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

[vz71]

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 see.
So the difference between your stand and mine is that I draw the line at causing the death of a human being…you do not.

More education here…
Here we finally see the reason behind the words “pro-choice”
They want desperately to turn it into an issue of mere choices.
That anyone that wants to curtail choices is necessarily against all kinds of liberties.
Anything to keep from facing the reality of the human life being extinguished.
Key here is to keep the argument on track. It IS about human life, not about choices.

 

[limerick]

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?

**
This represents most of my experience with pro-life individuals or groups, yes ma’am.

L**

 

[limerick]

I see.
So the difference between your stand and mine is that I draw the line at causing the death of a human being…you do not.

More education here…
Here we finally see the reason behind the words “pro-choice”
They want desperately to turn it into an issue of mere choices.
That anyone that wants to curtail choices is necessarily against all kinds of liberties.
Anything to keep from facing the reality of the human life being extinguished.
Key here is to keep the argument on track. It IS about human life, not about choices.

**I have already written multiple times that human life is sacrificed in an abortion procedure. This does not change my non-interventionist position one bit.

L**

 

[vz71]

I have already written multiple times that human life is sacrificed in an abortion procedure. This does not change my non-interventionist position one bit.
L

I am not looking to change your position.
I am looking to expose your position for what it is; and to teach others how to do the same.

I thank you for being such a willing foil in the endeavor.

At the moment we have agreement that you are in support of the murder of a human life.

My next question has to do with the current laws in this country.
Are you also in support of laws against murder?

 

[allhers]

**
This represents most of my experience with pro-life individuals or groups, yes ma’am.

L**

Talk about agitation though…

I once was praying outside of an abortion mill (one that is now closed, happily). A woman
came out of the building, jaywalked across the street to where I and others were - got right
in my face with much agitation! She was so close the spittle from her mouth sprayed on me as she ranted and raved, while I continued to pray. (To this day I still have no earthly
idea what she said). Well, when she finally gave up, seeing as how she wasn’t getting any reaction from me or those around me, when we had completed our prayers, she was just standing there, looking rather wide-eyed and upset, (as though she had seen something that we hadn’t), when we made the sign of the cross she went back across the street and back into the building. I found out later that she worked there.

She never came back out any other time we were there. When I think of that, I still say a
prayer for her, and all those involved in the culture of death, and for those who are
considering abortion.

Thanks for reminding me to continue to pray for her. Others told me afterwards that she
had probably targeted me that day because I was “new” to being there, they had been praying there for awhile and she probably “spotted” a new face and was hoping to scare me off. It didn’t work of course, as a matter of fact, many more came after that.

So, do you support the right of pro-life people that are just standing across the street praying?

As a side note, one in our group suggested that perhaps St. Michael the Archangel, in full battle armour appeared beside me. (He defeats the power of evil by the power of GOD.Perhaps that was why she looked so wide-eyed and upset. (who knows but God
and her and St. Michael if he did or not?). It’s an awesome thought though.

Do you know the prayer of St. Michael?

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our defense agasint the wickedness and snares of the devil, may God rebuke him, we humbly pray and do thou O Prince of the Heavenly Host…by the power of God, cast into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen

 

[allhers]

**I have already written multiple times that human life is sacrificed in an abortion procedure. This does not change my non-interventionist position one bit.

L**

Interesting that you would use the word sacrifice.

So its perfectly alright with you that a baby is sacrificed? Do you pratice witchcraft of any kind or claim to be a Wiccan
or anything like that also?

Fr. Tom has a lot to say about that.

www.hli.org

There is a search on his site.

 

[limerick]

I am not looking to change your position.
I am looking to expose your position for what it is; and to teach others how to do the same.

I thank you for being such a willing foil in the endeavor.

At the moment we have agreement that you are in support of the murder of a human life.

My next question has to do with the current laws in this country.
Are you also in support of laws against murder?

**
I do not endorse abortion, encourage abortion, or even like abortion. I am of the opinion that people who engage in sexual intercourse for any reason and find that they have conceived have a legal right to decide what to do about that and a moral compass by which they will decide what to do about that. My opinions or perceptions about their circumstances are immaterial. I had one abortion, for which I am morally responsible. I am not responsible for any other abortion, your “sins of omission” notwithstanding. Good luck with your teaching exercise, as you do nothing but preach to the choir. And you and I are in agreement on absolutely nothing. I do not try to persuade pregnant women to have abortions. I do not try to persuade them to paint the nursery blue or pink. I mind my own business, and another person’s reproductive life is none of my business.

