Responding to pro-choicers’ views on abortion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Erikaspirit16 said:
Clipped for char limit

From the moment of conception, a new individual with its own unique DNA is created.

For a fetus to be viable, it must attach itself to the wall of the womb within a week or so of conception. About 10% do not attach automatically and these become “natural” abortions.

Republicans have always been consistent in their opposition to abortion. (I.e., in late 2018 59% of Republicans polled said abortion “should be illegal in all or most cases.” In the past, this percentage has been roughly the same or higher.)

Every year since 1976 Gallup has asked “Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?”

The percent favoring “illegal in all circumstances” have increased between 1976 and 2018 by 7%.

Which of the following world religions agree with the pro-life definition of human life?

Judaism

Islam

Buddhism

Hinduism

Confucianism

Which of these other forms of Christianity agree with the pro-life definition of human life?

Anglican

Episcopal

Evangelical Lutheran

Methodist

Presbyterian

Quakers

Latter-Day Saints (Mormons)

All the doctors of the Church, especially major figures such as Saints Augustine and Aquinas, have agreed with the current doctrine of the Church on abortion (i.e., human life begins at conception, and any abortion = murder).

No pope has publicly disagreed with the current doctrine of the Church on abortion.

Canon law has always consistently upheld the current doctrine of the Church on abortion.

A woman should be responsible if she has an abortion. If abortion is murder, she should be charged with murder and subject to “some form of punishment.”

Logically, if you believe a human person is created at conception, it should have all the rights and privileges of any other human being. So do you agree with the following:
  1. Embryos at any stage of development are human beings. As such, they have human souls. Those embryos who are naturally aborted (for example, they do not attach to the wall of the womb), should be given funeral Masses and burials, just like any other human being.
  2. Child support should begin at conception, not at birth.
  3. Pregnant mothers should not be imprisoned for any reason, since that would be inflicting a punishment on the unborn child, who is innocent. It is illegal to imprison an unborn child without due process.
  4. Pregnant mothers should not be deported if their child was conceived in the US, since that unborn child is a US citizen.
  5. For federal income tax purposes, you should be able to claim an unborn child as a deduction, just like any other child.
  6. The census should count unborn embryos, since they are legally equivalent to any other child.
Click to expand...
Natural miscarriage is not abortion. Yes we believe that human life begins at conception. Science backs us up.

And the rest of your points look to me like the appeal to the law logical fallacy. Gonna have to do better than that unfortunately. 🙂
 
Bruised_Reed said:
But they are out there and vocal and misleading others and, again, there is crossover with other far-right groups and individuals. They are happy to mingle and the less discerning Catholic-types.
Click to expand...
They are out there but not nearly in numbers or credibility to turn the church or America into Gilead. And never will.

A much bigger threat to this country with social media and the intranet is white supremacy and the far right. That I agree with.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
40.png
Sbee0:
law logical fallacy
Click to expand...
Enlighten me, please.
Click to expand...
It’s a fallacious argument to say “what is by law is moral and correct.” In fact “what is, is not necessarily how it should be”. Many examples of that in history. So the legal standing of the unborn child has no relevance to anything.
Sbee0 said:
Natural miscarriage is not abortion.
Click to expand...
Who said it was? Not me.
Click to expand...
Then why mention it at all? Many pro choicers actually do believe people are going to jail under these laws for natural miscarriage.
 
Last edited:
Sbee0 said:
It’s a fallacious argument to say “what is by law is moral and correct.” In fact “what is, is not necessarily how it should be”. Many examples of that in history. So the legal standing of the unborn child has no relevance to anything.
Click to expand...
Please reply to WHAT I WROTE, NOT WHAT YOU THINK I WROTE.

