E
estesbob
Guest
Yes,
- Status
M
mlchance
Guest
estesbob said:
That exactly how one dehumanizes the victims in order to justify the violence. IOW: “Let’s not look at the facts about what actually happens during an abortion. Instead, let’s look at the dictionary and quibble, perhaps tossing in irrelevancies about souls and Aquinas along the way.”
Meanwhile, 3000 unborn children are sentenced to death every day.
– Mark L. Chance.
E
estesbob
Guest
Agreed-in fact most serious debates on abortion are quickly derailed by those who support it by supposedly profound statements about “menses” and “miscarriages” and the proper terminolgy used to describe the unborn. When it really gets *profound *is when your hear terms like “ensoulment”. Whenever you hear soneone use this term you know for sure its not safe to leave the fate of the unborn up to them.
When I was counseling at a CPC , BTW, you know it was pretty much a death warrant when the young woman started talking about what to do about her “fetus” OTH how many times have you heard a pregnant woman comment about feeling her fetus kicking? Or " I am going to have a baby once my fetus is fully developed" In the abortion debate words can indeed kill.
Have you ever noticed that those who support the killing of the unborn almost never use the word"abortion". I was thinking about this again yesterday when i saw an email questionaire Hillary Clinton sent out asking peoples opinion on “reproductive Rights”. And of course judge Alito is already accused of being against a “womans right to privacy” and her right “to control her own body” . Abortion seems to be the word that dares not speak its name.
T
tamccrackine
Guest
Have you also noticed the intense fear in the liberals about abortion and abortion only? There are so many other social agendas that can be debated and decided upon… but each and every nominee Bush has put up, the FIRST attack was about abortion. Why is that??
We’re getting their attention and the paradigm is shifting!Can’t stand Clinton anyway… either one of them.
And if a woman wants to “control her own body” why not fight for the right to prostitution? That’s illegal…oh yeah…semantics…
B
bones_IV
Guest
Fetus is latin for baby. Same thing.
E
estesbob
Guest
Roe V Wade will be overturned-the Democrat party is starting to back away from it-not because of any moral compunctions about killing 1.2 million chidren a year but becuase it has hurt the party deeply since they embraced is as the defining right for women.Have you also noticed the intense fear in the liberals about abortion and abortion only? There are so many other social agendas that can be debated and decided upon… but each and every nominee Bush has put up, the FIRST attack was about abortion. Why is that??
Can’t stand Clinton anyway… either one of them.
And if a woman wants to “control her own body” why not fight for the right to prostitution? That’s illegal…oh yeah…semantics…
D
Digger71
Guest
Latin is a dead language from a dead culture. Modern concepts cannot be retrofitted to it to try and avoid modern knowledge, definitions and terms.
M
mlchance
Guest
http://home.houston.rr.com/mchance3/rolleyes.gif
Today’s fallacy: Appeal to novelty.
As opposed to medieval notions of ensoulment that fly in the face of both Church teaching as well as completely ignore scientific facts, which are so very much in tune with “modern knowledge, definitions and terms.”
– Mark L. Chance.
S
snowman10
Guest
Latin in the language of the Church. The Church is alive. Therefore, Latin is alive because of the Church.
And bringing up what Aquinas says about ensoulment matters not. The fact is, he was not as privliged as us to have the science we do today. Please stop playing word games and using semantics. The truth is, abortion is wrong. It is the murder of a human being.
As a side note, I find it interesting how our government works. You can have an abortion and it is not muder. However, if a man murders a pregnant woman, he is charged with the death of two people. So basically, you can kill a child if you want to and the child is not really a human yet. But, it magically becomes a child when the mother and child our murdered.
dxu
E
estesbob
Guest
The term “fetus” is a word from this so called dead language. However all that is irelavant. You seem to think that terms we use to describe the stage of life a human being is in detemines whether they have the right to life or not. I guess callng the unborn child a “fetus” hels you rationalize killing it?
It is a common ploy of those who support the abject horror of killing 1.2 million unborn children a year. Instead of trying to defend it you want to change the subject into an argument over semantics.
C
cargopilot
Guest
Hi Digger71,
My daughter was born very prematurely and was unable to breathe on her own for quite some time after birth. Her development in utero was not much longer than the twins referenced by the OP. Today, she is a very healthy and happy little girl.