The current laws of this country prohibit the taking of human life outside of the womb. They also permit abortion, much to your obvious chagrin.

Limerick **

 

[allhers]

**
I do not endorse abortion, encourage abortion, or even like abortion. I am of the opinion that people who engage in sexual intercourse for any reason and find that they have conceived have a legal right to decide what to do about that and a moral compass by which they will decide what to do about that. My opinions or perceptions about their circumstances are immaterial. I had one abortion, for which I am morally responsible. I am not responsible for any other abortion, your “sins of omission” notwithstanding. Good luck with your teaching exercise, as you do nothing but preach to the choir. And you and I are in agreement on absolutely nothing. I do not try to persuade pregnant women to have abortions. I do not try to persuade them to paint the nursery blue or pink. I mind my own business, and another person’s reproductive life is none of my business.

The current laws of this country prohibit the taking of human life outside of the womb. They also permit abortion, much to your obvious chagrin.

Limerick **

Where do you suppose this moral compass was, that you mentioned, when they made the decision to engage in sex before Marriage?

St. Agustine says that we have a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. He said that
an unjust law is a law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Wouldn’t the laws of this country in regard to abortion be an example of an unjust law?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

**

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**

I agree, and this will be part of what we teach our sons.

 

[Drawmack]

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?

I underlined the part that says a mother’s rights begin before the father’s. You said, “…to come to terms with her condition and proceed on her own.” This means that the mother has the right to abort the fetus with or without the father’s knowledge or consent. The fetus is the product of what both the mother and the father did, but her rights begin first. Why?

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.

Are you willing to admit that the laws, at least, need reform to be fair to both the father and the mother? That is to say, so that the mother cannot assuage the father’s right by exercising her rights.

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.

Are you saying that in your opinion, I as a man should have no rights or say in what happens after a major indiscretion on the part of myself and another consenting adult?

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.

What if I believe that abortion is murder, but I have an moment of indiscretion? This indiscretion required the consent of both parties correct? (I’m not talking about rape here so don’t go there) So, why should either party be able to unilaterally decide how to deal with the indiscretion that will affect both parties for the rest of their lives?

 

[limerick]

Where do you suppose this moral compass was, that you mentioned, when they made the decision to engage in sex before Marriage?

St. Agustine says that we have a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. He said that
an unjust law is a law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Wouldn’t the laws of this country in regard to abortion be an example of an unjust law?

I understand that on this forum the notion of “making a mistake” is unacceptable, but I think this would explain their lapse in judgment. And don’t forget: Four in 10 unintended pregnancies to married women each year end in abortion. (Source: Henshaw SK, Unintended Pregnancy in the United States, Family Planning Perspectives, 1998, 30(1):24-29 & 46.)

Every moral compass does not point directly at true north, or there are varying degrees of interpretation with regard to morality; in either case, people are human. And God knew this going in.

Limerick

 

[Drawmack]

**
This represents most of my experience with pro-life individuals or groups, yes ma’am.

L**

I agree with Limerick on this point. Matter of fact, I’ve had pro-lifers tell me I’m not pro-life because I advocate being civil to people – all people.

 

[limerick]

Interesting that you would use the word sacrifice.

So its perfectly alright with you that a baby is sacrificed? Do you pratice witchcraft of any kind or claim to be a Wiccan
or anything like that also?

Fr. Tom has a lot to say about that.

www.hli.org

There is a search on his site.

**The word “sacrifice” is applicable here. There is so much whining about terminology that I thought this would be refreshing.

I have absolutely nothing to say about it being “perfectly all right” that a fetus is sacrificed.
I atoned for my own abortion and if other women choose this route for their pregnancies and it is legal, then they will have their own sit-down with God about their actions. I am neither interested nor responsible.

The only “Witchcraft” I know is the song written by Cy Coleman and Carolyn Leigh, cut by Sinatra in 1957 and twice again after that.

