If "pro-choicers" are really so "pro-choice" then why are they against the choice to be pro-life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Newbie, when you ask what is serious and who defines it - is your concern about a “slippery slope”?
When the pregnancy is already having an effect on the mother’s health, or because of her medical condition is bound to have an effect (Eisenmenger’s Syndrome), then that should satisfy the requirements for pre-emption. It is not a purely abstract, hypothetical risk.
 
Doc_Keele said:
Right, your response doesn’t actually make much sense. The definition of murder I go by is Coke’s, albeit amended by certain statutory provisions.

That’s a straw man argument.

A rhetorical question.
Click to expand...
So, what is an unborn baby and why should the baby be allowed to be murdered?
 
Well you’re pre-empting the conclusion of the first question with your second question.
The previous answers address this, I can’t see the point in going round in circles forever.
 
Doc_Keele said:
Newbie, when you ask what is serious and who defines it - is your concern about a “slippery slope”?
When the pregnancy is already having an effect on the mother’s health, or because of her medical condition is bound to have an effect (Eisenmenger’s Syndrome), then that should satisfy the requirements for pre-emption. It is not a purely abstract, hypothetical risk.
Click to expand...
Slippery-ness isn’t may main concern, but yes, it is of concern.

My question goes to a couple concerns:
  1. That such a mother’s condition is, yes, a risk, but there is no certainty that she cannot or will not carry to term successfully. A risk does not equal a certainty. The gravity of terminating another human life, especially when it is uncertain that it is "necessary is of concern.
  2. That the mother’s choce in the matter trump the choice of the Almighty. He created this life; by what right does the mother have to take an innocent life? Yes, in this scenario she did not want that life…but if “unwanted pregnancy” cannot be a criteria for this situation and not apply to all the other “oops” unwanted pregnancies of healthy women.
 
Doc_Keele said:
Well you’re pre-empting the conclusion of the first question with your second question.
The previous answers address this, I can’t see the point in going round in circles forever.
Click to expand...
The point is how can one claim a growing child is not a human being? It is not going in circles, unless we deny the reality of the situation.
 
To repeat my point - you can only say that death was certain retrospectively. No good then. Life is full of uncertainty. You can make a probabilitistic argument though.

Any act of healing could be said to be upsetting God’s plan. Is it God’s plan for both mother and baby to die when one could be saved? How do we know what God’s plan is?
 
fix said:
The point is how can one claim a growing child is not a human being? It is not going in circles, unless we deny the reality of the situation.
Click to expand...
It’s not essential to argue that the foetus is not a human being to be pro-choice.
We are going round in circles.
This has all been covered previously in the debate, what’s the point in useless repetition?
 
fix said:
Really, so when does the child get to be a baby? One second before parturition? One second after? A millisecond?
Click to expand...
Now you’re talking about an epistemic problem, not a moral one.
 
fix said:
It is a moral issue. At least it it would be to those who are about to be aborted.
Click to expand...
Well you don’t even understand the point being made then. You’re using thetoric.
Pure rhetoric doesn’t interest me in the slightest.
 
Doc_Keele said:
Well you don’t even understand the point being made then. You’re using thetoric.
Pure rhetoric doesn’t interest me in the slightest.
Click to expand...
I understand the point well. I reject the point.

What you call “rhetoric” is simply pointing out the absurdity of your position.
 
I don’t just call it rhetoric, it IS rhetoric. It’s certainly not a formal argument is it?
And it’s not MY position.

I’ll have to call quits on the “forum tennis”, things to do and all that:thumbsup:
 
BillP said:
I’m not. Nor is anyone else I am aware of on a personal basis.

Why is it that “pro-lifers” are so in favor of the death penalty and unnecessary wars?
Click to expand...
are you saying you’re “catholic” & not pro-life???
 
*****if people are so pro-choice, why is there forced abortion in china & NO feminist that i know of or any other pro-abort person… has come out against it?

why dont’ they just call themselves waht they are Pro abortion??

that choice **** is just… that…*****
 
Doc_Keele said:
I don’t just call it rhetoric, it IS rhetoric. It’s certainly not a formal argument is it?
And it’s not MY position.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of formal arguments. They are presented in these fora constantly. As I said in this thread, or the other one, arguments will not be accepted no matter how cogent they may be when people refuse to be convinced of what is true.

All that can be done is to keep putting the truth out front and hope and pray the H S will convert us.

Finally, have we come to a point in our civilization where we need a formal proof for what is self evident? That, alone, is an indictment.
 
distracted said:
*****if people are so pro-choice, why is there forced abortion in china & NO feminist that i know of or any other pro-abort person… has come out against it?

why dont’ they just call themselves waht they are Pro abortion??

that choice **** is just… that…*****
Click to expand...
What are YOU doing about it? Tell us what to do to make it better in China for women.

What specifically are your expectations? What specifically do you want feminists to do about it? What specifically do you want pro-choicers to do about it? Rally in D.C about changing the laws in China? They’re not even a Catholic country. What is the Vatican doing about it? What are their suggestions?

I personally loathe that situation in China. However, I have my hands full here at home. Making sure the rights of our own women are protected is a priority for me. If China’s women are a priority for you, please tell us how you are helping them because I, for one, have no clue what would influence that country to treat women better. They’re second-class citizens and chattel there to begin with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top