Non-Catholic religions and abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter iamrefreshed
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
estesbob said:
It was a lame attempt at humor that he has repeated at least a half dozen times. Basically he has backed himslef into a corner and is desperatley trying to change the subject.
Click to expand...
oh come on, how on earth am i changing the subject? all the points about the brain, human being, person were merely meant to support the main point which is the ‘human mind’. 😃
 
AgnosTheist said:
i dont know for sure. its likely a combination of medical dissection and neural imaging.
Click to expand...
So you approve of abortion even though you don’t know that your self admited criteria is provable?:eek:

That’s just unwise.
 
AgnosTheist said:
pure rubbish. we all die. fetuses die. babies die. the question is, when does life begin? sperms have a life of their own. dead sperms dont fertilize eggs.
Click to expand...
Well from a Catholic perspective we have to look beyond the physical and into the spiritual.

Does a sperm have a soul ? does an egg have a soul ? for me it would have no soul until both came together, the Prophet Jeremias puts it better, in the end for me it’s a matter of faith, and a matter of right and wrong.

Prophecy Of Jeremias *1:5 ***Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and made thee a prophet unto the nations. **

See, God even knew us before we were formed, and it’s ok to destroy the work of God ? I don’t think so.
AgnosTheist said:
oh come on, how on earth am i changing the subject? all the points about the brain, human being, person were merely meant to support the main point which is the ‘human mind’. 😃
Click to expand...
That’s part of your problem, you seem to concentrate on the physical and forget the spiritual, I don’t even know if you believe in the spiritual, but a Christian would have too, otherwise praying is useless.

So do you believe in the spiritual side of a human being , IE; they have a spirit ?
 
iamrefreshed said:
So you approve of abortion even though you don’t know that your self admited criteria is provable?:eek:

That’s just unwise.
Click to expand...
my dear, it is provable. i am just saying that im not sure about the exact details of the procedure. 🙂
 
snowfly said:
So do you believe in the spiritual side of a human being , IE; they have a spirit ?
Click to expand...
I believe in the spiritual. I just dont buy into the Catholic version of it. For me the soul is formed with the mind, not the body.
 
AgnosTheist said:
on medical findings, of course.

what about you, is there any objective basis for your opinions besides what catholicism is telling you?
Click to expand...
What medical findings prove tha some human life should not be protected. I am not offering anything from the carthecism. I am merely stateing that human life deserves to be protected. It is interesting that those who claim its ok to kill always use criterias that dont apply to them.
 
estesbob said:
What medical findings prove tha some human life should not be protected. I am not offering anything from the carthecism. I am merely stateing that human life deserves to be protected. It is interesting that those who claim its ok to kill always use criterias that dont apply to them.
Click to expand...
As in the earlier comment about aborting a baby that would be born into starvation?

Maybe the father should be killed, he eats more:eek:
 
AgnosTheist said:
I believe in the spiritual. I just dont buy into the Catholic version of it. For me the soul is formed with the mind, not the body.
Click to expand...
Well at least that much, and this means off-course that those babies with functioning brains in the womb who have a soul, have had their soul forcibly expelled.

I’m guessing the soul returns to God, the Holy Spirit expelled and rejected.
40.png
AgnosTheist:
vegetative state is a case to case basis. in most cases its just the brain motor functions that are severed, but the mind still exists. I would never allow killing that. But in the case of Terri Shiavo, the mind was permanently lost.
Click to expand...
And the soul ?
 