I wrote: “Logically, if you believe a human person is created at conception, it should have all the rights and privileges of any other human being…” I’m not writing about the law today, or what the law today thinks is “moral and correct.” I’m simply asking if there is consistency in your position.
Sbee0 said:
Then why mention it at all? Many pro choicers actually do believe people are going to jail under these laws for natural miscarriage.
Click to expand...
I called it (with quotations) “natural” abortion. I am just curious if anyone here actually knows the number (which is, of course, an estimated range). Perhaps you don’t. And let’s assume a state (Alabama, say) makes abortion illegal. A woman miscarries, naturally. How does she PROVE that it was a natural miscarriage and not an abortion? Wouldn’t the police, if the logic of all this is carried to its logical conclusion, investigate such potential “crimes”? If not, why not? Consistency is important. You can’t just say, “Oh, we didn’t mean that…”
 
Pattylt said:
Science backs us up.
Click to expand...
That was my first question. It looks like you are saying my first statement was a “true” statement. Please read my introduction again (the first sentences of my post) and see if you still want to vote “true.”
Pattylt said:
spontaneous abortion
Click to expand...
I’ll bear that in mind. However, I’m having a bit of a problem: First you say “Natural miscarriage is not abortion” and then you say “the medical term is spontaneous abortion.” I think you are reflecting a disagreement over the term “abortion.” Does it refer to “deliberate” abortion? “Natural” abortion? or both? https://www.medicinenet.com/pregnancy/article.htm defines it as both, with no reference to why the pregnancy was terminated:

“Abortion: In medicine, an abortion is the premature exit of the products of conception (the fetus, fetal membranes, and placenta) from the uterus. It is the loss of a pregnancy and does not refer to why that pregnancy was lost.”
 
Pattylt said:
the medical term is spontaneous abortion.
Click to expand...
No, medical community started to use “miscarriage” in late 80s-mid 90s

The conscious distinction by doctors of ‘miscarriage’ from ‘abortion’ (‘induced’ and ‘spontaneous’) may be seen to have reflected certain legal, technical, professional and societal developments. The distinction in language may also be read as part of the process of assigning meaning to those women to whom the language was applied, a process by which women who experience miscarriage could be defined as distinct from women who experience an induced abortion.
Click to expand...
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
Science backs us up.
Click to expand...
I’m really sorry but could you give me the post number for your statement? I’m not finding what I was replying to…I’m getting old!
I don’t ever remember saying miscarriage is not abortion?
I worked in medicine and often read charts. Many doctors still refer to miscarriage as spontaneous abortion. Actually most of them do as far as I ever saw.

Edit to add… I never said miscarriage is not abortion, Sbee0 did! I’m not losing it! 😂
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yes, I’m aware of the terminology change. However doctors often don’t follow the rules. We still had doctors ordering SMAC tests in our lab that were changed over 20 years ago. I was referring to doctors charting terminology.
 
Psalm30 said:
This person shut down every single pro-life argument in the book — how there’s a natural drive to have sex, sex isn’t a crime, that sex isn’t reserved for people who want to procreate, that one shouldn’t be punished for having sex
Click to expand...
I’d first point out that these aren’t pro life arguments. I’ve never met a pro-life person who doesn’t agree that there is a natural drive to have sex or that sex isn’t a crime, for example. She’s knocking down strawmen.
 
Pattylt said:
I’m really sorry but could you give me the post number for your statement?
Click to expand...
I think it’s #99.

As for the definition of abortion, as I said (post 108?) there seems to be a disagreement over the definition: does it only mean deliberate abortion or does it include “spontaneous” abortion or “miscarriage” or whatever you want to call it? It would be naive to assume that the overall contentiousness over abortion in general has not seeped down to the general definition, and it appears it has. If we all use the same word to mean the same thing, we’re all set. I will use “abortion” in the future only to refer to “deliberate” abortion and “miscarriage” to mean any natural, non-deliberate termination of pregnancy. At least we can all agree on that, right? If not, I give up.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I stand corrected. I should have been clear in what I meant and I certainly wasn’t. It is still used in medical terminology but shouldn’t be.
 
Last edited:
As Aquinas11 stated, the terminology has been officially changed so it is easiest to refer to abortion and miscarriage as distinct.
 
It’s all about sex now, but with no guidance except to do it as often as possible. In this case, the woman’s choice, especially in consensual situations, excludes the person who got her pregnant.
 
Yes

You can also look up Christian Reconstructionism. They remind me of the Wahhabi Muslims in their beliefs.
 
There’s not much we can do about that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top