what is your belief about pro-life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter water
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JMJ_coder said:
Hello,

If that is your professional opinion I would suggest you contact the medical school you attended and demand your money back. Take a look on any package of condoms. They say that they are not 100% effective and that they do not prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (i.e. HIV/AIDS).

This false thinking that condoms are perfect protection leads to two results. 1 - the continued spread of STD’s. Just look at Africa, which has been inundated with condoms. HIV continues to be spread like wildfire. 2 - it leads to the breakdown of marriages and the increase of extra-marital sexual relations and abortions. This is because the ideology of the contraceptive society is that they are being protected from STD’s and pregnancy when they are not. This leads to more promiscuity and a general downward spiral trend in marriages and society in general. Just look at society since the 1960’s when the so called “sexual revolution” began.
Click to expand...
Please let’s stop this explosion of “straw man” arguments and ad hominems
prevention does not mean 100% prevention does it? not in my usage
FACT - condoms prevent transmission of HIV
there is ample evidence of this
what the insert on a packet of condoms says is neither here nor there
as for condoms leading to the breakdown of marriages - HUH?

there is a lot of misinformation that comes from certain sources - which is odd, since surely the morality of condoms is separate from their efficacy?
 
Hello,
jack_hawkins said:
That is not what I’m saying at all. Again the problem is people trying to make judgments when they don’t know the crucial medical details, so they end up getting the wrong end of the stick!
Click to expand...
Then what are you saying? You indicated that the child is a disease that is afflicting the mother and that it should be removed. That is not medicine, it is barbarism :mad: !!! If that is not what you mean, then please correct me.
 
Hello,
jack_hawkins said:
as for condoms leading to the breakdown of marriages - HUH?
Click to expand...
The use of contraception is one of the causes of the general breakdown of society and specifically of marriages. By divorcing the marital act from procreation, you turn sex into a recreational activity to be used and discarded at will. The lifelong relationship between a man and a woman is perverted and distorted into one-night stands, affairs, marriages that last until one of the spouses decides they are tired of the marriage and want to move on to someone else. I remember a cardinal, I think, once saying that when a couple use contraception, they pervert what should be an act of total self giving of oneself to their spouse into an excercise in mutual masturbation with the person in bed with you.
jack_hawkins said:
there is a lot of misinformation that comes from certain sources - which is odd, since surely the morality of condoms is separate from their efficacy?
Click to expand...
I certainly would agree with that. It doesn’t matter how well contraceptives work, because they are always wrong to use. But there does seem to be a insistence on their use despite the unreliable nature of them. Those of a certain group just want them to be used, period! They don’t want to hear about abstinence outside of marriage and fidelity inside of marriage (i.e. chastity always). How could we possible ask people to control our urges. We gotta be free, I gotta be me. :rolleyes:

It is like those who insist on using embryos for stem cell research. Even though embryos haven’t shown any actual results (only promises and hopes), some still vehemently insist that they are the only hope for medicine. In the meantime, stem cells from umbilical cords, fluids, and afterbirth and adult stem cells have shown actual results and have already been used to help treat people. Despite this, anti-life proponents insist that we abandon these proven methods that don’t destroy life and go kill more unborn children for medical experiments.
 
JMJ_coder said:
Hello,

Then what are you saying? You indicated that the child is a disease that is afflicting the mother and that it should be removed. That is not medicine, it is barbarism :mad: !!! If that is not what you mean, then please correct me.
Click to expand...
Ok, let’s look at what I said - the foetus (in some situations) is the cause of the problem, the cause of the disease. That is not in any way saying that the child is a disease.
 
awantz said:
Whatever. I’m not trying to start an arguement. Why not permit adultery or condone druckeness? Because the BIBLE speaks against it. That is why not. I know this thread is not about condoms and that is what I’m trying to say. Why are we even talking about this when the thread has nothing to do with this? I have total respect for the unborn. Yes, I say I am Pro-life and I speak Pro-life. I agree that children are a gift from God. Noone knows what is better for themselves other than God. I do as well. I agree.
Click to expand...
Then, don’t tell me that you’re Pro-condom use AND Pro-Life - it’s an oxymoron.
 
