Pro-Life and World Hunger

[dmelosi]

Bringing more human life into this world, than we can take care of is not being pro-life. It is bring people into this world simply because our biology allows for it.

Wether you like it or not, it is seen for many pro-choice people AS a choice between the future for humanity, and a fetus that does not even know it exists. Pro-life and Pro-choice care about human life as much as each other.

They just have a different mechanism to achieve a similar goal.

The problem is, there are more people that need help, than those that can help. I commend those that do help, but it doesn’t mean they are viewing life holistically.

“lLife” is more than the sum of it’s parts, and human life is just a part of the big picture, not the “end” or “Point” of life itself. By bringing too many humans into the world, humans that consume to survive, we aren’t respecting LIFE, we are only respecting human life.

And by ignoring the life(plants and other animals) that we destroy through too many humans, ultimately affects humans. It’s very big picture, but at the end of the day, if you respect human life, you won’t try to create it just because you can, but only because you want to, and because you have the capacity to care for it. Since we do not have the capacity, stop doing it.

I would suggest that humans need to grow up a bit, and realize that we can’t have everything we want, including 6 kids each.

Perhaps the public school system failed, because people thought that buying an education would help solve the problem.

The more parents that choose to “pay” for an education, the less those parents are involved in a schooling system that is desperately needed by all.

This has nothing to do with catholicism. It’s laziness. Parents want to “pay” for discipline, rather than being involved in the great responsiblity toward education that we have toward the greater community.

Private schooling is not an answer to shodding public schooling, its an act of disrespect toward education for all. I will never support it.

Then why are more and more people starving? Regardless of how much work “christians” are putting into the system, they refuse to recognize that the system is breaking down DUE to human population in certain regions.

Not because of a lack of effort.

We can’t over throw them.

We need to live and support sustainable living locally, instead of focussing on the global system we utilize. IE, if we NEED something from a dictator, we will STILL buy it today. Most of the people in this forum will buy products that are made in countries that violate human rights.

Stop feeding them the $$ and they will have to do something about it, to survive. Looking in our own back door(IE for me Australia) is a good start. But then again, it’s so much “cheaper” to buy indonesian palm oil, than it is to buy something organic and sustainable.

What I’M sick of, is people claming they are trying when they won’t give up the very things causing the problem. The amount of humans they bring into this world, and what they consume.

Easier to blame everyone else…such GREED and CORRUPTION in the world…golly gosh.

The slope is very slippery when people try to justify that the unborn is less than a human and that killing it is ok. That is the first step to dehumanizing everything.

The single most important reason behind a private education is the fact that children are allowed and encouraged to talk about their faith as they interact with their friends. In public schools people are afraid of being made fun of when they talk about their faith.

Are you against religion and for killing the unborn?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Bringing more human life into this world, than we can take care of is not being pro-life. It is bring people into this world simply because our biology allows for it.

Wether you like it or not, it is seen for many pro-choice people AS a choice between the future for humanity, and a fetus that does not even know it exists. Pro-life and Pro-choice care about human life as much as each other.

They just have a different mechanism to achieve a similar goal.

So you defend that grisly crime, the killing of an innocent human being, by claiming you’re “saving the world?”

 

[Ridgerunner]

No, it does not increase food production.

Many acres of land are being diverted *from *grain/crops *to *corn for ethanol. This has created skyrocketing feed costs for animal producers and has created a shortage of grain crops on the world market-- wheat, soybean, corn, etc. The enticement of higher prices for corn diverted to ethanol production has cut the number of acres being utilized for human consumption crops as well as animal feed.

And, yes, we are a family of farmers so we too know “something” about this situation.

The irony was only about *making *blanket statements, not about the pro-green/ethanol people. They do deserve a lot of blame, just not all of it.

