E
estesbob
Guest
What bearing do these statsistics have to do on the morality of abortion?
- Status
F
fix
Guest
We do have all the facts. The child is a person and derserves the same right to life as you and I have.
E
estesbob
Guest
The facts are that the right to life is the basic fundamental right we have . ALL righs flow from the right to life. The right to life shoud not be subject to the vote of the people or to coursts ar anyone else.
C
Caramel
Guest
So why did you bring up the “OJ Simpson of abortion” if you didn’t want to discuss it? I didn’t bring it up - you did. I didn’t understand your term and asked for clarification. I think the best way to have a discussion about anything is to agree on the definitions of terms. I’ve asked for clarification of other terms you have used (“instant potatoes,” “digital manipulators,” etc.) and I haven’t received that clarification. It makes it very difficult to discuss this issue with you. If you don’t want to play games (and I will agree that you don’t) why aren’t you providing clarification?
I need some time to figure out what you are trying to say here.
I am representing myself here, as I am a biologist and have a Masters degree in Research Psychology, but the fact that organizations twist data to fit their own agenda is generally known throughout the life sciences. It is something that any first-year biology student should know. There are rules which govern how scientific data can be obtained and one of those rules is that you can’t approach a research project with any preconceived ideas of how the research should turn out. That results in confounding the research and causing any conclusions to be suspect. Everyone who is in the life sciences should know this. I don’t have to provide a source, no more than I need to provide a source to claim that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow. It is a given.
I got the feeling that you were accusing me of playing games. This is again why clarifying the terms that you use is so important. If I misread you I did so because I am confused about your terms (which you have failed to define, or if you have, I have missed them and kindly request the post numbers where the definitions were provided.)
You know, it would make things a lot easier if you didn’t throw website links at me but actually stated why you think those websites are appropriate. If I had known why you posted this link I might have been able to understand why you believe the website should be read by me (and others.) I am not psychic. I can’t read your mind - only the words which are in your posts. I want to understand your point of view. If I didn’t, I certainly wouldn’t be checking out the websites and responding to them. And I wouldn’t be spending time even responding to you. I assume that you want to know my point of view, also.
I don’t believe the OP has the power to kick either of us off the thread. I may be wrong, but I believe that is the duty of the moderators. Also, I don’t think the OP would kick either of us off even if he could. Again, I don’t need to cite sources when I am the source, or the “general rules of scientific research” are the source. I step in when it is obvious that someone is stating something about scientific research that is just incorrect. For example, a post appeared which stated that something had been “proven scientifically.” I stepped in to explain that nothing can be “proven” scientifically. By doing this I am certainly not playing games with data - I am simply stating what I know about science. I don’t do it to appear smarter than anyone else but because I believe that we should all define our terminology and if a mistake is made it should be corrected.
Thank you for your welcome to respond to you, but it isn’t needed. Once you post on this forum anyone can answer you. If you want to post privately you can always PM another member.
I don’t want to discuss the process of obtaining data with you because it is long and complicated and would go off-topic. I just really wish you would define your terminology in the interests of having a good, productive discussion.
Z
zamboni
Guest
I like this question because statistics are not an overriding concern to me either. I think it’s important to have an awareness of the numbers behind this issue, preferably an accurate picture of all numbers. Especially economic factors, which I see no one discussing here so far. But abortion is a large and complex issue, so I should not necessarily be surprised that I don’t hear anyone yet discussing that many parents and single women cannot afford to become pregnant, let alone give birth to a baby so that it can then be given up for adoption.
G
gakroeger
Guest
Regardless if Worthy is playing devils advocate (which I seriously doubt) or not, his arguments make zero sense when applied to Catholic teaching and natural law. Again, this is the reason for constantly pushing the debate to legal issues. This thread is strictly about Catholic teaching and “pro choice” Catholics and these distractions are disruptive to the discussion.
My intention when starting the thread was to show the impossible split positions they are attempting to take.
After watching the debate to this point I believe that Catholics “pro choice” position did not arise out of the abortion issue itself. I believe they are adopting this position and defending it because of their politics. As estesbob asked so correctly, “are your politics formed by your faith or your faith formed by you politics”? Clearly, in my mind “pro choice” Catholics have formed their faith (conscience) by their politics. Their party adopted a pro abortion platform and they “choose” to support that over the Catholic Church.
Christ and His Church say our consciences MUST be formed by Catholic teaching and NOT by worldly standards or by the Democratic Platform.
