J
JReducation
Guest
But just as you misunderstood me, you and may people can misunderstand the pro-choice argument. That’s why it’s important to have guidance.
JR
- Status
JR
J
Jeanette_L
Guest
This line of argument is like saying we shouldn’t outlaw the murder of adults because sometimes people are killed accidentally or die suddenly anyway, how would we ever differentiate the cause of all these deaths? Better just to let it all happen and not worry about it.
J
Jeanette_L
Guest
The evidence speaks for itself. The fact that the child suffers has been known for some time now, the fact that women suffer long term over their abortions, emotionally and now the evidence is coming in as to long term health issues, these are known, and yet no one in the pro abortion movement wants to admit to these, or even allow an open discussion of these issues.
What is not Christian or even moral from a secular perspective is to hide the truth of all this from the general populace so people don’t understand the whole of the issues and are able to make fully informed choices even with the current abortion laws.
You will not brow beat me with that one.
S
SFTor
Guest
This position has no standing. You are simply saying that in the end you will choose which laws you will obey based on your own moral philosophy. Don’t try it with the IRS.
We do not have separation of Church and State in the United States, because it’s not in the Constitution. The Constitution says that the state may not adopt an official religion. It does not say that the State is immune to religious belief. In fact. the name of God and the Creator are invoked in many parts of the Constitution.
You’re splitting hairs, JR. Of course we have separation of Church and State.
Federal, State and City governments have had contractual relationships with religious organizations since the founding of the nation. For example, the State pays the Catholic Church to provide services to people with developmental disabilities in many cities and counties around America. It provides funds for research to religious universities and hospitals.
Yes, this is a recent development, and a somewhat controversial one.
This is not a Catholic issue. People of many backgrounds, even ahteists object to the right to access abortion on the grounds that it violates the natural rights of the innocent.
I did not say it was a Catholic issue. I simply recognized that many Catholics disagree with Roe v. Wade. I imagine there is a minority of Catholics who do not. Not to mention a large number of people in the middle with less fully formed opinions.
This is an historical fact. It is an act of human, but it is not a human act. Therefore, there is no reason to support such action.
I didn’t say I support the action, I am just pointing out that there is a range of understanding and practice in the human community.
If you read these stories in their entirety and the scriptures from cover to cover, you see an evolution of this thought. By the end of the scriptures, you will see people giving up their lives for the sake of holiness and truth, not taking life.
Even Jesus said “bring my enemies to me and kill them before my feet.”
Hope this helps.
JR
M
marietta
Guest
Jeanette L:
" . . .the child suffers . . . "
" . . . the fact that women suffer long term over their abortions, emotionally and now the evidence is coming in as to long term health issues, these are known . . . "
Evidence, please. At what gestational age do you believe a fetus suffers? What percentage of women who undergo abortions “suffer long term”? What evidence documents “long term health issues” with regard to abortion?
Play fair. Try to use impartial sources.
marietta
" . . .the child suffers . . . "
" . . . the fact that women suffer long term over their abortions, emotionally and now the evidence is coming in as to long term health issues, these are known . . . "
Evidence, please. At what gestational age do you believe a fetus suffers? What percentage of women who undergo abortions “suffer long term”? What evidence documents “long term health issues” with regard to abortion?
Play fair. Try to use impartial sources.
marietta
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
S
SFTor
Guest
I don’t misunderstand the pro-choice argument. I have my own opinion.But just as you misunderstood me, you and may people can misunderstand the pro-choice argument. That’s why it’s important to have guidance.
JR
J
JReducation
Guest
There is no moral ogligation to obey an unjust law or an immoral law. This country was founded on this principal. In fact, it was taxes that got the ball rolling.
There is not such law in the Constitution.
This goes back to the writing of the Constitution when the Constitutional Congress asked James Carrol, the only Catholic delegate to the Congress, to convince his cousin, Archbishop John Carrol to persuade Catholics to support the new nation and to guarrantee that Catholic fidelity to the Pope would not interfere with their patriotic duties to the new nation.
We agree on this.
Yes, unfortuantely this is the case. But as long as rational people like you and I have enough Reason, we can use it to help others understand this issue correctly
If you read these stories in their entirety and the scriptures from cover to cover, you see an evolution of this thought. By the end of the scriptures, you will see people giving up their lives for the sake of holiness and truth, not taking life.
