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

[Sean_Boyle]

**

A fetus obviously gets no say in the matter. None. Zero**.

Limerick

Just like the 6 million Jews massacred in the Holocaust.

If you want to align yourself with that line of thinking, why not carry accept all that it entails.

 

[allhers]

It’s number 19 in the End Notes in the link you and Fix provided.

"19. This declaration expressly leaves aside the question of the moment when the spiritual soul is infused. **There is not a unanimous tradition on this point and authors are as yet in disagreement. For some it dates from the first instant; for others it could not at least precede nidation. It is not within the competence of science to decide between these views, because the existence of an immortal soul is not a question in its field. It is a philosophical problem from which our moral affirmation remains independent for two reasons: (1) supposing a belated animation, there is still nothing less than a human life, preparing for and calling for a soul in which the nature received from parents is completed, (2) on the other hand, it suffices that this presence of the soul be probable **(and one can never prove the contrary) in order that the taking of life involve accepting the risk of killing a man, not only waiting for, but already in possession of his soul.

 

[limerick]

No, but I have heard of women who tried to do just that and were prevented from doing so, they were held against their will and told it was too late and all kinds of other horrible things that have happened to them. Sadly, far too many women have tried to do just that and were unable to. They were not given that CHOICE. They speak out about it now though, and they are going to continue to. Nothing is going to stop them now!

If a woman did do that, I would thank God for that!!! She chose LIFE for her child. That’s awesome.

**Who prevented these women from getting up and leaving? Who prevented them from changing their minds?

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

Just like the 6 million Jews massacred in the Holocaust.

If you want to align yourself with that line of thinking, why not carry accept all that it entails.

**This is not a “line of thinking”. It is a fact.

I cannot “carry accept” anything, but I already accepted all that abortion entails.

June 8, 1971.

Limerick**

 

[allhers]

It’s number 19 in the End Notes in the link you and Fix provided.

"19. This declaration expressly leaves aside the question of the moment when the spiritual soul is infused. **There is not a unanimous tradition on this point and authors are as yet in disagreement. For some it dates from the first instant; for others it could not at least precede nidation. It is not within the competence of science to decide between these views, because the existence of an immortal soul is not a question in its field. It is a philosophical problem from which our moral affirmation remains independent for two reasons: (1) supposing a belated animation, there is still nothing less than a human life, preparing for and calling for a soul in which the nature received from parents is completed, (2) on the other hand, it suffices that this presence of the soul be probable **(and one can never prove the contrary) in order that the taking of life involve accepting the risk of killing a man, not only waiting for, but already in possession of his soul.

Well why didn’t you say the end notes to begin with?

It explains this part of #19 above it:

1. The moral discussion is being accompanied more or less everywhere by serious juridical
   debates. There is no country where legislation does not forbid and punish murder.
   Furthermore, many countries had specifically applied this condemnation and these penalties
   to the particular case of procured abortion. In these days a vast body of opinion petitions
   the liberalization of this latter prohibition. There already exists a fairly general
   tendency which seeks to limit, as far as possible, all restrictive legislation, especially
   when it seems to touch upon private life. The argument of pluralism is also used. Although
   many citizens, in particular the Catholic faithful, condemn abortion, many others hold that
   it is licit, at least as a lesser evil. Why force them to follow an opinion which is not
   theirs, especially in a country where they are in the majority? In addition it is apparent
   that, where they still exist, the laws condemning abortion appear difficult to apply. The
   crime has become too common for it to be punished every time, and the public authorities
   often find that it is wiser to close their eyes to it. But the preservation of a law which
   is not applied is always to the detriment of authority and of all the other laws. It must be
   added that clandestine abortion puts women, who resign themselves to it and have recourse to
   it, in the most serious dangers for future pregnancies and also in many cases for their
   lives. Even if the legislator continues to regard abortion as an evil, may he not propose to
   restrict its damage?

…and that still doesn’t change this part of what I said that the Document itself said:

1. Respect for human life is not just a Christian obligation.(and ends with this):
   Created immediately by God, man’s soul is spiritual and therefore immortal.