It appears that the only weapon we have against this is prayer. All pro life people need to spend “much” time in prayer over this issue every day. And if there is a pro life ministry in your parish (of which many are starting), join it and learn how you can more effectively fight this evil in our culture.
Our parish is just starting a pro life ministry and I have been amazed at the dedication of the Catholics who are not “pro choice” and their determination to fight this culture of death at every point they can. We Catholics have been asleep at the switch while this tragedy has developed to this advanced stage. We now need to make up for lost ground. The major challenge is to make people (all people) aware of what abortion actually is. The media and the far left have down played this murder for 40 years and we have been silent. To this all of us (not only Women who have had prior abortions) need to be “Silent No More”
My intention when starting the thread was to show the impossible split positions they are attempting to take.
After watching the debate to this point I believe that Catholics “pro choice” position did not arise out of the abortion issue itself. I believe they are adopting this position and defending it because of their politics. As estesbob asked so correctly, “are your politics formed by your faith or your faith formed by you politics”? Clearly, in my mind “pro choice” Catholics have formed their faith (conscience) by their politics. Their party adopted a pro abortion platform and they “choose” to support that over the Catholic Church.
Christ and His Church say our consciences MUST be formed by Catholic teaching and NOT by worldly standards or by the Democratic Platform.
It appears that the only weapon we have against this is prayer. All pro life people need to spend “much” time in prayer over this issue every day. And if there is a pro life ministry in your parish (of which many are starting), join it and learn how you can more effectively fight this evil in our culture.
Our parish is just starting a pro life ministry and I have been amazed at the dedication of the Catholics who are not “pro choice” and their determination to fight this culture of death at every point they can. We Catholics have been asleep at the switch while this tragedy has developed to this advanced stage. We now need to make up for lost ground. The major challenge is to make people (all people) aware of what abortion actually is. The media and the far left have down played this murder for 40 years and we have been silent. To this all of us (not only Women who have had prior abortions) need to be “Silent No More”
C
Caramel
Guest
Agreed!! I wish to add that voting for the right of the unborn to live wouldn’t work in a democracy. In a democracy minorities are supposed to be protected. With majority vote the rights of minorities can be discarded. As you say, “the right to life is the basic fundamental right we have”, or at least we should all have.
But then I guess we don’t live in a democracy anyway…
E
estesbob
Guest
Abortion is a complex issue only for those trying to justify it
C
Caramel
Guest
If “many parents and single women cannot afford to become pregnant” how did they become pregnant? Becoming pregnant is free. I think you meant to state that they cannot afford to continue their pregnancies. You were not posting on the last abortion thread (which was closed after it reached the maximum number of posts allowed on a thread) and I don’t know if you were a member at that time.
It has been brought up before and personally I would be very happy to try to pay for someone’s pregnancy so that the baby could be given up for adoption and I would be honored to be the one allowed to adopt this precious life.
The Catholic Church has provided support, both financially and via counseling. “Habitat for Humanity” is just one of the programs that help poor people find housing. St. Vincent dePaul offers low-cost items for pregnant women and new mothers, including appliances like refrigerators and stoves.
In my town there is a place called the “Caring Pregnancy Center” which is nonprofit and run by volunteers and is supported at least in part by the local Catholic Church. We meet and donate maternity and baby clothes. We also have “Food Share” which is administered by one of our local protestant churches but is supported by every church and grocery store in town and also by the Boy Scouts.
We also have a program that provides free medical care to low-income individuals. I don’t mean that the medical care they receive is written off as a tax break. It is absolutely free and includes prenatal care, birthing services (including “high risk” births), and every other medical condition a person could have.
If I think about it some more I’m sure I could come up with more. But this has already been discussed and your failure to find the discussion does not mean that no one here has not discussed it yet.
Instead of making statements such as you have made in this post, why don’t you simply ask if the issue has been brought up before instead of assuming that it hasn’t? There is nothing wrong with asking a question.
S
SteveGC
Guest
I was going to say…abortion is quite a simple issue. Don’t do it, don’t vote for it, fight to get it out from under legal protection. bada-bing, bada-boom. What’s complex about that?
W
Worthy5
Guest
Well Gakroeger, this poster’s posts do not rely on natural law or Catholic teaching, The arguments are based on American civil law and its notions of restaining govt power. Such power needs to be restrained because power is always abused by those who have it.