You’ll have to give me the citation, because I have never seen this.
Thanks,
JR
S
SFTor
Guest
I am not trying to browbeat you. I am simply noting that you are judging other people, without any idea of what you are talking about. That is uncharitable and unfair.
I for one am no part of a “pro-abortion movement.” I think there are people, for instance organized around Planned Parenthood and feminist organizations, who think abortion should be accessible to women. I don’t think many of them are unaware of the hardships many women go through.
J
JReducation
Guest
The impartial sources are neuroscientists who have taught us that the human brain is the first organ to develop and that the entire neural network of the brain functions before the end of the first 4 weeks. Pain is received and intepreted through the cerebral cortex. Therefore, even a fetus who has not completely developed organs, does have a fully functional central nervous system.
That being said, the issue is greater than pain. The issue is rights. One must prove that one has the right to terminate an innocent human life. The matter is too serious to simply act on assumption. That is not action enlightened by Reason.
Reason must enlighten every choice that we make. It is through Reason that we also love. Because we love, we do not destroy what we love. We must always make certain that our choices are loving choices. That certitude can only come from Reason. Reason is very different from rationalization. We have to be very careful.
JR
JR
S
SFTor
Guest
Luke 19:27You’ll have to give me the citation, because I have never seen this.
Thanks,
JR
“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”
J
JReducation
Guest
You are quoting out of context. Jesus is not doing the speaking. He is telling a parable about the final judgement when God will call everyone to accountablity and those who have not served God will be slain in hell.
If you read earlier in the chapter Luke tells us that Jesus told them this parable, then Luke begins to tell the parable.
JR
S
SFTor
Guest
Dear JR:
a quick scan of online articles has regrettably shown that your statement does not coincide with scientific knowledge. The neural tube, the first framework for the development of the notochord and later the brain, is formed after three weeks. A fetus begins showing some very rudimentary brain-controlled motions after about 9 weeks, and shows primitive reaction to outside stimuli some time between week 20 and week 27. The cerebral cortex, the seat of true reasoning and emotion is not even fully developed at birth, and takes several months and years to fully develop.
Just to set the record straight.
Respectfully,
Tor
S
SFTor
Guest
JR, I am afraid you are the one who is misreading. Jesus has already concluded the telling of the parable at that point.You are quoting out of context. Jesus is not doing the speaking. He is telling a parable about the final judgement when God will call everyone to accountablity and those who have not served God will be slain in hell.
If you read earlier in the chapter Luke tells us that Jesus told them this parable, then Luke begins to tell the parable.
JR
And even if you had been right, it would have beeen an example of Yahweh Shebaoth ordering the killing of humans in the New Testament.
The quote in context:
Jesus has concluded the parable and is now setting forth the moral in Verse 26:
26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.
27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
28 And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.
29 And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount called the mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples,
30 Saying, Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither.
I would also mention that I am quite sure that there is no “Luke” anywhere in this passage, not that I think that is what you meant exactly. You do not mean to imply that Luke appears in the narrative, right?
Respectfully,
Tor
S
SFTor
Guest
One more thing, JR:You are quoting out of context. Jesus is not doing the speaking. He is telling a parable about the final judgement when God will call everyone to accountablity and those who have not served God will be slain in hell.
If you read earlier in the chapter Luke tells us that Jesus told them this parable, then Luke begins to tell the parable.
JR
I think we all agree that you don’t get “slain” in hell, right? Isn’t the point eternal torment, which would require that you are in some sort of state of awareness?
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
This quote you give, is taken out of context. It is in reference to the final judgment. Are you saying God does not have the authority to pass judgment? He is the only one who may do so. The commentaries I have state of this verse, “The kingdom will appear in its permanent form when Christ renders the final judgment on humanities response to him”. This is a totally different meaning than that which you ascribe.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
S
SFTor
Guest
I am sure it is in reference to the final judgment. I did not assume it was something Jesus expected to have happen right at that moment. It just seemed a little bloodthirsty to me.
All my best wishes,
Tor
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
Even having a mother who had 10 miscarriages, yes I do.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
having the personal experience of almost a 1/3 of a century on this issue Iv’e got to say it may not account for everyone, but yes the vast majority.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
Please tell me what is more Christian. To protect the unborn, or to allow their unfettered slaughter
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
- Status