I would like to ask you three things. In your opinion, when did her ‘ensoulment’ take place? Remember she couldn’t breathe on her own for quite some time after birth.
Also, at what point did she become a ‘baby’? Keep in mind she was born about the same stage of development as the referenced twins, was she not a ‘baby’ until some later date?
If abortion is not murder, how would it have been any different if I just killed my daughter before she became a breathing, ensouled human being?
M
miguel
Guest
I hope you’re right about this. A couple signs…Hillary recently criticized the Chinese for their one child per family policy which has led to women being forced to have abortions…not that I would trust her as far as I could spit. And they really haven’t put up much of a real fight over Bush’s SC nominees…although that could also mean they’re comfortable the nominees won’t do anything to overturn Roe. I’ve also posted elsewhere a link to a WSJ article with a detailed analysis of how abortion has harmed the Democrats…the higher abortion rate in their ranks has hurt their political strength numerically…well duh! And a majority of Catholics (finally) voted Republican (pro-life) in 2004. Maybe they’ll actually wake up and realize they’ve been defending baby killing. I mean, is hatred for Catholicism really worth going that far?
M
miguel
Guest
The soul is there at the beginning of life. Life begins at conception.
M
mlchance
Guest
Exactly. At all living things have souls, but humans have a spiritual soul, which is of a different type than the souls possessed by other living things.
But, of course, the existence of the soul isn’t terribly relevant to the question of abortion. Science is sufficient to note that an embryo is alive and human.
– Mark L. Chance.
T
tamccrackine
Guest
Sweet Jesus… not to sound condescending, but when was the last time you cracked a dictionary and figured out where many of our modern words, ESPECIALLY those used in science, came from? When I took Latin in high school, there was a phrase that stuck out… “When your English is in ruins, study Latin.”
Believe me… when I was studying for my degree in Biology… those LOOONNNGGG nights of partying… I mean studying… I was able to figure out alot of the science words simply because of the Latin I took… I was able to break the words out, translate and go from there.
R
rhtaylor
Guest
Many people like to say that since any cell has a copy of all our DNA, an embryo or fetus is no more special than any other clump of cells. Your white blood cell is just a cell, an embryo (even at the one cell stage) is an complete ORGANISM. In the case of humans, a human ORGANISM is present the moment a sperm meets an egg or a nuclear transfer (cloning) takes palce. Go back to Bio 101 and study the difference between a cell and an organism.
R. Taylor
www.MaryMeetsDolly.com
A Catholic’s Guide to Genetics, Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology
S
snowman10
Guest
If you see my post in regards to this, we share the same message and IMHO, this one time that too many cooks in the kitchen is a good thing…
dxu
M
miguel
Guest
Yes. The human soul is eternal. It’s important to note that death is the separation of the soul from the body. And resurrection reunites body and soul. Those who argue the embryo has no value worthy of protection because it doesn’t have a soul are not making a Catholic arguement. And your point about science being sufficient is absolutely correct. Life doesn’t begin at birth. It doesn’t begin a week before birth. It begins when it begins…the moment of conception. We all learned that in 10th grade biology. Those who argue otherwise are not making a scientific arguement. And since the life we are talking about is human life, it is worthy of protection from the first moment of its existence. The Supreme Court arbitrarily fixed the point of birth as the moment the law kicks in to protect the individual. Not only was it a horrible precedent for the unborn, but it was a dangerous precedent for the born as well. Because other arbitrary decisions can and will be made about lives worthy of state protection. This is the essence of tyranny. Nazis applied racist criteria arbitrarily to remove state protection from Jews. And we all know Jews weren’t their only target. What the Supreme Court did was no different…only a different group was targeted for non-protection.Exactly. At all living things have souls, but humans have a spiritual soul, which is of a different type than the souls possessed by other living things.
But, of course, the existence of the soul isn’t terribly relevant to the question of abortion. Science is sufficient to note that an embryo is alive and human.
– Mark L. Chance.
J
James_2_24
Guest
Umm… Check your theology. A soul is that which animates and gives life. Animals have souls, its just that humans have immortal souls.
S
snowman10
Guest
James_2:24:
dxu
I thought we had eternal, not immortal? I am not trying to be rude or anything I just always heard eternal. Please correct me if I am wrong.
dxu
- Status