Hello,
jack_hawkins said:
Ok, let’s look at what I said - the foetus (in some situations) is the cause of the problem, the cause of the disease. That is not in any way saying that the child is a disease.
Click to expand...
And what exactly is the huge difference. A virus is not the disease per se but the cause. So you solution is to destroy the child by any means necessary, like one would a cold virus or infectious bacteria? We should always get rid of the cause of our ailments, is that what you are saying? So, if my neighbor is causing a disease in me, say clinical depression - which the medical community claims as a legitimate disease, and one that they will alot of times justify as needing to preserve the health of the mother - then I can kill my neighbor? Or I can go to my doctor, and my doctor will kill my neighbor? Is that your position?
 
elvisman said:
Then, don’t tell me that you’re Pro-condom use AND Pro-Life - it’s an oxymoron.
Click to expand...
You can think whatever you what, but I feel like you are trying to make me look like someone evil when I’m not. What have I done to affend you? I’d sure like to know. I am very strongly pro-life and it hurts/affends me that you would think anything else. You oviously don’t know me at all. Yet, you think you do.
 
awantz said:
You can think whatever you what, but I feel like you are trying to make me look like someone evil when I’m not. What have I done to affend you? I’d sure like to know. I am very strongly pro-life and it hurts/affends me that you would think anything else. You oviously don’t know me at all. Yet, you think you do.
Click to expand...
You are pro-condom so he reasons that you are anti-christ and anti-god. It’s a protestant typed mentality.
 
JoeyWarren said:
You are pro-condom so he reasons that you are anti-christ and anti-god. It’s a protestant typed mentality.
Click to expand...
Well, he oviously reasons wrong. It is not my typed mentality. I as pro-condom as you think. If you are going to say that I am either pro- or anti- condom. Then, I am anti-condom.
 
awantz said:
Well, he oviously reasons wrong. It is not my typed mentality. I as pro-condom as you think. If you are going to say that I am either pro- or anti- condom. Then, I am anti-condom.
Click to expand...
Don’t get mad at me. I was just trying to answer the question. I don’t think or know you to be anything. I was just replying from the 3rd person position.😉 Some catholics here are just as bad as some Protestants when it comes to certain topics and opinions.
 
JoeyWarren said:
Don’t get mad at me. I was just trying to answer the question. I don’t think or know you to be anything. I was just replying from the 3rd person position.😉 Some catholics here are just as bad as some Protestants when it comes to certain topics and opinions.
Click to expand...
I am not mad at you. I’m sorry if you feel that way.
 
water said:
As a Catholic, I am 100% pro-life - ie: I don’t believe in abortion, birth control, and other means that stop life?

I know some Protestants think the same, but what do your church and you, as a non-Catholic Christians, say about this?

If you are pro-choice? Do you support life? could you prove that?

I just wanted to learn your point of views on this matter.
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Well, I choose to be against premarital sexual intercourse, contraception, abortion, infanticide and euthanasia.

But it seems you are looking for insights on the supportive side of those actions.

I’ve never supported any of those issues, so I can’t give a real insight. But I would hazard to say that the average person who is pro on those issues still contends to support life.

The point of disagreement between those who oppose and support those issues has to do with the term life.

For example, a young, affluent, white, American woman who is engaging in frequent premarital sexual intercourse is slowly building a lifestyle. She must then be on a hormonal replacement therapy, usually “the Pill” to insure that she does not conceive a child through this natural process.

In keeping with her lifestyle, she has little stability in terms of finances, housing, commitment and with her partner(s) in general. She will settle down “some day.”

Then, the expected happens. Engaging in this natural process, she naturally ends up conceiving. No contraception is foolproof or 100% effective. Mother nature catches up with her.