I’m not a farmer, and know next to nothing about farming. I do know ranching, however, and I know for a fact that feeding grain to cattle the way it has been done for decades is a waste. There are still some ranchers who think they should feed supplemental grain to beef cattle in the winter, when what they really need is not protein supplementation but high energy, high rumen activity grasses or hay. Grain supplementation isn’t even good for them. But ranchers are learning to cut down on the grain because of the cost, and stockyards are starting to reward ranchers who bring bigger, grass-fed animals to market. Even some dairymen are starting to eliminate the grain diets. (It’s complicated and probably boring to most, but if anybody wants to know how it works, PM me.) What I’m saying applies to all ungulates. Granted, the feed lots still feed lots of grain for “finishing”. That could change, but it isn’t likely.

I don’t know if changes in ranching practices are going to offset the dedication of corn to ethanol production, but it sure would do it some. Hogs are probably a different story, but I don’t know anything about hogs except that pork comes from them and that I’ll shoot a feral hog on sight and leave him for the eagles and buzzards.

I have never been persuaded that using corn for fuel ethanol is really an effective solution, and I suspect it’s a boondoggle that will eventually be abandoned. But in the meanwhile, it has taught ranchers something worth knowing.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Bringing more human life into this world, than we can take care of is not being pro-life. It is bring people into this world simply because our biology allows for it.

This statement is one that would be loved by the Chinese government. I can only guess you approve of their one child policy?

 

[Yerusalyim]

“World Hunger” and abortion are unrelated issues. We have hunger in the world, NOT from overpopulation, but from greed and mismanagement.

 

[kettle]

I’m anti-abortion. I volunteer with Right to Life. I work for a Christian non-profit ministry which supports Ugandan orphans. I spend thousands of dollars and countless hours each year helping to care for the needy. My husband and I have four children. We support our children without the assistance of others.

Which blanket statement are you going to cover me with?

snap

“pro-lifers don’t care about the hungry…” Puhleez.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’m anti-abortion. I volunteer with Right to Life. I work for a Christian non-profit ministry which supports Ugandan orphans. I spend thousands of dollars and countless hours each year helping to care for the needy. My husband and I have four children. We support our children without the assistance of others.

Which blanket statement are you going to cover me with?

snap

“pro-lifers don’t care about the hungry…” Puhleez.

That’s a standard “Pro-choice” tactic. They accuse those who are for life of “not caring about the child after it’s born” and not caring about the hungry.

Yet pro-lifers work hard, contribure and raise money, care for the poor, assist young girls care for their children, help them finish their education, get jobs and so on.

Frankly, the accusations are a lie of the worst kind.

 

[Dameedna]

The slope is very slippery when people try to justify that the unborn is less than a human and that killing it is ok. That is the first step to dehumanizing everything.

In your opinion. I have been to overpopulated countries. In those countries there is simply so much human life, it isn’t considered important. It’s not valued. You may claim it’s ethics, but it’s not. It became devauled, more and more, with the growth of the population.

Life isn’t devalued soley by random acts of destruction . You can also devalue it by creating so much of it that life itself ends up in in an instinctual fight for survival, and not a life based on the human spirit.

The single most important reason behind a private education is the fact that children are allowed and encouraged to talk about their faith as they interact with their friends. In public schools people are afraid of being made fun of when they talk about their faith.

The most important thing about education, is education. Reading, writing, and arithmetic. Call me old fashioned, but if you cannot read, write or do basic math, your religion will not assist you in dealing with the modern world.

Let them read first, so they can then read about morality.

Are you against religion and for killing the unborn?

No I’m not against religion, and no I’m not “for” the killing of unborns.

 

[Dameedna]

So you defend that grisly crime, the killing of an innocent human being, by claiming you’re “saving the world?”

No.

 

[Dameedna]

This statement is one that would be loved by the Chinese government. I can only guess you approve of their one child policy?

Yes I do support it.

 

[vern_humphrey]

In your opinion. I have been to overpopulated countries. In those countries there is simply so much human life, it isn’t considered important. It’s not valued. You may claim it’s ethics, but it’s not. It became devauled, more and more, with the growth of the population.

I have spent a good part of my life outside the United States – I have lived in Peru, Egypt, Viet Nam, Korea, and Singapore.

And I have noticed something – people who say, " there is simply so much human life" do not volunteer to leave this life – instead, they volunteer someone else.