Verisimilitude said:
As another pointed out, what is the difference from you going to hospitals and homes of those in a vegitative state and killing them in the same vein you would kill <90 days old fetuses in poor areas?
Click to expand...
vegetative state is a case to case basis. in most cases its just the brain motor functions that are severed, but the mind still exists. I would never allow killing that. But in the case of Terri Shiavo, the mind was permanently lost.
Verisimilitude said:
Your two major points; a function mind and a qualified view of what is a human being are inaccurate benchmarks but alos incorrect conclusions.
Click to expand...
explain.
Verisimilitude said:
You speak as if the functioning mind must be fully formed, without defect or injury- or else it is subject to termination without regard to offense.
Click to expand...
defects are beside the point.
Verisimilitude said:
You speak as if a human being is only viable at some point within the womb, definately not at conception though yet you cannot describe when, but as long as it does not conflict with the funtion mind portion of your theory.
Click to expand...
its like this, i dont know when its gonna rain, but i am damn sure it aint gonna rain in the next 30 munutes.
Verisimilitude said:
Thankfully you are in the minority.
Click to expand...
not really.
 
AgnosTheist said:
your question concerns ethics, not science.
Click to expand...
I am utterly shocked that you use the word science in any of your posts. You have provided not one single scientfic piece of evidence of anything you have posted. Not one. And I doubt you ever will. I am not surprised that you give such short answers lacking in anything that resembles a coherent well thought rebuttal, for if you did your ignorance of the subject would only shine brighter than it does now.

The people who responded to you in this thread deserve some concrete scientific studies that demonstrate and support your position. You brought up science no one else did. Back it up. You can’t. In fact every tough question that requires any sort of thought on your part is ingnored.
 
estesbob said:
And you responses adress neither.
Click to expand...
May I remind you that this entire thread addresses the matter of whether or not its morally acceptable to abort the unborn.

My point: it is morally acceptable to do so up until the first 90 days since scientifically the embryo is not yet a human being during that period.

The catholic point: it is morally unacceptable because the soul forms right after conception.

🙂
 
AgnosTheist said:
My point: it is morally acceptable to do so up until the first 90 days since scientifically the embryo is not yet a human being during that period.

🙂
Click to expand...
Says who. Some nameless faceless scientist you quote form wikipedia. Back this claim up with some cold hard studies where we can read and digest the same information you base your position on. It cannot be that hard since it is proven scientifically which means it has gone through the scientific method so it should be documented.
 
AgnosTheist said:
May I remind you that this entire thread addresses the matter of whether or not its morally acceptable to abort the unborn.

My point: it is morally acceptable to do so up until the first 90 days since scientifically the embryo is not yet a human being during that period.
Click to expand...
There is no sicentific definition of what consitutes a human being nor is there any scientific evidence that human life is disposable but human beings are not.
The catholic point]: it is morally unacceptable because the soul forms right after conception.]
Click to expand...
I am not presenthing a Catholic view. i am presenting irefutable evidence that seperate human life exists from the moment of consception and the observation that ALL huamn life should be protected.
 
ncgolf said:
Says who. Some nameless faceless scientist you quote form wikipedia. Back this claim up with some cold hard studies where we can read and digest the same information you base your position on. It cannot be that hard since it is proven scientifically which means it has gone through the scientific method so it should be documented.
Click to expand...
I did a lot of work already. Time for you guys to return the favor. Theres a lot of you, so at least one of you should provide a counter evidence which suggests that young embryos are already capable of reason, memory and/or emotions. Good luck. 🙂
 
AgnosTheist said:
I did a lot of work already. Time for you guys to return the favor. Theres a lot of you, so at least one of you should provide a counter evidence which suggests that young embryos are already capable of reason, memory and/or emotions. Good luck. 🙂
Click to expand...
Nobody claimed that. You are the one who claims that human life deserves no protection unitl it reaches a stage of develpment YOU find acceptable. you have offered no scientific support for why a child at 90 days gestation can be killed but one at 91 days can not.
 
AgnosTheist said:
why do you refuse to recognize this as scientific evidence:

home.iprimus.com.au/rboon/StagesofBrainDevelopment.htm
Click to expand...
This only details known development of the brain and nuerlogical function. It makes no mention of deciding whether a person exists or does not. It only states the obvious, well known fact that an embryo has an undeveloped nervous system and over time it develops.

Where did you come up with you can abort this embryo? This study makes no mention of this. Any basic college biology textbook has this information. Where does this embryo not being a person come from … what studies support that notion?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top