Question to Catholics about Abortion

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Original poster: Pointless proposition. Mind games from the Liar meant to confuse those who are in the process of receiving Truth. I will remain Catholic despite human law, I will remain anti-abortion despite human law. Choose Truth from He who is Truth and reject Lies from he who is Lies.

 

[BareKnuckler]

Pointless proposition. Mind games from the Liar meant to confuse those who are in the process of receiving Truth. I will remain Catholic despite human law, I will remain anti-abortion despite human law. Choose Truth from He who is Truth and reject Lies from he who is Lies.

HAHA! Yes, Lucifer sent me to earth, to decieve, ye people of faith. Mission Accomplished, now I get my Home on the beach in Hell Fire Miama, on the South Side of Satanville…

I can see Bareknuckler; that you borrow your philosophical rational from a Buddhist or Hindu point of view, since you hold to your personal belief in (“Karma”). Christians and in particular Catholics do not subscribe to the philosophy that natural laws of causation are sufficient to explain the effects of life in relation to morality. The fallacies of the human intellect are too primitive and riddled in personal human pride to appreciate what ((“true”)) moral justice really is.
God’s moral justice is (“nothing”) comparatively close to the laws of human moral justice which is most often inordinately flawed. The fact that (“You”) “Bareknuckler” do not care about God’s Moral Justice and rely on your own prideful sense of what is right and wrong speaks clear that you have no idea what God’s Moral Justice really is.

Out of all that, I got: Your prideful, and wrong. I do not know if you were trying to make a point in this debate, but ok, good luck in life.

 

[miguel]

I would rather have something legal or illegal, according to the majority, then to one man, or one group’s morals.

Are you serious? We don’t have abortion because of democracy. The Supreme Court removed abortion from the democratic process. Before that, it was criminal in most states. And those laws were on the books because democratically elected legislative bodies put them there.

 

[BareKnuckler]

Are you serious? We don’t have abortion because of democracy. The Supreme Court removed abortion from the democratic process. Before that, it was criminal in most states. And those laws were on the books because democratically elected legislative bodies put them there.

That doesn’t change my stance. If its not in the democractic process, then its not voted on, but I am pretty sure Abortion is voted on isn’t it?

 

[elts1956]

Abortion. First thing I think of is why. Why would this mother want her baby taken from her? Well, their are MANY reasons, some of which I doubt I’ll ever know, but I do support some reasons. I support Abortion if it was due to a Rape, or if the mother will die and the baby, during the pregnancy. Other then that, doubtful, well better yet, not at all, if its a teen pregnancy, then so be it, no abortion, cause both had consented sex, and knew the risk, I am a teen, and if I got a girl pregnant, I would take the responsibility and support her and the kid, until the day I die, and I do not mean child support.

My question unto you, ye faithful (lol love that little set of words) is this:

Would you be willing to give up Freedom of Religion, for Abortion to be out-lawed? Here is what I mean:

Let’s say, 51% of America, supported Abortion, but 49% didn’t, would you want Abortion out-lawed then, even though the majority of America, is ok with it? Cause if you do, then your willing to get rid of a piece of democracy, no I am not trying to bash you guys/gals who would, but I am making a statement of fact, that if your willing to make a law, even though the people (majority) don’t want it, then what’s next?

Good luck, please be courteous to all, no matter which stance you are, and please none of this “baby killers” ****, cause I am asking you to question yourself, whether your willing to sacrifice freedom, for a cause. I personally, would not, no, I do not like abortion, but I am not gonna destroy a piece of democracy to stop it.

You aren’t talking about true freedom. Our founding fathers wrote the constitution for protection of all, born and unborn. This piece of Democracy is being taken away by such acts as FOCA, and the rescinding of the protection of FREEDOM of conscience Act for all medical personnel.

In their time, the Founding Fathers could not have conceived of such laws endorsing abortion, the killing of the unborn. It would have been unthinkable, just as it should be to any moral person living today.

Pro-choice advocates say the unborn are only globs of cells with no human identity. They don’t know their science.

TRUTH IS TRUTH EVEN IF NO ONE BELIEVES IT.
A LIE IS A LIE EVEN IF EVERYONE BELIEVES IT.

 

[Des]

When is the baby a human being? Does abortion, only a few weeks after conception murder to you?

Medical science, not religion says a human life begins at the moment of conception.