Then, using your endnotes for # 19 it explains this:
19. This declaration expressly leaves aside the question of the moment when the spiritual soul is infused. There is not a unanimous tradition on this point and authors are as yet in disagreement. For some it dates from the first instant; for others it could not at least precede nidation. It is not within the competence of science to decide between these views, because the existence of an immortal soul is not a question in its field. It is a philosophical problem from which our moral affirmation remains independent for two reasons: (1) supposing a belated animation, there is still nothing less than a human life, preparing for and calling for a soul in which the nature received from parents is completed, (2) on the other hand, it suffices that this presence of the soul be probable (and one can never prove the contrary) in order that the taking of life involve accepting the risk of killing a man, not only waiting for, but already in possession of his soul.

So, if that soul is placed by God within that person before they implant (which is the word nidation above - that I underlined and bolded,) or after they implant we don’t know for sure is all it sounds like to me. In any case, its a baby with a soul.

By the way, it also proves that its a baby before it implants in the womb too.

 

[allhers]

**Who prevented these women from getting up and leaving? Who prevented them from changing their minds?

Limerick**

They said it was the people who worked there and Doctors in the abortion mills.

I’ll find you some examples and post them.

 

[allhers]

This is from the silent no more web site, from women who regret their abortions.
Just click on the one (in the upper left hand corner of the box) that says:
Women Who Regret Their Abortions, it’ll bring up page after page of their testimonies.
silentnomoreawareness.org/testimonies/index.aspx

It’s a real education for people, so that they will understand about abortion.

 

[allhers]

You could search these archives at life site news to find stories I’ve read about it too, they go clear back to 1997
lifesitenews.com/ldn/archive.html

 

[vz71]

Get on board. Read the entire thread.

Limerick

I have.
Pro-Choice to choose what?

Another good point for education…when someone lay claim to pro-choice, make them admit what exactly that choice entails.

 

[limerick]

I have.
Pro-Choice to choose what?

Another good point for education…when someone lay claim to pro-choice, make them admit what exactly that choice entails.

**
A woman gets pregnant. She currently has the right to choose how to proceed, or whether to proceed, with her pregnancy. This is choice as I support it. I support her right to consult with the father of the embryo or fetus and proceed as a couple, or to come to terms with her condition and proceed on her own. I support the non-intervention of well-meaning or ill-meaning individuals who may be compelled to influence her** decision, her choice, in any way. I support the woman’s unencumbered exercise of free will as she ponders her situation and decides whether or not to terminate her pregnancy or carry it to term. I support her right to change her mind at any time during the decision-making process. I support every woman’s right to give birth if that is what she chooses.

I also support complete, all-encompassing sex education for all children before they enter adolescence. I support the teaching of abstinence, but I also support instruction on birth control with accurate, non-biased information pertaining to the physical, mental, emotional, spiritual and financial aspects of the use of birth control methods. I endorse completely open communication between parents and children, a luxury to which I was not entitled as a child or as an adolescent. I support empowerment of girls and young women in matters of finance, self-sufficiency and self-defense. A woman competent enough to negotiate a contract or bring down a cape buffalo is less likely to fall for “I love you … no, really!” or "My wife just doesn’t understand me … "

Limerick

 

[vz71]

**I support the woman’s unencumbered exercise of free will as she ponders her situation and decides whether or not to terminate her pregnancy or carry it to term. **

So you are pro-choice to procure an abortion.

Another point to educate people with…
People often have a problem saying they are in support of abortion.
When pushed to answer what exactly pro-choice is a choise of, they will often throw out a litany of things and hide the abortion somewhere therin.

 

[allhers]

So in other words limerick, you want to talk about anything, other than the fact that you support murdering babies, right?

Afterall, someone for choice is also for pulling babies apart, sucking their brains
out, murdering them in the womb and other various methods such as are described here,
right?

Abortion pulls babies apart, suctions them out, sometimes they are partially born and then
their brains are sucked out…sometimes they come out whole through the suction tube
with their hearts still beating.

These videos done here by Fr. Frank Pavone describe all that, using plastic models and
drawings (not of real abortions).

This is what you support?

youtube.com/watch?v=QBOAPleF1t0

 

[allhers]

…
support the non-intervention of well-meaning or ill-meaning individuals who may be compelled to influence her decision, her choice, in any way. I support the teaching of abstinence, but I also support instruction on birth control with accurate, non-biased information pertaining to the physical, mental, emotional, spiritual and financial aspects of the use of birth control methods.