You want to talk about natural law and Church teaching, but neither one has the mechanism to effectuate what you want-----police power to outlaw abortion. Yet you claim this discussion is not about civil law.
It is a moral debate (but not for this poster) and also a legal debate.(what this poster has done making the opposition’s argument). Why are you so determine not to have both presented?
This poster knows his/her views. The test of one’s view is wrestling with the other sides positions—that is the test of strength. And this poster is not sure why you want to cut off that debate off.
Is this a forum to exchange ideas or not?
S
SteveGC
Guest
All of it, Worthy. Haven’t you figured that out yet? That’s the pro-life position…
- Use ALL of the govt’s power to protect ALL life. All of it. :knight1:
- At the same time, educate and help form the moral conscience of society.
kpeople: - And pray…alot
G
gakroeger
Guest
Why do you challenge people when they claim to know your thoughts but a quick to do the same to others. You have (more than once now) said I want Abortion outlawed and use police power to enforce it. And I have responded everytime telling you that is NOT my objective. My objective is to get “pro choice” Catholics to form their consciences according to Church teaching and not the Democratic Political Platform PERIOD, but you continue to tell me what I think.Well Gakroeger, this poster’s posts do not rely on natural law or Catholic teaching, The arguments are based on American civil law and its notions of restaining govt power. Such power needs to be restrained because power is always abused by those who have it.
You want to talk about natural law and Church teaching, but neither one has the mechanism to effectuate what you want-----police power to outlaw abortion. Yet you claim this discussion is not about civil law.
It is a moral debate (but not for this poster) and also a legal debate.(what this poster has done making the opposition’s argument). Why are you so determine not to have both presented?
This poster knows his/her views. The test of one’s view is wrestling with the other sides positions—that is the test of strength. And this poster is not sure why you want to cut off that debate off.
Is this a forum to exchange ideas or not?
If you want to talk about legal issues, start your own thread, you are off topic here which is against forum rules.
All you are doing is proving my point…
W
Worthy5
Guest
With all due respect based on what you said you do not have a point. The Democratic platform (aisde from its funding for abortion) is Pro-Choice which is saying that the women decides, it has no opinion on what way the women should decide. In fact, for one to decide to not have an abortion based on their conscience is perfectly fine with the Democractic platform.
As Steve just pointed out, the Pro-life position wants govt to make the decision about abortion everytime.
If you want to say your objective is to effect Pro-Choice Catholics " conscience" then you 1) assume that every pro-choice person is proabortion–which is not necessarily true and 2) that by effecting their conscience as opposed to the effect of the Democratic platform-you want to influence voting patterns toward a pro-life postion—which is the outlawing of all abortions. Otherwise, why are you bringing up the Democratic Platform.
All of which is fine. So why are you saying otherwise.
G
gakroeger
Guest
With all due respect based on what you said you do not have a point. The Democratic platform (aisde from its funding for abortion) is Pro-Choice which is saying that the women decides, it has no opinion on what way the women should decide. In fact, for one to decide to not have an abortion based on their conscience is perfectly fine with the Democractic platform.
As Steve just pointed out, the Pro-life position wants govt to make the decision about abortion everytime.
If you want to say your objective is to effect Pro-Choice Catholics " conscience" then you 1) assume that every pro-choice person is proabortion–which is not necessarily true and 2) that by effecting their conscience as opposed to the effect of the Democratic platform-you want to influence voting patterns toward a pro-life postion—which is the outlawing of all abortions. Otherwise, why are you bringing up the Democratic Platform.
All of which is fine. So why are you saying otherwise.
Would you say the Planned Parenthood is Pro Abortion?
Do you ever face any issue head on? Or do you aways take the indirect and confusioning direction?
W
Worthy5
Guest
[SteveGC;5952715]All of it, Worthy. Haven’t you figured that out yet? That’s the pro-life position…
- At the same time, educate and help form the moral conscience of society.
Yes, Steve that is the pro-life position. But what if that power gets abused?:nunchuk:
- And pray…alot
W
Worthy5
Guest
Look, the pro-choice position is not about Planned Parenthood. Its a position arguing for what the law’s role should be in terms of who gets the choice. The fact that PP is counseling women in a wrong way or otherwise trying to make money is not the point of the legal issue.
W
Worthy5
Guest
Look Gakroeger, this poster does not mean to be difficult—just testing ideas out, that is all. Peace.
:flowers::hug1:- Status