Oh I am? If that is the only part of the debate you consider significant, then well, sorry. The problem with that is, people have differing opinions when the child is a child. Is it a child when its born (I think so) or when it is un-born. When the child becomes a US Citizen (birth) it is a child.

So 10 seconds before the Child comes out, it’s not a human being with a right to his/her own life because your government doesn’t consider it a citizen? Or is it to you a human being even then of which you still won’t consider should have a say in his/her basic right to life because he/she can’t vote?

The natural moral law has nothing to do with religion and ‘EVERYTHING’ to do with basic rights that every human should get from the moment they are first created.

And your government is wrong, just like mine and just like they were wrong about blacks and slavery at one time.

Yes or no, was your government morally correct when they once made it law that woman couldn’t vote?
And so since the majority of people at that time who believed in this idea, your own reasoning would mean you would be imputing your own religion on others hence taking away democracy if you so much had even protested against it of course.

Also by your own reasoning, before the abortion law and while the majority were still against it, these first few minorities who opposed it were imputing their own religion on it’s citizens once they started to make some noise for their cause.

The ironic thing is they indeed were taking democracy away from us all because we all at one time were part of the unborn but still human beings.

One more thing. Your reasoning must mean that any democratic country where the majority of people oppose abortion is magically not inserting their religious beliefs on it’s people simple because it’s the numbers who are for/against tell you when religion comes into play.
.
What it comes down to as is most always is the case, is that you don’t believe a fetus is a human being which you even admit. It really has nothing to do with religion or democracy as you initially stated cause if you seriously did believe that a fetus was a person just like a newborn, I highly doubt we’d even be having this conversation.

 

[BareKnuckler]

Medical science, not religion says a human life begins at the moment of conception.

So 10 seconds before the Child comes out, it’s not a human being with a right to his/her own life because your government doesn’t consider it a citizen? Or is it to you a human being even then of which you still won’t consider should have a say in his/her basic right to life because he/she can’t vote?

The natural moral law has nothing to do with religion and ‘EVERYTHING’ to do with basic rights that every human should get from the moment they are first created.

And your government is wrong, just like mine and just like they were wrong about blacks and slavery at one time.

Yes or no, was your government morally correct when they once made it law that woman couldn’t vote?
And so since the majority of people at that time who believed in this idea, your own reasoning would mean you would be imputing your own religion on others hence taking away democracy if you so much had even protested against it of course.

Also by your own reasoning, before the abortion law and while the majority were still against it, these first few minorities who opposed it were imputing their own religion on it’s citizens once they started to make some noise for their cause.

The ironic thing is they indeed were taking democracy away from us all because we all at one time were part of the unborn but still human beings.

One more thing. Your reasoning must mean that any democratic country where the majority of people oppose abortion is magically not inserting their religious beliefs on it’s people simple because it’s the numbers who are for/against tell you when religion comes into play.
.
What it comes down to as is most always is the case, is that you don’t believe a fetus is a human being which you even admit. It really has nothing to do with religion or democracy as you initially stated cause if you seriously did believe that a fetus was a person just like a newborn, I highly doubt we’d even be having this conversation.

If he or she isn’t a citizen, then they have no right guranteed to them by the United States (unless the US has given rights to the un-born? if so, please give me a link, I’d like to know), their not even born, their not citizens of the U.S, cause they have to be born, to be eligable.

Basic Rights are a joke. In the Middle East, and other countries, when the regimes take over, and take the food the UN sends the people, where is that basic right enforced? It’s not (usually), Basic Rights are not anything, if they can not be enforced everywhere.

Yes, Slavery was wrong, but it was corrected later on (and if your correct, so will abortion, which is fine by me, I do not care, Pro or No, if the US Government rules its not ok, then fine with me, but if they rule its ok, fine as well).

What?

Maybe they were, I don’t know, do you know a religion that is pro-abortion?

Sorry my opinoin isn’t the same as yours?

You aren’t talking about true freedom. Our founding fathers wrote the constitution for protection of all, born and unborn. This piece of Democracy is being taken away by such acts as FOCA, and the rescinding of the protection of FREEDOM of conscience Act for all medical personnel.

In their time, the Founding Fathers could not have conceived of such laws endorsing abortion, the killing of the unborn. It would have been unthinkable, just as it should be to any moral person living today.

Pro-choice advocates say the unborn are only globs of cells with no human identity. They don’t know their science.