Limerick

This makes me wonder a few things:
…do you also support giving a child free condomns but telling them not to use them…
…do you support handing them a weapon but telling them they ought to talk things out…
…do you support drinking with them/or using drugs with them because afterall they are probably going to do it anyway…
…do you support a teenagers right to be told the truth that a life will be ended if she chooses to abort her baby…
…or do you support lying to her and telling her it is a simple “procedure” that will be over with in no time and that it really isn’t a baby afterall, its just some “tissue”…

…do you support our right to tell them the truth??

 

[Drawmack]

I have.
Pro-Choice to choose what?

Another good point for education…when someone lay claim to pro-choice, make them admit what exactly that choice entails.

That is exactly why I don’t mind using the term pro-choice. It allows me to make a well reasoned apology for what that choice is, whereas if I refuse to use the term pro-choice I loose the ability to make such an apology – I’ve short shifted myself by cutting to the chase.

 

[Drawmack]

A woman gets pregnant. She currently has the right to choose how to proceed, or whether to proceed, with her pregnancy. This is choice as I support it. I support her right to consult with the father of the embryo or fetus and proceed as a couple, or to come to terms with her condition and proceed on her own. I support the non-intervention of well-meaning or ill-meaning individuals who may be compelled to influence her decision, her choice, in any way. I support the woman’s unencumbered exercise of free will as she ponders her situation and decides whether or not to terminate her pregnancy or carry it to term. I support her right to change her mind at any time during the decision-making process. I support every woman’s right to give birth if that is what she chooses.

I also support complete, all-encompassing sex education for all children before they enter adolescence. I support the teaching of abstinence, but I also support instruction on birth control with accurate, non-biased information pertaining to the physical, mental, emotional, spiritual and financial aspects of the use of birth control methods. I endorse completely open communication between parents and children, a luxury to which I was not entitled as a child or as an adolescent. I support empowerment of girls and young women in matters of finance, self-sufficiency and self-defense. A woman competent enough to negotiate a contract or bring down a cape buffalo is less likely to fall for “I love you … no, really!” or "My wife just doesn’t understand me … "

Limerick

Why do the mother’s parental rights start before the father’s? Why can the mother force the father to accept responsibility for a child when the father cannot force this on the mother? Where are the father’s rights? Where is the father’s choice? Why can a woman make a unilateral decision that will affect the father for, at least, the next 18 years without the father having any say in this? What gives the woman the right to make me a daddy when I don’t have the right to make her a mommy? If I believe that abortion is murder, what gives anyone else the right to kill my child?

 

[limerick]

So you are pro-choice to procure an abortion.

Another point to educate people with…
People often have a problem saying they are in support of abortion.
When pushed to answer what exactly pro-choice is a choise of, they will often throw out a litany of things and hide the abortion somewhere therin.

**
Of course I support abortion. I have no problem saying that or living that. If you had really read the thread you would know this is true. I support a woman’s legal right to put her feet in the stirrups and have a doctor aspirate a fetus from her uterus. I support a woman’s legal right to subject herself to a 2-day medical abortion involving the mechanical softening and dilation of the cervix, and the ingestion of drugs so she can pass her fetus through the birth canal and into a bathtub if that’s what she chooses. I also support live birth, even if the fetus is irreparably damaged and there is absolutely no hope that it will survive an hour, a day, a week. If those parents want to experience this then that is their right and I endorse it. I also endorse adoption: if a mother or a couple cannot give a good life or a stable life to a baby once it is born and they believe the best option is to put that baby up for adoption, I’m all for it.

The main component of all this is that I believe with absolute, resolute conviction that it is not my place to interfere in any woman’s decision, in any couple’s decision, in any family’s decision with regard to pregnancy, abortion, adoption, or birth. It is none of my business what they will choose and how they will proceed. I will not superimpose my principles onto the religions, faiths, moral codes, lifestyles, fears, doubts or bank accounts of anyone considering abortion and weighing it against the option of birth. I believe in stand-alone, no-strings-attached free will and each individual’s legal and moral right to live their lives according to their own consciences. My opinion, my wishes, my sorrow, my own experience with abortion, is not a factor in their decision.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

So in other words limerick, you want to talk about anything, other than the fact that you support murdering babies, right?

