Trump calls out Biden on religion

[LilyM]

Right that’s the line of argument I don’t understand. It equates women to simply being passive victims of male sexuality. It’s silly and unrealistic.

Where did I say or iimply “victims of male sexuality”? Obviously there are just as many men s women ‘victims’ involved in this situation.

BOTH men and women are subject to peer and societal, not to mention familial, pressure.to have lots of sex but no (or not whatever society deems to be too many) chikdren. And lack of societal and familial support in the event of unplanned pregnancy.

We are, like it or not, social creatures so it is very difficult to resist such.

 

[StudentMI]

Where did I say or iimply “victims of male sexuality”?

“Because women don’t get themselves preganat. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum. And so the choice is rarely if ever entirely their own.”

 

[Freddy]

My daugter had two very difficult pregnancies (as did my wife giving birth to her and her brother). The second came close to killing her. If somehow she became pregnant again, despite all precautions (which you would claim are immoral in any case) then as soon as she found out she’d have a decision to make: Continue, with a strong possibility that she would die and leave a husband without a wife and two children without a mother…or terminate the pregnancy at the earliest possible opportunity.

When she chose the second option you would send her to jail.

If you think that the vast majority of reasonable people would think that would be a great idea then keep pushing that demand. There’s only one side of the argument that you are benefitting. And if you weren’t aware, I’ll tell you. It’s not yours.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Do pro-choice people ever say “looking at it from the pro-life point of view, I kind of get it, I kind of understand why they oppose it”?

Yes, of course pro-choice people understand your position. I do not think here are many women who do not understand abortion is killing a child.

That could be in individual cases, but the pro-choice propaganda does everything possible, to keep women from thinking about it this way. They probably can’t get by with the “clump of cells” thing anymore, so they speak of “the pregnancy”, the “products of conception”, the “products of pregnancy”, but never, never, “the baby”. Let’s say that a woman goes to have an abortion, and she says “I can’t be pregnant, but I’m afraid I’m killing my baby”. What do they tell her? I honestly don’t know. Do they say “if you’re that unsure, maybe you shouldn’t do it”? Even though there’s no money in it for them? Do pro-choice people want mothers to hear the heartbeat? See a sonogram? Be shown a model or a to-scale diagram of what the “products of conception” actually look like? Or would they prefer that the women block these things out of their mind, just go ahead, don’t overthink this, have the abortion, problem solved?

“Let’s make it illegal”? How to prevent it? Oh… prison terms for doctors. Take away their medical licenses. Make it at least a misdemeanor to enable the abortion. And even though some mothers know full well what they’re doing, aren’t scared in the least, aren’t desperate, just don’t want the baby, I would actually treat them more as victims. Maybe in some cases that’s too generous. No matter. We don’t have to treat them as villains, and neither do we need to be villains. And I cannot say contraception (the non-abortifacient kind) is “okay”, ditto for sterilization, but at least it’s not murder. It’s the lesser of two evils. I’d rather see a woman use contraception to avoid further pregnancies, than to see her conceive and abort, legally or illegally. If all Planned Parenthood did, were to provide non-abortifacient contraception and sterilization, I couldn’t say it is morally acceptable, but I wouldn’t have nearly as much of a problem with them. Not even in the same ballpark. For those women who do keep the baby, provide everything they reasonably need to see them through all of this. If it can’t be funded by tax dollars, make it a “Catholic thing” to take up second collections for this. Catholics are very modest givers compared to many Christian confessions. Maybe this needs to change.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Women get abortions in part because they have no incentive to give birth. If you can provide an incentive, you will accomplish the prevention of abortions.

It’s a nice thought, but I really have to take issue with this, in many cases. Surely it’s true sometimes. But there are any number of women who simply cannot be pregnant right now. There’s not an incentive in the world, that could make them want to have this baby. They want to have the sex from which pregnancy can result (even with the best contraception), but accidents happen. We might be talking “one percent and down”, but even if it were a one-tenth of one percent failure rate, that’s still a lot of unwanted pregnancies. As it stands right now, when there’s an “oops baby”, the mother either makes her peace with the situation, or discreetly gets an abortion and nobody — possibly not even their male partner — ever knows.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

Where did I say or iimply “victims of male sexuality”?

“Because women don’t get themselves preganat. It doesn’t happen in a vacuum. And so the choice is rarely if ever entirely their own.”

And so ii isn’t. As I said, often society and families push both male.and female.into.hving sex when they arent ready for children, and then into abortion when pregnancy results.

I was not pointing the finger at male sexuality at all, and it is all on you that you jumped there.

 

[StudentMI]

I was not pointing the finger at male sexuality at all, and it is all on you that you jumped there.

I’m sorry I brought in men when discussing women getting pregnant?