TRUTH IS TRUTH EVEN IF NO ONE BELIEVES IT.
A LIE IS A LIE EVEN IF EVERYONE BELIEVES IT.

Where did they address unborn?

I take it you knew the founding fathers, so you know their opinoins on the matter, correct?

I would think they know their science, if their a scientist, they go to college/university for years, and go through a lot of stuff to get their diploma’s and such, who are you to say they don’t know what they are talking about?

Good, making it in caps makes it true…

 

[fix]

They are citizens, they have rights, but a unborn is not a citizen, cause you have to born to be a citizen, unless they modify the requirments to be a U.S. Citizen.

So, non citizens get to be murdered?

Who is to say it is Murder if you kill a thing that is not yet born?

Right reason, common sense, logic, non pathological consciences, and people of good will

If the baby is born, as in, it is out of the mother and alive, then it is a US Citizen, because it was born in the United States of America, then it has rights.

Rights only come from the government? Hmm, I guess that means if the government decides you are not worth keeping then that is it. What a strange view of government.

No we wouldn’t slavery was very in-efficient. What would we use slaves for? Servants? Only the very wealthy could afford that, and I doubt their morality would be so cold to allow them to have slaves. We would not use slaves for manual labor on farms, cause people like me, use that as a job, and we fill up the ranks of it pretty good.

I would guess so, that was the way it was for a long time, idk, if their considered citizens I guess they would.

Your entire premise is faulty. You only impute rights to persons if the government says so or if the person has utility to you. Wow.

 

[st_lucy]

If he or she isn’t a citizen, then they have no right guranteed to them by the United States (unless the US has given rights to the un-born? if so, please give me a link, I’d like to know), their not even born, their not citizens of the U.S, cause they have to be born, to be eligable.

So I guess you think it is okay to butcher illegal aliens, right?

Basic Rights are a joke. In the Middle East, and other countries, when the regimes take over, and take the food the UN sends the people, where is that basic right enforced? It’s not (usually), Basic Rights are not anything, if they can not be enforced everywhere.

So are advacating the US become more like the Middle East?

Yes, Slavery was wrong, but it was corrected later on (and if your correct, so will abortion, which is fine by me, I do not care, Pro or No, if the US Government rules its not ok, then fine with me, but if they rule its ok, fine as well).

So if the US government ruled that it is okay to kill all illegal Muslim women you would think that is okay?

What?

Maybe they were, I don’t know, do you know a religion that is pro-abortion?

Well I do know that the religion you seem to be following is most diffently pro-abortion.

.

 

[Des]

If he or she isn’t a citizen, then they have no right guranteed to them by the United States (unless the US has given rights to the un-born? if so, please give me a link, I’d like to know), their not even born, their not citizens of the U.S, cause they have to be born, to be eligable.

Huh? What are you even talking about. Your argument consists of defending your stance and saying their vote or their life does not count merely on the fact that they are not a citizen. You seem to be intentionally trying to confuse the situation. I was giving an example how silly that notion is. Even if you are not a citizen, you still have your right to life in the States the last time I checked.

Basic Rights are a joke. In the Middle East, and other countries, when the regimes take over, and take the food the UN sends the people, where is that basic right enforced? It’s not (usually), Basic Rights are not anything, if they can not be enforced everywhere

.
Basic rights are there whether you believe they exists or not. Those are corrupt contries are they not? We are talking about ‘Democratic’ contries where people can actually voice their opinions. I have no idea why you even said what you did.

Yes, Slavery was wrong, but it was corrected later on (and if your correct, so will abortion, which is fine by me, I do not care, Pro or No, if the US Government rules its not ok, then fine with me, but if they rule its ok, fine as well).

You admit then that just because a minority of folks who want to change something, has nothing to do with being against democracy? It’s got everything to do with democracy.
Abortion isn’t a religious issue where it only stems from a belief in God.

Maybe they were, I don’t know, do you know a religion that is pro-abortion?

Pick one of the christian non denominations. I’m sure you’ll find a church who are usually for it in some cases.

 

[centurionguard]

They are citizens, they have rights, but a unborn is not a citizen, cause you have to born to be a citizen, unless they modify the requirments to be a U.S. Citizen.

No, but the mother might not want the child, and I believe the rapist should be executed, I’d support the execution of him.

It happens, even if its rare, it does happen.

Who is to say it is Murder if you kill a thing that is not yet born?

