is “Ensouled” or whether a particular Embryo or Fetus is “Ensouled” are NOT topics of this thread. Please, Do NOT post on any of them again on THIS THREAD, or I shall be forced to contact the MODERATORS.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Well, we can see for the last 39 years people have gotten away with saying, “I would not have an abortion, but I do ot support making it illegal.”

Willie:

For MOST of the last 350 years, Abortion has been illegal in this country - Even the Suffragettes opposed Abortion. Since the time of the Apostles, the Undivided Catholic Church (& then the Catholic & Orthodox Churches after the Schism) has taught that Abortion was MURDER - The Deliberate Taking of INNOCENT Human Life.

This whole idea that one can personally oppose MURDER and believe that it didn’t need to be PROHIBITED comes from a Philosophy called RELATIVISM. Relativism says that all things - Including Morality & Truth - Are RELATIVE. If I take Relativism to its Logical Conclusions, It’s OK for me to STEAL FROM You if I feel it’s OK to do so, because I’m the Arbiter of my own morals - NO ONE has the right to IMPOSE their morals or ethics on ME… and, There is NO such things as TRUTH - You have YOUR FACTS , & I HAVE MINE, & our arguments are ENDLESS, because we can’t even agree on the BASIC FACTS… I hope you can see NO SOCIETY can last for very long with that kind of overarching philosophy.

I can only say the philosophy of RELATIVISM has already led to some stupendously appalling (and lethal) decisions that I can’t even begin to discuss due to the limitations of this thread. If you want to believe it, by all means…

BTW, Does the “Personally I oppose …, but I would never impose …” really express your view on the issue of Abortion and the taking of INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE?

In Christ, Michael

 

[WillieWonka]

It is the act of man that would be gravely evil, not the act of God.

This could be where you got messed up, (in particular on the other thread where we were discussing), we think it is probable that if it were possible that a child were cloned like a sheep that they probably would have a soul.

Again, this has nothing to do with abortion, however, I felt it might be a good idea to clear this up for you.

OK. Glad to know he little tyke would have a soul. And that brings up an interesting point. At what point would single cell beocme a human? When the biologist implants the DNA in the host? The same DNA that sat in a skin cell a moment ago?

 

[WillieWonka]

Willie Wonka:

The teaching of the Catholic & Orthodox Churches, and the musings of various theologians, on the matter of “ensoulment” are simply NOT the topic of this thread. If you wish to discuss that topic, I would suggest you either ASK AN APOLOGIST or Start your Own Thread on the Issue.

This thread has a topic - How to re-educate so that people will understand about abortion?

Please post on that topic. “Ensoulment”, when an Unborn Embryo or Fetus is “Ensouled” or whether a particular Embryo or Fetus is “Ensouled” are NOT topics of this thread. Please, Do NOT post on any of them again on THIS THREAD, or I shall be forced to contact the MODERATORS.

In Christ, Michael

One of the items high on the agenda of people who want to re-educate the public is convincing them a fertlized egg is a human being with a composite body and soul, and therefore has the right to life. Do you contend that idea should not be part of a re-education effort? It seems to me that’s the most important item for the re-educators.

One might also ask if the targets of the re-education effort will simply sit quietly while someone tells them how it is. What I have said here is just a sample of what awaits anyone contemplating re-education the public.

 

[WillieWonka]

Can you elaborate? Are you under the impression that some fertilized egg is destroyed in the cloning process?

For the sake of full disclosure, let me add somehting here. Today’s cloning process usually implants many eggs, with the expectation that most will not survive. The techniques simply aren’t that good today. Only a very few do survive. So, one can validly say today’s technique would result in the unintended death of most of the candidates.

 

[WillieWonka]

Willie:

For MOST of the last 350 years, Abortion has been illegal in this country - Even the Suffragettes opposed Abortion. Since the time of the Apostles, the Undivided Catholic Church (& then the Catholic & Orthodox Churches after the Schism) has taught that Abortion was MURDER - The Deliberate Taking of INNOCENT Human Life.