Now, due to her lifestyle, she feels rather trapped. The next logical choice for her is to willfully abort her child.

This is where the average “pro” steps in. He or she recognizes this situation. Indeed, is probably living it right now. And those who support these issues realize that the infrastructure of a million choices has brought them to a hard one. Now they must choose to continue along the path they have been walking, or change their entire lifestyle, their entire worldview, their entire inner self.

Few people win out on that inner development. Therefore, we have people who blindly and quite nonsensically support extremely old behaviors that are rather bloody and barbaric, that are unhealthy mentally and physically to the mother and usually deadly to her child. In effect, they do support life. Meaning, a lifestyle. A society that has been in the making for more than 30 years. A step by step process that slowly leads people down a dead end. A desparate life.

Anyways, that’s my POV
 
JMJ_coder said:
Hello,

And what exactly is the huge difference. A virus is not the disease per se but the cause. So you solution is to destroy the child by any means necessary, like one would a cold virus or infectious bacteria? We should always get rid of the cause of our ailments, is that what you are saying? So, if my neighbor is causing a disease in me, say clinical depression - which the medical community claims as a legitimate disease, and one that they will alot of times justify as needing to preserve the health of the mother - then I can kill my neighbor? Or I can go to my doctor, and my doctor will kill my neighbor? Is that your position?
Click to expand...
Ok we’d have to go into the medical details - in the meantime stop making straw man arguments which any reasonable person will see as not relating to what I said at all.
You obviously didn’t pick up the significance of my previous comments about viability. Do you understand what a foetus being viable means?
Then I can show you what I mean once you understand the terminology.
In any case your analogy actually works well - coming back to the self-defense analogy that started this line of argument. Of course the law allows you to kill your nieghbour in self-defense if he attacks you and you fear for your life and you cannot get him to desist.
You will remember I was advocating abortion when a pregnancy put a mother’s life at serious risk and the foetus isn’t viable.
 
Hello,
jack_hawkins said:
Ok we’d have to go into the medical details - in the meantime stop making straw man arguments which any reasonable person will see as not relating to what I said at all.
Click to expand...
I have repeatedly asked that if I misunderstood you to please correct me. But, I have not seen anything in your replies that makes me think that you do not view the child in the earliest and most vulnerable stages, when it needs our protection the most, as anything more than some foreign biological agent that needs dealt with using any medical procedures whatever. A child is a living human being, regardless of whether the child resides in his mother’s womb or outside of it. Again I say, if this is not your view, please correct me.
jack_hawkins said:
You obviously didn’t pick up the significance of my previous comments about viability. Do you understand what a foetus being viable means?
Then I can show you what I mean once you understand the terminology.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand what modern medical practitioners regard as viability.
jack_hawkins said:
In any case your analogy actually works well - coming back to the self-defense analogy that started this line of argument. Of course the law allows you to kill your nieghbour in self-defense if he attacks you and you fear for your life and you cannot get him to desist.
Click to expand...
I haven’t read all the posts on this thread so I am unaware of this argument presented. As far as self-defense, there is a double effect - the preservation of one’s life, and the potential death of the aggressor. One is intentional, and one is not. One can never enter the situation with the intent to kill the aggressor. The intention of legitimate self-defense is the preservation of one’s life. In the process, it could happen that a lethal blow is delivered. But, the intention is not to kill the aggressor.

Likewise, in any medical procedure the intention must be for the preservation of life - of all patients (in the case of a pregnancy this involves both the mother and child). It can happen that in the course of medicine that a life is lost, but this must never be intentional. Medical science exists to preserve life, not take it away.
jack_hawkins said:
You will remember I was advocating abortion when a pregnancy put a mother’s life at serious risk and the foetus isn’t viable.
Click to expand...
There can never be an advocacy of abortion under any circumstances. Life is a gift of God, and must be treated as such - from the first moment of conception until natural death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top