That is of course presuming choice has anything to do with it and I’ve never come across any reason that suggests it does.
I’m using the word “choice” as the pro-aborts use it: pro-abortion. Choice, in the greater sense, means what decisions we make. I’m concerned with moral and immoral choices or decisions. Don’t you agree that when you make a bad choice, it affects not only yourself, but others? For example, killing one’s child affects the whole family throughout all generations. That child is lost and so is a great part of the future.
BTW, in my post I made a typo. I meant that the term “fetus” means “little one” NOT a “blob of tissue.” Sorry!
If you do not like the appropriate terms for the process of birth, that’s fine but just because you find it “derogatory” does not mean it is.
What is “derogatory” is the rudeness and illiteracy of the pro-aborts who refer to the unborn child as a “fetus” in the derogatory sense, although it is scientifically correct after the embryonic stage.
Why would that clarify the issue?
Did you actually click on the link? You’d learn something which would clarify the issue of the evil involved in killing unborn human beings. Aren’t you glad your mom was pro-life?
I doubt many of your theological references are true but in order to keep the thread on track I won’t address them. We’ve just gone through this, an embryo and a fetus are not considered “alive” by the definition of “life”
Oh pleeease! How do you figure an embryo and fetus are not alive. And what is the definition of life in your opinion?
I’ve browsed them and I have looked into much of that topic, it does interest me quite a bit.
No, but everyone certainly has their own opinion of truth.
“Opinion of truth?” Truth is still objective. What is your opinion of it?
The majority rules and sometimes people realise that forgetting their difference in opinion avoids unnecessary conflict and helps for social cohesion.
What if the “majority” announces: Kill the Jews! Or, kill all the disabled and elderly? Or kill all the kindergartners, or teens, or anybody we don’t like?
Not necessarily, I’ve found that when an objective truth is proposed one can seek a method to fulfill that objective, for example, the objective being the preservation and wellbeing of the human race. That is an objective and laws can be derived from it that would be ‘true’ regarding this objective. However, that is the limit of objective truth in the matter, it doesn’t mean that this process is objectively right or wrong, or if it is the best way to go about it. So we still digress into opinions of truth when trying to achieve the objective.
Our opinions are subjective ideas about truth. Objective truth was codified by God’s Revelation in the Ten Commandments and further understood in the New Testament as the Law of Love. (“Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God with your whole heart, soul, mind and strength; and love your neighbor as yourself.”) Then there’s the Golden Rule to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. But before Revelation, people in early social groups had to come to an understanding of what is objectively moral and immoral, which is the law written into our hearts.
Have you encountered another species that engages in or creates porn.
The type that creates and/or enjoys porn.
The use of porn is a disordered act. Because we can make choices regarding morality, of course only humans can degrade themselves. We can choose to reach for sublime heights (as the great saints by imitating their virtues) or lower ourselves into the sewer of filth. A hellish thought!
