Pro choice but not Pro Abortion

[Pong]

Oh how I wish people would knock it off with the little catchphrases like “abortuary.” It does nothing to strengthen their argument. Following the Beethoven “logic,” if you knew a woman who was married to a man named Theodore and they lived in Chicago in the 1940’s, would you recommend that she should have an abortion?

If you said “no”, then you have just allowed the unibomber to be born.

Works both ways.

 

[Belgarion]

Oh how I wish people would knock it off with the little catchphrases like “abortuary.” It does nothing to strengthen their argument. Following the Beethoven “logic,” if you knew a woman who was married to a man named Theodore and they lived in Chicago in the 1940’s, would you recommend that she should have an abortion?

If you said “no”, then you have just allowed the unibomber to be born.

Works both ways.

Except there are more “Beethovens” than “unibombers”

Your argument is invalid.

Seriously, you seem to want to argue against one of the key beliefs of the Church. Papal and Church Infallibility.
Go to confession.
Stop wasting your time arguing pointlessly.

You have been proven wrong by science
You have been proven wrong by YOUR VERY FAITH

You are wrong, deal with it.

You and others like you are too prideful to not only take admit you were wrong, but also take responsibility for your mistake!

Also, irresponsibility and pride is the stem of those who seek abortions anyways.
Their motives stem from not wanting a child, or not wanting anyone to know about it.

I can tell you are a seriously proud person, who cannot admit you’ve done anything wrong. You ignore the fact that if you went up to the Pope (or any Pope before him) he’d tell you that you are wrong. How does it feel to know that St. Peter himself would demand you go to confession, otherwise you will be barred from receiving Holy Communion?

You must seriously examine your conscience if you buy into the lies of places like Planned PArenthood. If you ignore logic, as well as Doctrine.

Your argument lost. The Church wins.

and good day

 

[catharina]

Oh how I wish people would knock it off with the little catchphrases like “abortuary.” It does nothing to strengthen their argument. Following the Beethoven “logic,” if you knew a woman who was married to a man named Theodore and they lived in Chicago in the 1940’s, would you recommend that she should have an abortion?

If you said “no”, then you have just allowed the unibomber to be born.

Works both ways.

oh cool. let’s turn back time and kill hitler - and stalin and mao too.

that’ll make God “happy” for sure (?). not.

ted k. grew up one neighborhood away from me. so did the Navy spy hansen. a jillion other nieghboood boys did not grow up and turn into that type - but you go ahead: kill beethoven.

da da da daahhhhhh

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

Oh how I wish people would knock it off with the little catchphrases like “abortuary.” It does nothing to strengthen their argument.

I tend to agree. We should just use it in prolife circles but stick to facts when trying to argue the wrongness of abortion. Is “abortion clinic” an acceptable term?

Following the Beethoven “logic,” if you knew a woman who was married to a man named Theodore and they lived in Chicago in the 1940’s, would you recommend that she should have an abortion?

If you said “no”, then you have just allowed the unibomber to be born.

Works both ways.

Also true. Both sides use emotional means to make points. It is a quick and easy way to have a chance of affecting someone deeply…but also a quick and easy way to derail a good debate. Simple facts should suffice for anyone actually searching out the Truth.

 

[catharina]

I tend to agree (re term abortuary). We should just use it in prolife circles but stick to facts when trying to argue the wrongness of abortion. Is “abortion clinic” an acceptable term?

above per FW

“Abortion CLINIC?” I sense a problem, FW.

Clinic implies medical care is given.
In an abortion clinic, two patients enter, perfectly well.
One exits but the other’s been killed.
Its remains reside in a clinic trash can.

What’s wrong with that picture?

Maybe “Clinic and KIlling Center” would work for everybody?

 

[Pong]

Thank you, Malia. Even though we may disagree, you stuck to the issue and responded to the points being made. :tiphat:

Belgarion- Your inability to continue a conversation in any sort of coherant fashion without repeating the same opinions passed of as sound logic has earned you a space on my ignore list. Welcome to it.

 

[Philothea53]

Oh how I wish people would knock it off with the little catchphrases like “abortuary.”

What is it about the term abortuary that bothers? The similarity to the word for a funeral home? The fact that it can only mean one thing - a place where people go to die at the hands of an abortionist? What would YOU call this place? You wouldn’t consider calling it a women’s health clinic, would you? I don’t think it quite describes what goes on in one of those places. What euphemism would you use? Maybe you would go for a catch phrase including the word “choice”. No, that wouldn’t quite work either. The baby has no choice in the matter. Hmmm. The only one that really fits is abortuary. If it’s such a good choice, why the trouble accepting the only term that adequately describes what is happening there? Truth hurt?

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

“Abortion CLINIC?” I sense a problem, FW.

Clinic implies medical care is given.
In an abortion clinic, two patients enter, perfectly well.
One exits but the other’s been killed.
Its remains reside in a clinic trash can.

What’s wrong with that picture?

Maybe “Clinic and KIlling Center” would work for everybody?