This whole idea that one can personally oppose MURDER and believe that it didn’t need to be PROHIBITED comes from a Philosophy called RELATIVISM. Relativism says that all things - Including Morality & Truth - Are RELATIVE. If I take Relativism to its Logical Conclusions, It’s OK for me to STEAL FROM You if I feel it’s OK to do so, because I’m the Arbiter of my own morals - NO ONE has the right to IMPOSE their morals or ethics on ME… and, There is NO such things as TRUTH - You have YOUR FACTS , & I HAVE MINE, & our arguments are ENDLESS, because we can’t even agree on the BASIC FACTS… I hope you can see NO SOCIETY can last for very long with that kind of overarching philosophy.

I can only say the philosophy of RELATIVISM has already led to some stupendously appalling (and lethal) decisions that I can’t even begin to discuss due to the limitations of this thread. If you want to believe it, by all means…

BTW, Does the “Personally I oppose …, but I would never impose …” really express your view on the issue of Abortion and the taking of INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE?

In Christ, Michael

Well, I suppose if you were starving and I was hoarding a warehouse full of food, it would be morally acceptable to take it from me.

 

[allhers]

Well, I suppose if you were starving and I was hoarding a warehouse full of food, it would be morally acceptable to take it from me.

But it wouldn’t be morally acceptable of him to murder you in order to get it.

 

[WillieWonka]

But it wouldn’t be morally acceptable of him to murder you in order to get it.

Could be. If force has to be used because I am a hoarding maniac, then a fight to the death would be warranted.

 

[allhers]

Could be. If force has to be used because I am a hoarding maniac, then a fight to the death would be warranted.

I think not

 

[limerick]

Willie & vx:

Allow me to add - “Ensoulment” isn’t even an issue to be discussed - This is:
Priests for Life - Looking Abortion in the Eye - Go through ALL the LINKS
priestsforlife.org/images/index.aspx#galleries

This is the reality of Abortion - Those who claim to be “Pro-Choice” (I’m always amazed that’s the one sentence we NEVER finish) can defend THAT! and, I’m always amazed that those defending abortion NEVER want to acknowledge that we’ve done that to 48 MILLION of our fellow Americans since Roe v. Wade, and 2 BILLION of our fellow humans since Abortion was legalized in various countries, and made mandatory in others, beganing in the late 1960’s…

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

**
I hate to put an end to your winning streak, but I’m pro-choice (not** pro-abortion) and I freely admit that abortion has been going on not just since Roe, but since men and women first understood there are ways to end pregnancy.

I’m not saying this has been the optimal way for men and women to conduct their reproductive lives. But, yes, it is true that live have been lost.

Limerick

 

[limerick]

If you want to call the intentional killing of a baby a choice you are free to do so. In some, strange, pedantic, removed way it is a choice. An evil choice. The problem is when people say “pro choice” they do not say pro mortal sin choice, pro murder choice, pro abortion choice, pro denying a baby the right to live choice, or anything like that. They say “pro choice” and then claim it is only about the free will of the mother. It is obfuscation. If you want to confirm that error go ahead. I will not.

**What about “pro-I think I’ll change my mind choice”? What about “pro-let’s try this as a married couple - we can make it!” choice? "What about “pro-it’s only seven more months, and then I can place the baby for adoption” choice?

Choice is not the harbinger of death and mortal sin you would have us believe.

You have a choice, too. How about “pro-maybe I should just pray for all involved and allow these people room to decide how to proceed in this very private matter” choice?

Limerick**

 

[allhers]

**
I hate to put an end to your winning streak, but I’m pro-choice (not** pro-abortion) and I freely admit that abortion has been going on not just since Roe, but since men and women first understood there are ways to end pregnancy.

I’m not saying this has been the optimal way for men and women to conduct their reproductive lives. But, yes, it is true that live have been lost.

Limerick

So what is it that you are saying, that you are not for abortion? Then that makes you prolife not prochoice. If you are for a womans right to choose to abort her baby then that makes you prochoice, and that also makes you pro abortion, meaning that you believe someone has the right to choose to end the life of their preborn child.

Is your last sentance there suppose to be “But, yes, it is true that I’ve been lost?”
Because quite frankly, it sounds like it.