How would you respond to this argument?

  • Thread starter Thread starter followingtheway
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If the fetus were not a human being, the statement would be true; but there is no “personal” decision where the life of another is involved.

ICXC NIKA
 
It’s the law which defines homicide as justifiable, lawful, unlawful etc.

It’s the law that defines the beginning and ending of natural life.

It’s personal choice whether to abide by the law, or break it.

And where an action is legal but objectively morally wrong, personal choice comes into play in deciding what to do about it.
 
The decision to take life is Gods’ and Gods’ alone. An abortion is NOT a personal decision as it involves at least two people (mother AND unborn child). Indeed, in the VAST MAJORITY of cases, an abortion is a selfish act which equates to a perverse form of belated contraception.
 
I say that its both a personal decision and a justified legal debate. I could have a personal decision to ram into the car in front of me because theyre going too slow (and causing their death) and a decent society should certainly have a legal debate about that.

I understand my analogy isn`t super relevant, but it was the quickest thing I could come up with. :o
 
We in the pro-life movement need to do a better job of pursuing person-hood status for the fetus. A fetus is just as much of a person as I am, just as much of a person as a one-day old baby. Declaring person-hood at any other point than conception is subjective and random. We would never say it’s a personal decision to kill a one-day-old baby. It’s not a personal decision to kill a person. I’ve been in several abortion debates with friends and family. I always ask them when does person-hood begin. I hold them to this question and don’t let them diverge to something else. In my experience, no one has ever been able to reasonably answer this question with anything other than person-hood beginning at conception.

We win this argument on logic.
 
We hold these truths to be self evident,

If you read the Founding Fathers both American and Catholic you will see that the abortion approval will lead to our demisw- see Old Test. Molek.
 
Correct. Murder is very personal for the victim; and the legality of murder hasn’t been a debate for a long time.

edit-

Just saw CDB’s rework of the image. I like that better then my post.
 
I guess according to you (poster) that murdering a child is a personal choice. It shouldn’t be a choice.
 
hannajomar said:
We in the pro-life movement need to do a better job of pursuing person-hood status for the fetus. A fetus is just as much of a person as I am, just as much of a person as a one-day old baby. Declaring person-hood at any other point than conception is subjective and random. We would never say it’s a personal decision to kill a one-day-old baby. It’s not a personal decision to kill a person. I’ve been in several abortion debates with friends and family. I always ask them when does person-hood begin. I hold them to this question and don’t let them diverge to something else. In my experience, no one has ever been able to reasonably answer this question with anything other than person-hood beginning at conception.

We win this argument on logic.
Click to expand...
Such arguments are good, but they require the listener to be capable of sufficient abstract thought. This thread forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=653981 discusses the distribution of graphic literature on abortion. Personally, I believe this is the most effective way to convey the message because people get 99.44% of their information visually, hence a picture is worth 1,000 words. The vigor with which the pro-abortionists resist this type of speech is a good indicator of how effective it really is. “Person-hood” is too abstract of a concept for most people to grasp.
 
Why can’t ‘women’ have the child and hand them over for adoption. I personally feel it be far less painful - mentally and physically in the long run.

It cannot be an easy decision for anyone to make and I assume its done out of desperate measures.
 
The United States Supreme Court took the first step down a dark and slippery slope by legalizing abortion in 1973. A child is legally entitled to life only if his or her mother wants that child. Abortion is murder, pure and simple. Abortion is not a religious issue. It is an issue of a human right – the right to life.

It does not matter if you are pro-life or not. Abortion is about bloodshed and victims. Over 4,000 babies are being killed every day, and we are not doing anything about it. Babies in the womb should be protected. The failure to protect life is a betrayal of human decency.

The fight over abortion always seems to end in the struggle over the sovereignty of God. We have two choices. We can say, “God is the Lord of my choices.” He alone has authority over my life. I will obey His laws and His will. On the other hand, we can say, “I am the Lord of my choices.” I alone will decide what is true, and what is right for me. I will do what I want, when I want and how I want.
 
followingtheway said:
http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/276430_290886384256483_1046972338_n.jpg

I disagree with it, but I would like for everyone to share their opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...
It’s rather begging the question, isn’t it?

For one thing, it’s both – a personal decision and a legal debate. All legal debate centers around personal decisions. Except in deranged societies or miscarriages of justice, you can’t be held to account for something you didn’t do, or couldn’t choose not to do. Hell, it is the fact of it being a “personal decision” that makes it so evil – all mortal sins being, by definition, chosen, with full consent.

Perhaps they mean it’s a “right”? But if so, where did this right come from and how did no one notice it existed until like five minutes ago? If it was just now invented, why can’t it be de-invented? It was invented through legal debate after all, no?
 
sw85 said:
It’s rather begging the question, isn’t it?

For one thing, it’s both – a personal decision and a legal debate. All legal debate centers around personal decisions. …
Click to expand...
Excellent point!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top