More Scandal From the Pro-Life Movement's Perceived Lack of Concern For the Born

  • Thread starter Thread starter billsannie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bill is my husband. And I’m not the one saying that. I’m only repeating what medical experts say.
 
upant said:
isn’t the church quite involved in the border? it is selective fake news
Click to expand...
The Church is indeed quite involved with issues of separating families and advocates on behalf of those families. And the Church is also very much concerned with abortion and the pro-life cause. But the Church is much bigger than the pro-life movement. So the claim of the OP is not automatically refuted by citing these diverse good works by the Church. Indeed it seems quite possible that those who are most vocal and passionate in opposing abortion are, as a group, the least likely to advocate on behalf of those families, and most likely to voice support for the very policies that effected the separation.
 
billsannie said:
This just illustrates that the pro-lifers’ refusal to oppose all anti-life issues
Click to expand...
You often see this with welfare. I’m actually a believer in the welfare state, but a complete lack of welfare doesn’t justify not criminalizing smothering children with pillows. Don’t kill your children is on a different level than finding the best system that respects people’s rights while ensuring resources are properly distributed.
 
Last edited:
From the article:
what they consider to be unborn children clearly does not apply to defending actually living, asylum-seeking children
Click to expand...
It’s kind of odd that someone who claims to have been so in-tune with the pro-life ideals as to experience cognitive dissonance clearly at some point stopped believing that the unborn are living children. Either way, she doesn’t seem to get it.

Part of the reason the pro-life movement is so anti-abortion is that it is unambiguously relevant. Abortion is the willful, deliberate taking of an innocent child’s life. Performing the action, seeking it out, and/or defending it is embracing the death of innocent children.

Now I’m not necessarily as opposed to immigration as I’m sure many here are, but I’m positive that those who are less pro-immigrant than me don’t want us to treat immigrants inhumanely. If it happens as a result of what they push for, it is an unfortunate consequence, not a desired outcome, as is the case with abortion. It also doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t go further and seek ways to help make the society in the places these people are emigrating from better at helping people live life. Then again, I don’t see too many politicians offering solutions that go that far (and it may not be something the government can reasonably do).

Is this to say that there aren’t ways in which the pro-life movement behaves against its (or Christian) ideals? No, but I think the author is speaking from a lack of understanding.
 
Now I’m not necessarily as opposed to immigration as I’m sure many here are, but I’m positive that those who are less pro-immigrant than me don’t want us to treat immigrants inhumanely. If it happens as a result of what they push for, it is an unfortunate consequence, not a desired outcome, as is the case with abortion.
Click to expand...
I’ve known women who had abortions, and I can tell you they didn’t willfully or deliberately kill a child. They simply didn’t want to be pregnant and this involved eliminating a being they perceived as part of their bodies, not a child. This is what abortion advocates actually believe, and with some medical justification, as medical science hasn’t figured out how to define personhood to anyone’s satisfaction.
Now I’m not necessarily as opposed to immigration as I’m sure many here are, but I’m positive that those who are less pro-immigrant than me don’t want us to treat immigrants inhumanely. If it happens as a result of what they push for, it is an unfortunate consequence, not a desired outcome, as is the case with abortion.
Click to expand...
Trump has refuted this by saying that he supports this kind of treatment in order to discourage immigration. He has abundantly shown he supports immigration, but only for those he considers “the best people”, not the “tired or the poor”. His supporters at least tacitly agree with him.
 
Last edited:
Pro Choice also responsible for these deaths since Pro Choice back free welfare for illegal immigrants which is the magnet causing these kids to make dangerous trips, getting raped, etc
 
The kind of thinking you show is just so beyond logic and reason that it’s frightening. It is frightening that my children’s generation, and trickling into my grandchildren’s as well, is so lacking in basic, rudimentary thinking skills that they can present as a flat statement, “a woman who has had an abortion does not willfully or deliberately kill a child; they simply did not want to be pregnant and this involved eliminating a being they perceived as part of their bodies. . .with some medical justification as medical science hasn’t figured out out to define personhood to anyone’s satisfaction”. . .

And not perceive the glaring errors in deductive reasoning, the non sequiturs, the ‘appeal to authority’ fallacies, the presentation of their ‘want’ as trumping all else. . .