**
You have to give a little to get a little. I am willing to give up the inflammatory term “abortuary” if that means that a pro choice person might actually listen to what I have to say instead of getting stuck on one word:shrug:

Clinic, to me is a general term. Someplace that doctor’s practice. We cannot deny that the people responsible for murdering babies are doctors. I wonder if there is a more neutral term?

**

 

[Pong]

What is it about the term abortuary that bothers?

It is a made-up term that tries to equate a clinic that provides abortions (I will refrain from calling it an “abortion clinic” because many clinics provide other services, however clinics that exist solely to perform abortions may properly be called abortion clinics) with a mortuary. The term exists solely to sensationalize abortion and turn it into something that it is not.

You wouldn’t consider calling it a women’s health clinic, would you?

Of course I would, if the clinic provided women’s health services.

What euphemism would you use?

I would refrain from using one. I prefer to call things as they are. For example: a foetus is different from a baby, which is different from a child, which is different from an adult, etc…

 

[estesbob]

It is a made-up term that tries to equate a clinic that provides abortions (I will refrain from calling it an “abortion clinic” because many clinics provide other services, however clinics that exist solely to perform abortions may properly be called abortion clinics) with a mortuary. The term exists solely to sensationalize abortion and turn it into something that it is not.

…

Uh where do you think all those dismembered baby parts go? Any aborfftion clinic has to have a mortuary to dispose of the dead childens bodies. i think abortuary is an apt description.

 

[catharina]

You have to give a little to get a little. I am willing to give up the inflammatory term “abortuary” if that means that a pro choice person might actually listen to what I have to say instead of getting stuck on one word:shrug:

Clinic, to me is a general term. Someplace that doctor’s practice. We cannot deny that the people responsible for murdering babies are doctors. I wonder if there is a more neutral term?

Well, you’re much sweeter than I and that’s for sure.

I’m going with Women’s Clinic and Babies’ Death Center (like they got accidentally killed?).

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I like to put the word “doctor” in quotes. That really seems like such a waste of money for medical school to end up doing those “procedures” for a living.

When a woman has an abortion, she might or might not know what her unborn looks like…but these “doctors” see time after time what the “products of conception” look like. I can’t understand this at all.

 

[estesbob]

I like to put the word “doctor” in quotes. That really seems like such a waste of money for medical school to end up doing those “procedures” for a living.

When a woman has an abortion, she might or might not know what her unborn looks like…but these “doctors” see time after time what the “products of conception” look like. I can’t understand this at all.

The nurse has the worst job. She has to reconstruct the dead baby to make sure all the body part got sucked out.

 

[Philothea53]

It is a made-up term that tries to equate a clinic that provides abortions (I will refrain from calling it an “abortion clinic” because many clinics provide other services, however clinics that exist solely to perform abortions may properly be called abortion clinics) with a mortuary. The term exists solely to sensationalize abortion and turn it into something that it is not.

Of course I would, if the clinic provided women’s health services.

I would refrain from using one. I prefer to call things as they are. For example: a foetus is different from a baby, which is different from a child, which is different from an adult, etc…

Interestingly enough you did not come up with a name except a touch and go with abortion clinic.

A search for the definition of clinic came up with:

1. A facility, often associated with a hospital or medical school, that is devoted to the diagnosis and care of outpatients.
2. A medical establishment run by several specialists working in cooperation and sharing the same facilities

I don’t see how either one of those describe what goes on in a place that exists for the purpose of murdering a child in the womb. But a place where a woman goes to abort her child by an abortionist trained in abortions so that the women leaves without her dead child can only be called an abortuary.

It’s kind of how the abortion industry got you all talking about abortion as a “choice” and calling the unborn baby a “fetus” like we are all interns in med school. New words/new definitions crop up all the time.

 

[Belgarion]

Belgarion- Your inability to continue a conversation in any sort of coherant fashion without repeating the same opinions passed of as sound logic has earned you a space on my ignore list. Welcome to it.

Considering that you have done nothing but ignore the facts, I will continue to repeat them, even if you add me to your ignore list.

Though I’m sure ignorance is bliss for you

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

**If anyone is iterested in a philosophical argument against abortion:

peterkreeft.com/topics-more/personhood.htm**

Either the fetus is a person, or not; and either we know what it is, or not. Thus there are four and only four possibilities:

1. 
   *]that it is not a person and we know that,
   *]that it is a person and we know that,
   *]that it is a person but we do not know that, and
   *]that it is not a person and we do not know that.
   Now what is abortion in each of these four cases?
   In case (1), abortion is perfectly permissible. We do no wrong if we kill what is not a person and we know it is not a person—e.g., if we fry a fish. But no one has ever proved with certainty that a fetus is not a person. If there exists anywhere such a proof, please show it to me and Ishall convert to pro-choice on the spot if I cannot refute it.
   If we do not have case (1) we have either (2) or (3) or (4). What is abortion in each of these cases? It is either murder, or manslaughter, or criminal negligence.
   In case (2), where the fetus is a person and we know that, abortion is murder. For killing an innocent person knowing it is an innocent person ismurder.
   In case (3), abortion is manslaughter, for it is killing an innocent person not knowing and intending the full, deliberate extent of murder. It is like driving over a man-shaped overcoat in the street, which may be a drunk or may only be an old coat. It is like shooting at a sudden movement in a bush which may be your hunting companion or may be only a pheasant. It is like fumigating an apartment building with a highly toxic chemical not knowing whether everyone is safely evacuated. If the victim is a person you have committed manslaughter. And if not?
   Even in case (4), even if abortion kills what is not in fact a person, but the killer does not know for sure that it is not a person, we have criminal negligence, as in the above three cases if there happened to be no man in the coat, the bush, or the building but the driver, the hunter, or the fumigator did not know that, and nevertheless drove, shot or fumigated. Such negligence is instinctively and universally condemned by all reasonable individuals and societies as personally immoral and socially criminal; and cases (2) and (3), murder and manslaughter, are of course condemned even more strongly. We do not argue politely over whether such behavior is right or wrong. We wholeheartedly condemn it, even when we do not know whether there is a person there, because the killer did not know that a person was not there. Why do we not do the same with abortion?
   The answer to that question is not an easy one to admit. It is this:
   
