0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
But, is it true?
I mean do the Democrats support abortion and now infanticide?
I mean do the Democrats support abortion and now infanticide?
- Status
P
Pattylt
Guest
Abortion, yes. I’m not sure any will state they are for infanticide and the Democrats on the ground sure don’t. If the party really starts pushing abortion in the final weeks…unless to save the mother…I think they will find quite a bit of pushback from the members.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Zsigna attempting to tell me what I mean . . .
A
Annie
Guest
And we had planned for a pandemic, as much as one can. We wouldn’t even be thinking of that closed-down department 1) if we hadn’t had a pandemic in the same administration or 2) if the administration had been Democrat.
@F_Marturana @blackforest
@F_Marturana @blackforest
Last edited:
Z
zsiga
Guest
No, they do not. First of all, it is incorrect to speak of “democrats” as if they would be a monolithic group. (The same error would be talking about “republicans” in the same vein.)
The democratic platform supports the right and freedom to have an abortion, if the woman so chooses. The problem with these kinds of discussions is to try to wash away the huge differences between a “morning after pill” and the late term abortions. Until it is impossible to come to agreement and treat the different instances differently, we keep on talking past each other. And that is just a waste of time.
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
Which is the killing of an innocent person.
Z
zsiga
Guest
So, no chance for a discussion. To call a zygote, a blastocyst or an embryo a “person” prevents any possibility of having a conversation. Too bad.
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
I’m afraid you’re right about the impossibility of conversation when you deny the personhood of your fellow man.
Z
zsiga
Guest
As I said before, a human CELL or a bunch of human CELLS cannot be rightfully called a PERSON.
There can be no person without a sufficiently developed and functional brain. A freshly dead human still has some parts of her body functioning to a certain degree. But her brain is dead. And death is declared when the brain stops functioning. What is so strange about this concept?
A
Annie
Guest
Suppose we knew for sure that the brain would start functioning again–would it still be ok to start harvesting organs (which would lead to the death of the donating body)?
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
In your opinion.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
zsiga . . . .
An angel is a person.
There are Three Divine Persons in One God in the Holy Trinity.
You don’t understand personhood zsiga.
The cells are coupled to a spiritual soul. The remain that way in some form until death. Then that PERSON’S soul goes to God for judgment.
At the end of time, all HUMAN PERSONS get a body back and either end up in Heaven or Hell.
What is “strange” is that it is wrong in that you are conflating partial truths.
An angel is a person.
There are Three Divine Persons in One God in the Holy Trinity.
You don’t understand personhood zsiga.
The cells are coupled to a spiritual soul. The remain that way in some form until death. Then that PERSON’S soul goes to God for judgment.
At the end of time, all HUMAN PERSONS get a body back and either end up in Heaven or Hell.
Last edited:
S
StudentMI
Guest
So someone has to believe in God to understand personhood? That’s really shutting down any possibility of a conversation.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
StudentMI . . .
What shuts down conversations is watering down the fullness of truth.
Last edited:
Z
zsiga
Guest
I really like hypotheticals, so I will answer. So, let’s get to it. Without a functioning brain the body will decompose in a certain amount of time. As such what will be there to restart? A zombie?
If we KNEW for CERTAIN that the brain will restart before the body (which includes the brain tissue) will decompose, then harvesting the organs would not be OK.
I am not special. Without a functioning frontal lobe, there can be no personality, therefore there can be no person. And, of course your remark also serves no constructive purpose. Just another avoidance of a conversation.
If you can demonstrate the existence of these entities, we can continue.
Again, if you can demonstrate that truth, we can continue.
Last edited:
I have the right and freedom to own a firearm. I won’t ask the taxpayers buy one for me.
I have the right to freedom of the press. I won’t ask the taxpayers to buy a printing press for me.
Don’t ask the taxpayers to pay for abortions.
A
Annie
Guest
OK, now suppose my grandfather were in such a state–brain not working but it was going to restart before decomposition, so he would totally recover.
He was very rich and planned to leave me a lot of money. Would it be ok for me to kill him while he was in that temporarily brain-dead state? I plan to give all the money to the poor but he was an uncharitable guy who never helped anyone out.
Last edited:
Z
zsiga
Guest
In a society there are many expenditures which do not benefit some people. It is called the “problem of commons”.
You do not directly benefit from the existence of libraries if you do not use them, but some of your tax dollars are spent on them. You might not personally use the road system in the rural areas, and yet, your tax dollars are spent on maintaining the road system. You might never need the help of the police, and your tax dollars are spent on maintaining the police force. Some tax dollars are spent on education. But if you are an adult, you don’t need the school system. Some tax dollars even go to religious private schools. Churches are exempt from paying taxes. But they benefit from the tax dollars spent on common welfare.
That is the price of living in a society.
If the insurance would be readily available, it would solve this conundrum. But we have Medicaid for those who have no other form of insurance. Shall we get rid of that, too? And yes, pregnancy is an abnormal and unhealthy state of affairs. It is not a disease - per se - but it is an unhealthy condition. And some people do not want it.
By the way, if there would be no tax dollars spent on abortions, would you support the women’s right to have one? Serious question. Please answer.
Z
zsiga
Guest
You cannot KNOW that. If you could KNOW, beyond a shadow of the doubt, that would be a different state of affairs. But since perfect knowledge is only possible in a deductive or axiomatic system, it is not possible to have absolute, 100% knowledge.
What is the point of your questions?
Irrelevant. And besides, if he were to leave you a lot of money, then he cannot be totally “uncharitable”.
A
Annie
Guest
OK, my grandfather has the condition which to our ability to measure results in a temporary state of brain death but from which everyone so far has recovered.Annie:
You cannot KNOW that. If you could KNOW, beyond a shadow of the doubt, that would be a different state of affairs. But since perfect knowledge is only possible in a deductive or axiomatic system, it is not possible to have absolute, 100% knowledge.
So we don’t KNOW that he will recover, but we are very sure.
However, his condition is labeled brain death, so would it be ok for me to give him medication that will cause his heart to stop? Or maybe just put a plastic bag over his head?
Just considering issues of brain death, as you used it for a justification for abortion.
- Status