If the baby is born, as in, it is out of the mother and alive, then it is a US Citizen, because it was born in the United States of America, then it has rights.

No we wouldn’t slavery was very in-efficient. What would we use slaves for? Servants? Only the very wealthy could afford that, and I doubt their morality would be so cold to allow them to have slaves. We would not use slaves for manual labor on farms, cause people like me, use that as a job, and we fill up the ranks of it pretty good.

I would guess so, that was the way it was for a long time, idk, if their considered citizens I guess they would.

I do not care about God’s moral justice, that is his, not mine, and I am not gonna base mine on his, I make mine out of others. To you it is a wrong choice, but your morals are not the laws of this nation, and when one man’s morality becomes the basis of all our nation’s laws, is the day our nation becomes a dictatorship.

The boys have rights, and that law would conflict with the laws, and they would have to first get rid of the laws giving the boys rights.

Better then following morals of one man, or one people for the government.

Originally Posted by BareKnuckler
You’ve lost me.

If your willing to go against the majority of America, to get a law passed that isn’t actually supported by the majority, because of your religion, then other religions that are ok or neutral, on the subject, lose their equality.

You do understand that murdering another is not just a religious issue right. There are many atheists for example who are against abortion and recognize it as what it is murder.
Example please.

Slavery was wrong, but it was a foundation of America, and it was abolished, because some people realized it was wrong, but it was abolished democractically in July 9, 1868 (this is when it was made an amendment, the EP was passed in 1863)

When does the fetus become a child, to you? When it is formed, like the exact second, or when sperm enters the female, or a certain amount of time after the formation?

While obviously when it is a sperm entering the female is a sperm but when the sperm and the egg unit it beomes much more, a unique never before made human being and nothing else. so just as science has proven time and time again a person becomes a person at conception, not before and not after.

It does, when you do it, against the majority of Americans, cause of your religious beliefs.

Again stopping someone from murdering someone else is not necessary a religious belief, it is a compassionate human belief.
I do not believe so.

That is their opinoin. Murder is part of religion, Christians (I believe all do) follow the Ten Commandments, that stops them (or should anyways) from killing people, that is religion stopping someone from breaking a law, or trying to in any case.

Ok, thank you for telling me when you consider a baby, a baby.

It is a religious belief for many, including Christians.

Bareknuckler;

If you believe that the sacred values you attribute to your KARMA are morally sound with respect to your beliefs that Abortion is justified in your mind. Then may I respectfully give you some advice by saying that you should re-think the principles by which you attribute to your Karma. Read the following links (“Buddhism and the Morality of Abortion”): urbandharma.org/udharma/abortion.html (“Buddhism Religion & Ethics”): bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/buddhism/buddhistethics/abortion.shtml

 

[Mark77]

I would rather have something legal or illegal, according to the majority, then to one man, or one group’s morals.

Come on BAREKNUCKLER, WAKE UP! Murdering innocent babies is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, WRONG!

These stupid straw man arguments are so lame.

It’s not “one group’s morals” it’s the Truth. No man has the right to murder an innocent person, we all know murder is wrong!.

It has nothing to do with religion, “Karma” teaches you that if you murder and innocent person, you will be repaid with the same horrible fate!

If the mother was raped, do you really think that ripping a living baby from her womb in tiny bloody pieces will help reduce her pain or guilt?

NO, IT WILL LEAVE HER WITH WORSE PAIN AND GUILT FOR THE REST OF HER LIFE. (SHE WAS AN INNOCENT VICTIM OF A HORRIBLE RAPE, BUT IF SHE DECIDED TO ABORT THE INNOCENT BABY, THEN SHE HAS A PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT MURDER.)

Why not let the innocent baby live and give it up for adoption? The baby is still at least 50% the flesh and blood of the mother.

The same goes for the “health of the mother” argument. It is never ok to murder the baby! We should protect the health of the mother while also doing everything possible to save the baby.

No parent with half a brain would want to live if it meant that saving their life caused their own child to die.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

Mark

 

[ahollars]

Slavery was wrong, but it was a foundation of America, and it was abolished, because some people realized it was wrong, but it was abolished democractically in July 9, 1868 (this is when it was made an amendment, the EP was passed in 1863)

Wrong. It was not democratic. It took a civil war that killed thousands of men to abolish slavery. Governors of the new South were appointed by Washington. Martial law was the norm, and the military patrolled the whole region. We shed blood to show the world how much we knew slavery was wrong. I have no hesitations about fighting another civil war to abolish infanticide. The question is… when the time comes, would you?