 

[ribozyme]

I have spent a good part of my life outside the United States – I have lived in Peru, Egypt, Viet Nam, Korea, and Singapore.

And I have noticed something – people who say, " there is simply so much human life" do not volunteer to leave this life – instead, they volunteer someone else.

Those people do not propose killing anyone; the just want contraceptives to be used more.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Those people do not propose killing anyone; the just want contraceptives to be used more.

Ah, that way they don’t have to put their money (and lives) where their mouth is.

I note that we are challenged with the statement “I have been to overpopulated countries” (as if no one else on these forums has). Yet Mother Theresa didn’t just visit poverty-stricken “overpopulated” countries – she lived in one, Bengladesh. And she did not share your opinion, nor that of Dameedna.

Of course, she actually worked to alleviate poverty.

 

[st_lucy]

Yes I do support it.

You are saying that you support the idea of ripping ones limbs apart one by one or having acid spilled on someone or having a hole drilled on ones head so that we can have an ideal population? Right.

Okay than when are you going to step up to that plate obviously you are part of the overpopulation problem also. Or is that not what you meant. It is only ok if it is not you who is being tortured all in the name of population control.

 

[st_lucy]

OP,

I am pro-life and I also do my share of feeding the hungry and clothing the poor. I am unsure why you think you cannot do both. Is it because the crowd you get your outlandish ideas from have hard time doing more than one?

It does seem kind of silly doesn’t, we can be passionate about more than one thing. We cry and stand up for the murdered children and feed the children that are hungry all at the same time.

 

[vern_humphrey]

You have to understand it’s easier to support killing the chilren than it is to work to help them, raise money, and devote hours and hours of your time.

 

[mapleoak]

Bringing more human life into this world, than we can take care of is not being pro-life.

You have to define who the ‘we’ is here. If it is ‘you’ who cannot or more accurately will not take care of anyone but yourself, you cannot make such a claim.

It is bring people into this world simply because our biology allows for it.

That is a pretty ridiculous thing to say. Who does this?

Wether you like it or not, it is seen for many pro-choice people AS a choice between the future for humanity, and a fetus that does not even know it exists. Pro-life and Pro-choice care about human life as much as each other.

Nope, Pro-life cares about human life. Pro-choice destroys human life.

They just have a different mechanism to achieve a similar goal.

If the goal of being pro-choice was to improve the outlook for the future of humanity it wouldn’t seek to exterminate humanity.

The problem is, there are more people that need help, than those that can help.

Support for this statement needed.

I would suggest that humans need to grow up a bit, and realize that we can’t have everything we want, including 6 kids each.

You also need to realize that you can’t have everything you want. This means not killing other people so that you can have what you want. Pretty selfish indeed.

We need to live and support sustainable living locally

How do you figure it is you that needs to live and be supported locally and not someone else?

What I’M sick of, is people claming they are trying when they won’t give up the very things causing the problem. The amount of humans they bring into this world, and what they consume.

And if there are too many people in the world, aren’t you one of them?

 

[Sean_Boyle]

I have spent a good part of my life outside the United States – I have lived in Peru, Egypt, Viet Nam, Korea, and Singapore.

And I have noticed something – people who say, " there is simply so much human life" do not volunteer to leave this life – instead, they volunteer someone else.

Very true, and so simple …

if you believe the world is overpopulated and you need to do something about it, why are you still alive to talk about it.

How many people could live off of the amount of food and resources that you require to travel to all those places. Those resources would be better spent on someone that needs it.

Are you and your existance somehow more important to the world than a starving child somewhere else. Why are you using the resouces that could feed hundreds of people a year?

Why is that okay?

 

[mapleoak]

You have to understand it’s easier to support killing the chilren than it is to work to help them, raise money, and devote hours and hours of your time.

Easier to not put ones own standard of living in jepoardy by giving to those in need but instead killing the needy off. Money and power corrupts such that those that have these things take advantage of their position of power to oppress the needy who are perceived to be a threat to them.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Those people do not propose killing anyone; the just want contraceptives to be used more.

How about the contraceptive of “not doing it in the first place…”