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

I was not pointing the finger at male sexuality at all, and it is all on you that you jumped there.

I’m sorry I brought in men when discussing women getting pregnant?

But you didn’t just bring in men, did you? You went straight to “women as passive victims of male.sexuality”. Which is unjustified.

Both men and women are in theae situations because they are victims, if you like, of many other forces. Male and femle sexuality is just part of it, although we are as a species hard wired to procreate, of course.

 

[StudentMI]

So personal responsibility isn’t a thing any more? Just social determinism? How calvinistic.

 

[farronwolf]

Yea I dont see doctors out on the street grabbing women to abort babies without their consent. To put the blame and punishment on the doctors makes zero sense.

If abortions are made illegal the punishment should fall squarely on the person who asks for the procedure and consents to it being done, the woman.

Letting them claim victim status would be akin to letting a man claim victim status after being solicited by a prostitute. No one would buy that argument.

 

[LilyM]

So personal responsibility isn’t a thing any more? Just social determinism? How calvinistic.

Read the catechism sections on homosexuality or masturbation. Or for that matter many other sins such as suicide.

They contain a well-nuamced balance between stating the objective wrongness of the acts and a note of the many factors that suggest that a compassionate and sympathetic approach is required.

What IS Calvinistic is black-and-white thinking. Not about tge morality of n.act or acts but how best to approach sinners in various situations. A blanket condemnation of ‘all your fault’ is a short step away from ‘nobe of my problem’. Which is a very un-Christian attitude.

 

[StudentMI]

I highly suggest the book Iota Unum. It does a great job showing a logical way of thinking.

 

[pnewton]

Plenty are unduly pressured, tricked or manipulated, if not actually forced, either into having sex in the first place, into pregnancy, or into abortion.

For what it is worth, this comes across as saying they are victims of male sexuality to me as well. I really see no other way to read it.

 

[Freddy]

Well, you have one thing right. You can’t please the world. Actually two things right: You are losing ground. And the reason for both is that you don’t seem to appreciate that there’s a real world out there with real problems. And people with honestly held beliefs that don’t align with yours. And simplistic arguments that ignore all of that.

‘Don’t use contraception!’ But she got pregnant anyway.
‘Don’t have an abortion!’ But she’s in danger of her life and suicidal.
‘Then she shouldn’t have had sex!’ Were you ever a teenager? When your brain is a few years from being fully formed and your hormone drenched body thinks of nothing but sex?
So she has an abortion: ‘Lock her up!’

Four demands that have been made within this thread. None of them based in reality. And none which will go any way whatsoever to reduce the number of abortions.

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

Plenty are unduly pressured, tricked or manipulated, if not actually forced, either into having sex in the first place, into pregnancy, or into abortion.

For what it is worth, this comes across as saying they are victims of male sexuality to me as well. I really see no other way to read it.

Fair enough, and sincere apologies to all of you for expressing myself poorly.

 

[StudentMI]

And the reason for both is that you don’t seem to appreciate that there’s a real world out there with real problems.

And here comes the real disagreement on this whole issue…

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

And the reason for both is that you don’t seem to appreciate that there’s a real world out there with real problems.

And here comes the real disagreement on this whole issue…

Don’t leave the comment hanging, Student. You’ve always got something to say worth reading so please continue. Are you saying that we should not treat this as a practical matter?

 

[StudentMI]

Don’t leave the comment hanging, Student. You’ve always got something to say worth reading so please continue. Are you saying that we should not treat this as a practical matter?

No I’m saying you don’t see religious people apparently as having a view of the real world. That’s what you just said. So why bother debating the topic?

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

Don’t leave the comment hanging, Student. You’ve always got something to say worth reading so please continue. Are you saying that we should not treat this as a practical matter?

No I’m saying you don’t see religious people apparently as having a view of the real world. That’s what you just said. So why bother debating the topic?

I think most religious people do have a realistic view of the world. @NevermoreLenore being one example from a few in this thread. But how should I treat someone’s view that takes simplistic demands (don’t have sex, don’t use contraception, only sex within marriage, lock people up if they do have abortions) and tries to apply them to real.world problems.

When my daughter was old enough we made sure that she knew about contraception. Not because we had no problem with her having sex (I’m not sure it’s ok now and she’s been married 8 years) but we live in the real word where real life problems occur and need real life solutions.

The solution from others would be: Tell her that contraception is evil, tell her not to have sex and if she gets pregnant anyway and has an abortion because the pregnancy might kill her, lock her up.

 

[StudentMI]

Thats not really an unrealistic view of the world. It’s an uncompromising view of the world but it doesn’t deny the world as it is. I doubt (name removed by moderator) would disagree with many aspects of Thomistic realism.