 

[Corki]

That doesn’t change my stance. If its not in the democractic process, then its not voted on, but I am pretty sure Abortion is voted on isn’t it?

Abortion “rights” were indeed voted on but only 9 people in the whole USA got to vote.

Restrictions on abortion are routinely voted on and approved but struck down by a “democratic” process that inclued 9 people.

 

[Spirithound]

You’re making an unwarranted assumption that my opposition to abortion has anything to do with my religion.

 

[BareKnuckler]

To Centurionguard: I have based my view on abortion, not only from Karma, I admire Tenzin Gyatso’s opinoin on it.

Abortion “rights” were indeed voted on but only 9 people in the whole USA got to vote.

Restrictions on abortion are routinely voted on and approved but struck down by a “democratic” process that inclued 9 people.

Then try to change it, send a letter to your senator, or a local political officer.

Wrong. It was not democratic. It took a civil war that killed thousands of men to abolish slavery. Governors of the new South were appointed by Washington. Martial law was the norm, and the military patrolled the whole region. We shed blood to show the world how much we knew slavery was wrong. I have no hesitations about fighting another civil war to abolish infanticide. The question is… when the time comes, would you?

Would I what?

Come on BAREKNUCKLER, WAKE UP! Murdering innocent babies is ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, WRONG!

These stupid straw man arguments are so lame.

It’s not “one group’s morals” it’s the Truth. No man has the right to murder an innocent person, we all know murder is wrong!.

It has nothing to do with religion, “Karma” teaches you that if you murder and innocent person, you will be repaid with the same horrible fate!

If the mother was raped, do you really think that ripping a living baby from her womb in tiny bloody pieces will help reduce her pain or guilt?

NO, IT WILL LEAVE HER WITH WORSE PAIN AND GUILT FOR THE REST OF HER LIFE. (SHE WAS AN INNOCENT VICTIM OF A HORRIBLE RAPE, BUT IF SHE DECIDED TO ABORT THE INNOCENT BABY, THEN SHE HAS A PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT MURDER.)

Why not let the innocent baby live and give it up for adoption? The baby is still at least 50% the flesh and blood of the mother.

The same goes for the “health of the mother” argument. It is never ok to murder the baby! We should protect the health of the mother while also doing everything possible to save the baby.

No parent with half a brain would want to live if it meant that saving their life caused their own child to die.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

Mark

Sorry, I am awake. I have never murdered a man, I may have to when I join up, but that is not murder, that is killing in the defense of others, and I am willing to do that, that is why I am joining the Military, cause I would rather it be me getting shot at, then someone else, who is not ready to accept death.

It will give her a second chance on going on through life as she did before, its her choice, and if you want, you can go on, hoping to take that choice away from her, thats your right, go express it to the mobs.

Putting it caps, makes it more important, and even more truthful .

If the mother and baby are predicted to die due to complications, then both could die, instead of just the baby.

That is your opinoin .

I don’t know, I think it’s latin, but idk.

Huh? What are you even talking about. Your argument consists of defending your stance and saying their vote or their life does not count merely on the fact that they are not a citizen. You seem to be intentionally trying to confuse the situation. I was giving an example how silly that notion is. Even if you are not a citizen, you still have your right to life in the States the last time I checked.

.
Basic rights are there whether you believe they exists or not. Those are corrupt contries are they not? We are talking about ‘Democratic’ contries where people can actually voice their opinions. I have no idea why you even said what you did.

You admit then that just because a minority of folks who want to change something, has nothing to do with being against democracy? It’s got everything to do with democracy.
Abortion isn’t a religious issue where it only stems from a belief in God.

Pick one of the christian non denominations. I’m sure you’ll find a church who are usually for it in some cases.

I doubt it would be around me, most of the churches here are Baptist/Methodist/CoC and they are all very old style, their are few of the other non-denom churches around, except I think 2.

So, non citizens get to be murdered?

Right reason, common sense, logic, non pathological consciences, and people of good will

Rights only come from the government? Hmm, I guess that means if the government decides you are not worth keeping then that is it. What a strange view of government.

Your entire premise is faulty. You only impute rights to persons if the government says so or if the person has utility to you. Wow.