Limerick**

 

[Drawmack]

I do not endorse abortion, encourage abortion, or even like abortion. I am of the opinion that people who engage in sexual intercourse for any reason and find that they have conceived have a legal right to decide what to do about that and a moral compass by which they will decide what to do about that. My opinions or perceptions about their circumstances are immaterial. I had one abortion, for which I am morally responsible. I am not responsible for any other abortion, your “sins of omission” notwithstanding. Good luck with your teaching exercise, as you do nothing but preach to the choir. And you and I are in agreement on absolutely nothing. I do not try to persuade pregnant women to have abortions. I do not try to persuade them to paint the nursery blue or pink. I mind my own business, and another person’s reproductive life is none of my business.

The current laws of this country prohibit the taking of human life outside of the womb. They also permit abortion, much to your obvious chagrin.

Limerick

I used to feel very similar to you Limerick. I counted myself as publicly pro-choice and personally pro-life. It was great fun to debate with pro-life because I would stand there agreeing with everything they said and then I would say, “But I don’t have the right to limit someone else’s rights.”

One night when I was thinking about this, I got onto a train of thought that changed my mind. I’m not attempting to change your mind; I’m offering my personal testimony which you can take or leave as you like.

I started to think about, and research, all the times when it is legal to end the life of another human being in this country: stop life support, self-defense, etc. I realized that it boils down to two times when one person may end another’s life directly or indirectly.

1. If someone is posing an immanent danger to your life or safety you make use any means necessary, including murder, to remove the danger.
2. If someone is in a state where prolonging their life is simply prolonging their suffering with no chance of recover.

Abortion, for the most part (and let’s leave the fringe out of this for now), does not fit into either of these categories. Therefore, I do not believe that abortion should be legal.

However, this does not give me the right to treat those who support, procure, or perform abortions uncivilly. I still have to treat other people with respect. I still have to respect ALL life.

 

[limerick]

I underlined the part that says a mother’s rights begin before the father’s. You said, “…to come to terms with her condition and proceed on her own.” This means that the mother has the right to abort the fetus with or without the father’s knowledge or consent. The fetus is the product of what both the mother and the father did, but her rights begin first. Why?

Can’t count the number of times I’ve heard, “I don’t know who the father is.” Or the father is absent. This is the situation to which I was referring when I stated the mother can come to terms with her condition and proceed on her own.

Are you willing to admit that the laws, at least, need reform to be fair to both the father and the mother? That is to say, so that the mother cannot assuage the father’s right by exercising her rights.
**
By the time the law enters the picture it is too late. Education, or re-education, should take place years before this scenario. As a divorced mother of one, no, I do not believe the laws should be changed. There would be too much disagreement between the parents as to the way to raise the child and too much legal opportunity for game-playing and strategizing and sabotage of all lives involved. If this is a child of a marriage or divorce, then mediation is called for. If this is a child conceived outside of marriage, both parents can agree to custody and lifestyle terms acceptable to each, in writing; or both parents can spend all their time and resources fighting back and forth until the child reaches the age of majority. Or one of the parents, or even both of the parents, can abandon the child. **

Are you saying that in your opinion, I as a man should have no rights or say in what happens after a major indiscretion on the part of myself and another consenting adult?
**
Whatever major sexual indiscretions you take part in are none of my business.**

What if I believe that abortion is murder, but I have an moment of indiscretion? This indiscretion required the consent of both parties correct? (I’m not talking about rape here so don’t go there) So, why should either party be able to unilaterally decide how to deal with the indiscretion that will affect both parties for the rest of their lives?

**If you are adamant that abortion is murder, then you will not put yourself or a partner in a position where any sexual indiscretion can possibly occur.

Limerick**

 

[Drawmack]

By the time the law enters the picture it is too late. Education, or re-education, should take place years before this scenario. As a divorced mother of one, no, I do not believe the laws should be changed. There would be too much disagreement between the parents as to the way to raise the child and too much legal opportunity for game-playing and strategizing and sabotage of all lives involved. If this is a child of a marriage or divorce, then mediation is called for. If this is a child conceived outside of marriage, both parents can agree to custody and lifestyle terms acceptable to each, in writing; or both parents can spend all their time and resources fighting back and forth until the child reaches the age of majority. Or one of the parents, or even both of the parents, can abandon the child.

My ex and I also have a child and I disagree with you. If the woman doesn’t know who the father is then that’s fine, we’ll wait until paternity can be determined with DNA. If the father is absent that’s fine, just a phone call to acquire his permission. I just don’t understand why a woman can get an abortion without any thought of the father. I just don’t understand why a woman can unilaterally decide a man’s fate.