   "If we do not see the awfulness of abortion, that is not because the facts and arguments are unclear but because our own consciences are unclear.
   
   *Mother Teresa says, “Abortion kills twice. It kills the body of the baby and it kills the conscience of the mother.”
   
   *Abortion is profoundly anti-women. Three quarters of its victims are women: half the babies and all the mothers."

 

[dontknow]

As it was brought up on Theresa Tomeo’s show discussing this with Father Frank Pavone:

youtube.com/watch?v=aIehOHSG1ZI

It’s disgusting, sad but reality.

Although I don’t expect non-believers to “get it” - it’s the truth about the legal murder of these helpless lives (I’ll refrain from classifying it as a fetus, baby or anything else).

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

**If anyone is iterested in a philosophical argument against abortion:

peterkreeft.com/topics-more/personhood.htm**

Either the fetus is a person, or not; and either we know what it is, or not. Thus there are four and only four possibilities:

1. 
   *]that it is not a person and we know that,
   *]that it is a person and we know that,
   *]that it is a person but we do not know that, and
   *]that it is not a person and we do not know that.
   Now what is abortion in each of these four cases?
   In case (1), abortion is perfectly permissible. We do no wrong if we kill what is not a person and we know it is not a person—e.g., if we fry a fish. But no one has ever proved with certainty that a fetus is not a person. If there exists anywhere such a proof, please show it to me and Ishall convert to pro-choice on the spot if I cannot refute it.
   If we do not have case (1) we have either (2) or (3) or (4). What is abortion in each of these cases? It is either murder, or manslaughter, or criminal negligence.
   In case (2), where the fetus is a person and we know that, abortion is murder. For killing an innocent person knowing it is an innocent person ismurder.
   In case (3), abortion is manslaughter, for it is killing an innocent person not knowing and intending the full, deliberate extent of murder. It is like driving over a man-shaped overcoat in the street, which may be a drunk or may only be an old coat. It is like shooting at a sudden movement in a bush which may be your hunting companion or may be only a pheasant. It is like fumigating an apartment building with a highly toxic chemical not knowing whether everyone is safely evacuated. If the victim is a person you have committed manslaughter. And if not?
   Even in case (4), even if abortion kills what is not in fact a person, but the killer does not know for sure that it is not a person, we have criminal negligence, as in the above three cases if there happened to be no man in the coat, the bush, or the building but the driver, the hunter, or the fumigator did not know that, and nevertheless drove, shot or fumigated. Such negligence is instinctively and universally condemned by all reasonable individuals and societies as personally immoral and socially criminal; and cases (2) and (3), murder and manslaughter, are of course condemned even more strongly. We do not argue politely over whether such behavior is right or wrong. We wholeheartedly condemn it, even when we do not know whether there is a person there, because the killer did not know that a person was not there. Why do we not do the same with abortion?
   The answer to that question is not an easy one to admit. It is this:
   
   "If we do not see the awfulness of abortion, that is not because the facts and arguments are unclear but because our own consciences are unclear.
   
   *Mother Teresa says, “Abortion kills twice. It kills the body of the baby and it kills the conscience of the mother.”
   
   *Abortion is profoundly anti-women. Three quarters of its victims are women: half the babies and all the mothers."

1. 
   Thanks Malia, this is a great resource. BTW you are a GREAT apologist. The part I highlighted is so sad…and that is probably not taking into consideration abortions in China and India, done precisely because the pre-born is a girl.

 

[catharina]

Thanks Malia, this is a great resource. BTW you are a GREAT apologist. The part I highlighted is so sad…and that is probably not taking into consideration abortions in China and India, done precisely because the pre-born is a girl.

I second that.

 

[marietta]

Belgarion:

“I cannot find corinas or anything like it in my Latin dictionaries. I know via is ‘road, path, method’ and inundum looks like it comes from the verb ‘overflow, inundate, flood’, but it’s incorrectly constructed. So, if you’ve written correctly what was said, then that’s as much as I can help. --EncycloPetey 14:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)”

Have your posts anything to do with flooding a thread with verbiage which needs to be corroborated, and in so doing deter those who do not agree with you from reserving time to respond to the points you’re trying to make?

Care to enlighten?

marietta