Just mind-boggling.
 
billsannie said:
I’ve known women who had abortions, and I can tell you they didn’t willfully or deliberately kill a child.
Click to expand...
they didn’t? tell me, did the child choose to die? did the doctor make the choice for the child to die? who made the deliberate choice for the child to die? it wasn’t an accident.
 
the kind of thinking you show is just so beyond logic and reason that it’s frightening. It is frightening that my children’s generation, and trickling into my grandchildren’s as well, is so lacking in basic, rudimentary thinking skills that they can present as a flat statement, “a woman who has had an abortion does not willfully or deliberately kill a child; they simply did not want to be pregnant and this involved eliminating a being they perceived as part of their bodies. . .with some medical justification as medical science hasn’t figured out out to define personhood to anyone’s satisfaction”. . .
Click to expand...
Unless you’re very old I’m probably of your generation or closer to your age than that of your parents or grandchildren. The ladies I was referring to are probably of your grandchildrens’ generation.
And not perceive the glaring errors in deductive reasoning, the non sequiturs, the ‘appeal to authority’ fallacies, the presentation of their ‘want’ as trumping all else. . .
Click to expand...
I must have made a much longer, larger statement than I thought.
they didn’t? tell me, did the child choose to die? did the doctor make the choice for the child to die? who made the deliberate choice for the child to die? it wasn’t an accident.
Click to expand...
None of those things. I was saying that they didn’t see the baby as a separate person, therefore the will to deliberately kill anything wasn’t involved.
Pro Choice also responsible for these deaths since Pro Choice back free welfare for illegal immigrants which is the magnet causing these kids to make dangerous trips, getting raped, etc
Click to expand...
According to reports, unaccompanied children are usually fleeing violence, not trying to get get welfare. I certainly wouldn’t let my children make such a dangerous journey just for welfare, and I doubt most other parents would do so.
 
Last edited:
billsannie said:
Agreed that the Catholic Church does do much good to alleviate the suffering at the border. The problem is, the Church and its members tend to be very willing to politically engage on the issue of abortion as objectively immoral, which it is, but at least the baby doesn’t usually suffer, or even know its life is snuffed out. At the same time, other life issues, which can cause grave suffering for a lifetime, are seen as issues on which Christians may legitimately differ. How is this right? or morally correct?
Click to expand...
While that sounds very clever, the difference is this—

Abortion is an event. A human being is killed. Not half killed or a quarter killed, killed.

We are commanded by Jesus to cate for our neighbor, but there are many ways to do this—direct hands on care, donating money or political action. It’s up to us.

How do you know what individual pro lifers are doing to help?

The actual scandal is the people who spread lies about the prolife movement.
 
I didn’t ask about pain, I asked about the baby’s knowledge.
Click to expand...
According to medical experts such a young baby would not be aware of anything.
 
0Scarlett_nidiyilii said:
Abortion is an event. A human being is killed. Not half killed or a quarter killed, killed.

We are commanded by Jesus to cate for our neighbor, but there are many ways to do this—direct hands on care, donating money or political action. It’s up to us.

How do you know what individual pro lifers are doing to help?

The actual scandal is the people who spread lies about the prolife movement.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t writing about individuals but about the movement as a whole. Unfortunately the disrepute of the pro-life movement among many persons of goodwill is a very obvious fact.
 
billsannie said:
Unfortunately the disrepute of the pro-life movement among many persons of goodwill is a very obvious fact.
Click to expand...
In other words, very silly people have decided to believe the lies of very wicked people.

Meh, nothing new under the sun.

But be very clear on this—everybody will be held to account for the lies they chose to believe and spread, especially after they were told the truth.
 
billsannie said:
According to medical experts such a young baby would not be aware of anything.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.
If you shot somebody in the back of the head, they wouldn’t be aware of it either, but you still committed a heinous murder.
 
billsannie said:
None of those things. I was saying that they didn’t see the baby as a separate person, therefore the will to deliberately kill anything wasn’t involved.
Click to expand...
if they weren’t killing anything, why did they have to do anything?
 
This evening’s (and tomorrow’s) gospel reading is taken from Luke, the parable of the Good Samaritan. My pastor’s homily got deep into the question of “who is my neighbor?”, and he nailed it. Replace the priest and Levite with two Americans, and do the same for the victim of the robbing. Then replace the Samaritan with a radical Islamist fundamentalist (my pastor’s words). This is how the parable can better speak to us today- who hates America more than an ISIS fighter?

However, in the parable, those who should care most about their fellow man pass him by, while the man who should “hate” him is the one to rescue him.

Who is our neighbor? It’s whoever we think the least about. For those such as the article’s author (and those who share their sentiments), the unborn child is your neighbor. According to Jesus, this neighbor of yours who is being killed deserves your sympathy and help- the killers don’t need your help “rationalizing” their attack.
 
Last edited:
billsannie said:
They simply didn’t want to be pregnant and this involved eliminating a being they perceived as part of their bodies, not a child. This is what abortion advocates actually believe, and with some medical justification, as medical science hasn’t figured out how to define personhood to anyone’s satisfaction
Click to expand...
Completely false. The baby has a unique genetic DNA code separate from the genetic DNA code of the mother.

If it was “part of her body” it would have her unique genetic DNA code but it doesn’t, per medical science
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top