If you are adamant that abortion is murder, then you will not put yourself or a partner in a position where any sexual indiscretion can possibly occur.

So, being adamant that abortion is murder makes me perfect?

 

[limerick]

My ex and I also have a child and I disagree with you. If the woman doesn’t know who the father is then that’s fine, we’ll wait until paternity can be determined with DNA. If the father is absent that’s fine, just a phone call to acquire his permission. I just don’t understand why a woman can get an abortion without any thought of the father. I just don’t understand why a woman can unilaterally decide a man’s fate.
**
So if she is considering abortion, paternity is determined at 20 weeks when abortion is more difficult to perform but still legal in some places and the father doesn’t give a rat’s ss, or paternity is never* determined, she should just carry to term to satisfy the unknown sperm donor and the pro-life person who has nothing to do with it? I disagree. She qualifies for abortion by default if that is her choice.

If the father is absent, he may be way absent and unable to be found (and that’s just the way he intends it). Again, abortion by default. It’s clear neither of these men is connected to the situation on any level.

I would think most women who have abortions do not do so without some thought of the father. And those thoughts may be laced with much negativity. Some must wish they had an authentic relationship with the father but they do not and they never will. Some are just careless and ready to get back to the party. It is not cut and dried in the details of it.

So, being adamant that abortion is murder makes me perfect?

**No. Your responsibility in any situation where indiscretion threatens is directly proportional to your immovable and unyielding commitment to your “true north”, your moral compass, to your religious beliefs, to what you understand to be God’s will for you.

Limerick **

 

[vz71]

**I do not endorse abortion, encourage abortion, or even like abortion. I am of the opinion that people who engage in sexual intercourse for any reason and find that they have conceived have a legal right to decide what to do about that and a moral compass by which they will decide what to do about that. **

The argument is still there. They want to talk about anything but abortion.
In this case, they wish it to be all about choices and willingness to stay out of it.

And you and I are in agreement on absolutely nothing.
and as we see, the still do not want to see that the difference is one of degree. I will not take a life, I oppose the choice to take life.

As I said earlier, I am all for choice, but stop short of taking life.
Yet the active abortion supporter claims we have nothing in common.
In this, they are right. In laying claim to choices myself, and being called on it, I have now exposed the issue again. After all, if it were really about choices, then my concession to all but the taking of life would be a step forward…right?
The issue is not about choice. It is about life.

The current laws of this country prohibit the taking of human life outside of the womb. They also permit abortion, much to your obvious chagrin.

---

Having made the admission that they are talking about abortion, not merely a choice.
Having agreed that abortion is taking a life…
Note that the question asked is avoided.
The question is wether or not she supports of laws against murder.
Why do you suppose they do not want to answer?

 

[limerick]

vz71:
The argument is still there. They want to talk about anything but abortion.
In this case, they wish it to be all about choices and willingness to stay out of it.

and as we see, the still do not want to see that the difference is one of degree. I will not take a life, I oppose the choice to take life.
As I said earlier, I am all for choice, but stop short of taking life.
Yet the active abortion supporter claims we have nothing in common.
In this, they are right. In laying claim to choices myself, and being called on it, I have now exposed the issue again. After all, if it were really about choices, then my concession to all but the taking of life would be a step forward…right?
The issue is not about choice. It is about life.

Having made the admission that they are talking about abortion, not merely a choice.
Having agreed that abortion is taking a life…
Note that the question asked is avoided.
The question is wether or not she supports of laws against murder.
Why do you suppose they do not want to answer?
**
If you have a question you mean to ask** me directly, why not get off the professorial tone and just ask it? First it’s “they”, then it’s “she”, then it’s “they” again. Sometimes it’s even “the”! What?

The issue is choice and it’s not yours to make for another person.

I have already responded in compellingly graphic and honest language on the topic of murder, body parts, vacuum aspiration and the whole nine yards of it. It was deleted by the moderators before it ever appeared. If you have a gripe about that, or about the way this forum will not permit absolute candor with regard to this very sensitive topic, then please address it with the moderators or the administrators.

Limerick

 

[royal_archer]

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?

The examples you give are not comparable since they say things which are minor deviations from the original meaning they are not diametricaly opposed. As in the case of those who call themselves pro choice who are actually anti choice. They use this term not as a slang interpretation but as an attempt to deliberately deceive.