Afterall, someone for choice is also for pulling babies apart, sucking their brains
out, murdering them in the womb and other various methods such as are described here,
right?

Abortion pulls babies apart, suctions them out, sometimes they are partially born and then
their brains are sucked out…sometimes they come out whole through the suction tube
with their hearts still beating.

These videos done here by Fr. Frank Pavone describe all that, using plastic models and
drawings (not of real abortions).

This is what you support?

youtube.com/watch?v=QBOAPleF1t0

**Please read my response to vz71 on the same subject.

I don’t understand why you can slide with this post while a post I wrote a couple of days ago on the same subject, with the same descriptions, with the same ire, was deleted by the moderator before it ever made it to the board. Oh, wait: this is a Catholic website. I suppose practicing Catholics have free rein and the rest of us schlubs get Big Brother.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

This makes me wonder a few things:
…do you also support giving a child free condomns but telling them not to use them…

No, I would not give a condom to anyone and tell him or her not to use it. I am not responsible for their reproductive lives. If they are considering sexual activity they can get their own condoms. Cheap, legal, available.

…do you support handing them a weapon but telling them they ought to talk things out…

**The U.S. government has prohibited me from handling or owning a firearm, so I would not hand anyone a gun. Again, if an individual is having problems of such great magnitude that they have come to me for advice, then I will talk with them. Only if they ask. If they don’t ask, I have nothing to say. They alone are responsible for their own behaviors, legal and illegal. **

…do you support drinking with them/or using drugs with them because afterall they are probably going to do it anyway…

I am sober 25 years. The question in not applicable.

…do you support a teenagers right to be told the truth that a life will be ended if she chooses to abort her baby…

I support every man’s and every woman’s right to know the complete truth about abortion, adoption, child-rearing so long as the information is conveyed without bias either way.

…or do you support lying to her and telling her it is a simple “procedure” that will be over with in no time and that it really isn’t a baby afterall, its just some “tissue”…

In many cases it is not a simple procedure. If asked, I will explain what is likely to happen at her particular place in the gestational timeline. If not asked, I will say nothing.

…do you support our right to tell them the truth??

**Whose right? Pro-life people’s right to get in someone’s face with agitation and self-righteousness, throwing around terms like “baby killer” and “monster” and “you’re going to hell!”? No, I do not support your right to do anything that places judgment upon or invades the privacy of the woman or the couple or the family considering or having an abortion.

Limerick**

 

[limerick]

Why do the mother’s parental rights start before the father’s? Why can the mother force the father to accept responsibility for a child when the father cannot force this on the mother? Where are the father’s rights? Where is the father’s choice? Why can a woman make a unilateral decision that will affect the father for, at least, the next 18 years without the father having any say in this? What gives the woman the right to make me a daddy when I don’t have the right to make her a mommy? If I believe that abortion is murder, what gives anyone else the right to kill my child?

**A mother’s parental rights do not start before the father’s. As I have said, *“I support her right to consult with the father of the embryo or fetus and proceed as a couple, or to come to terms with her condition and proceed on her own.” *** Where in this sentence do you find the suggestion that a mother’s rights begin before the father’s?

As to your other questions, they are legal matters which I cannot explain, defend or support. This is just the way it is right now.

There are women who would want to make men “daddy” to their child or children for various reasons, many of which are unscrupulous and greedy. My only suggestion to you is to keep your pants zipped.

If you believe abortion is murder, then choose a wife carefully, remain monogamous, adhere to the teachings of the Roman Catholic faith if you are Catholic. If you are not Catholic, the first two suggestions stand.

Limerick

 

[allhers]

Whose right? Pro-life people’s right to get in someone’s face with agitation and self-righteousness, throwing around terms like “baby killer” and “monster” and “you’re going to hell!”? No, I do not support your right to do anything that places judgment upon or invades the privacy of the woman or the couple or the family considering or having an abortion.

Limerick

Sheeesh, talk about judgement!! That is your description of Pro-life?