Maybe, but when the baby is un-born, it isn’t a citizen, so it isn’t guranteed the rights it would be. Abortion is legal, and until its voted un-lawful, it will be legal.

utility? Explain

 

[BareKnuckler]

If he or she isn’t a citizen, then they have no right guranteed to them by the United States (unless the US has given rights to the un-born? if so, please give me a link, I’d like to know), their not even born, their not citizens of the U.S, cause they have to be born, to be eligable.

So I guess you think it is okay to butcher illegal aliens, right?

Basic Rights are a joke. In the Middle East, and other countries, when the regimes take over, and take the food the UN sends the people, where is that basic right enforced? It’s not (usually), Basic Rights are not anything, if they can not be enforced everywhere.

So are advacating the US become more like the Middle East?

Yes, Slavery was wrong, but it was corrected later on (and if your correct, so will abortion, which is fine by me, I do not care, Pro or No, if the US Government rules its not ok, then fine with me, but if they rule its ok, fine as well).

So if the US government ruled that it is okay to kill all illegal Muslim women you would think that is okay?

What?

Maybe they were, I don’t know, do you know a religion that is pro-abortion?

Well I do know that the religion you seem to be following is most diffently pro-abortion.

No, but they are illegal, and should be deported, and I do support the idea of arming guards with heavier weaponry, and allowing them to use it.

No, I am making a point, I figure you’d get that.

I follow no religion in paticular. I follow parts. I meditate like a Zen Buddhist would, I follow some Shamanistic views, and I worship my ancestors. I am not a Religious Affiliated person.

 

[elts1956]

when is the baby a human being? Does abortion, only a few weeks after conception murder to you?

It is very civil to laugh at people’s arguments, thanks for showing it .

A man’s rights can be trampeled, by anyone, it happens everyday. Yes, our laws gurantee your rights, but their not always enforced. The geneva convention’s rights for soldiers was broken thousands of times during wars.

Oh i am? If that is the only part of the debate you consider significant, then well, sorry. The problem with that is, people have differing opinoins when the child is a child. Is it a child when its born (i think so) or when it is un-born. when the child becomes a us citizen (birth) it is a child.

So you know more than all the Scientific minds who study embriology? Fantastic!

TRUTH IS TRUTH EVEN IF NO ONE BELIEVES IT
A LIE IS A LIE EVEN IF EVERYONE BELIEVES IT

 

[MACHIU]

SInce you are studying budhism and shamanism (a far fast religion/belief), I assume you know how the traditional reckoning of age for these religion. For those of you who don’t, allow me to explain.

East Asian age reckoning is a concept and practice that originated in China and is used in East Asian cultures. Several East Asian cultures, such as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Mongolia and Vietnamese, share this traditional way of counting a person’s age, in which a person’s age is counted *starting from *conception, rather than from physical birth. Newborns start at one year old, and each passing of a New Year, rather than the birthday, adds one year to the person’s age; this results in people being between 1 and 2 years older in Asian reckoning than in the Western version.

This concept has been practiced for thousands of years even before Western civilization came up with the Gregorian calendar system or the “legal birth” definition.

Now because of westernization, these cultures tend to (or should I say, forced into) accepting the more commonly used age-ing system.

OK, I know they got the “one year” wrong, because we know that average incubation period is normally 9 months, but hey… they got the picture and they guessed it pretty close. Even the religion/belief that you are studying clearly acknowledge the existence of a child starts at conception - some time before the actual birth.

In all known universe, the power to create a human being is only reserved to God (please read our bible - the book of Genesis). And there is no other place in universe can we see that mystery of creation other that what happened in the womb of a woman. In essence, God creates through the womb of a woman.

What humans do is to use God’s creation (sperm and ovum), put it together and claim THEY solved the mystery of pro-creation, therefore a fetus can be discarded because they can easily make another one.

The mystery of creation stays the same. However, humans strip it down to numbers and science with no moral thinking attached.

My hope (and pray) is you can take on pro-life belief (or at least understand and respect).

God Bless

 

[mapleoak]

Rights only come from the government? Hmm, I guess that means if the government decides you are not worth keeping then that is it. What a strange view of government.

Your entire premise is faulty. You only impute rights to persons if the government says so or if the person has utility to you. Wow.

The OP seems to put faith in blind obedience to the law. The law is most certainly not absolute, as evidenced by the very fact that it is subject to change. In fact anything not based on absolute morality is subject to change. If one chooses to put blind obedience and faith in the law, It is pitiable indeed.