Why the focus on abortion?

[IsaiahSpirit]

Gospel means “Good News” it is a proclamation of remedies to live this life;
letting Christ lift us by Grace to the next. The more He lifts our inner disposition;
the more we understand Providence in our own personal lives; reconcile & repair
the effects of our own mistakes; and share the compassion of The Gospel to help
other’s heal. This happens in my family, among my friends in real ways.
~
And please understand, God treats everyone with perfect equity.
Someone appearing devout & walking the walk to themselves and projecting that
to others doesn’t necessarily mean their ‘inner disposition’ is in a state of Grace.
Just like in Jesus Christ’s Suffering Servant Days; we see so many
justifying philosophies/ideologies/agendas with many terminologies.
If someone, no matter how outwardly appearing Godly, has an ‘inner disposition’
attached to their own fallible intellectual or other biases; more than the holistic
compassionate perfect Gospel Divine Revelation; and their were those who
aided & abetted coming to our day of confusing the ideals of our Creator;
but their are also those who justify a ‘hush, hush’ attitude. Only God knows
impartially their ‘inner disposition’ reasons verses mitigating Providential hardship reasons; such as misplaced emphasizing & concentrating on fallible perceived
solutions; but are fleshly emotional in nature.
Divisiveness does come from a ‘harsh word,’ but also comes from complacency
in conveying the Holistic Gospel evenly. Creative compassionate clear conveyance
addressing our historical times, with an urgency of now, has been historically a healing response, and reflects The Gospel. But thank God their has been increased awareness.
With ‘1984’ totalitarianism in China/Korea directly oppressing Judaeo Christianity & other places; religious totalitarianism in many oppressed societies oppressing by far
more Judaeo Christians than anyone else; the open society nations think, we have no oppression. The brand of oppression here, thematically is a “Brave New World,”
by Aldous Huxley type of oppression. The intellectual elitists since the mid 1800s;
gave this type of technique as part of their agenda; and Bishop Fulton J. Sheen;
Dietrich & Alice von Hildebrand and others warned that this was happening.
Did you know that these elitists; whose inner disposition is only completely impartially known to God; derive pleasure in promoting their various terminologies philosophies/ideologies/agendas? Jesus Christ did say their would be ‘tares,’ weeds that look like wheat among the tares. Be careful; they use many things, including playing at heart strings pleasing to the ears rhetoric to justify complying with their fallacy perceptions harming others. And they seem to be for ‘the have nots’ as Saul Alinsky would put it. Real addressing problems requires growth in ‘inner disposition’ for growth in inner ‘fruit’ to share good fruit, like authentic compassion.

 

[IsaiahSpirit]

" “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits.
“Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.’
‘Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise person who built his house upon the rock…’" - Matthew 7:13-24

 

[YourNameHere]

But do we actually have a right to life?
It is when two people come together in a special way that life is made.
If two people in a relationship choose not to have children, are they committing a sin?

 

[Lea101]

I wouldn’t say we are more valuable if we have children.

Single/childless individuals provide value to society through other means, such as through their labour and gifts that married people may not be able to.

And of course, there’s the church teaching that vocations are equally important which we would agree already

 

[glencor63]

You know someone that had an abortion, but she hasn’t told you. One out of every three women will have an abortion in her lifetime. Abortion is the secret sorrow, secret shame, the secret sin of millions of women and men. Abortion destroys lives quietly. It’s the sin that keeps you up at night. It’s the sin which Satan accuses you of at 3:00 AM. It’s a grave offense against God. It hurts women. It’s a lie from the pit of hell that female empowerment must be bought at the altar of abortion. No, I’ve never had an abortion, but I’ve known and met many survivors, including a child once.

 

[Annie]

I was not clear. Women are the type-of-thing that has human babies; therefore they are important. It does not matter of they don’t or can’t or are too old to on an individual basis; the fact that they are that type-of-thing is a part of what they are, and that-type-of-thing is necessary to the future of society.

 

[IQ170]

I hope your “handle” doesn’t mean your IQ has been tested to be 170…

Why do you hope for that? It does not threaten anyone…

 

[Annie]

Sure it does. It gives others a sense that you are very intelligent so you are more probably right than those whose IQ is less, the fallacy of authority.

 

[goout]

goout:

Well thanks for your opinion.

It is not just an opinion that some people consider children a blessing, and other people do not. It is a fact.

You subject human beings to your opinion as to their value.

No, I don’t. I am not qualified to decide or declare what is valuable for you (or anyone else), and what is not. As such I make no declaration about your value system. Of course this cuts both ways. Value is a subjective opinion.

Let’s try again.
Since values are subjective in your opinion (irony noted)
And you are not willling to make declarations about values
then

You do not believe we should use our legal system to:
feed the hungry
provide housing
protect the public against violence
provide medicaid
provide welfare payment

because you are not willing to enforce your values.

1. I do not believe that you are unwilling to enforce your values, I think that is a canard to silence others you disagree with
2. if you really are unwilling to enforce your values, then you should be prepared for violence, oppression, poverty, and chaos. Is that your worldview as a “subjective values and opinions” kind of person?

What you said has nothing to do with my post. You are so far out that I am going to leave you to your views.

Are you achieving some clarity?

 

[IQ170]

Sure it does. It gives others a sense that you are very intelligent so you are more probably right than those whose IQ is less, the fallacy of authority.

When you hear the opinion of a member of the clergy, especially a bishop, their word carries more weight than that of an anonymous layman. And that is how it should be… isn’t it? More educated, more experienced, more knowledgeable, what is wrong with that? Would you call their words to be an example of the "fallacy of authority’?

But if you feel “threatened”, just imagine that my avatar is the result of some wishful thinking, or embellishment. It does not matter to me.

Let’s return to the topic and stop this “sickoanalyzing” (Extra brownie points if you know which book contained this expression.)

 

[Brendan]

Umm, are you saying that rape is justified? One human inside of another, get it?
No human being has the right to be inside of another human being without consent at any stage of human existence.

Who mentioned capital punishment?
The courts looked at privacy and pregnancy and decided that abortion is legal under various circumstances.

I never said that rape was justififed. I recognized what you said about one human not having a right to be inside another.

But the legal deliberate, killing of that offending human, by definition, would be an exercise of Capital Punishment.

Why would this human not be entitled to the basic human right of a fair trial before his or her execution (for the crime of violating anothers body).

 

[Annie]

When you hear the opinion of a member of the clergy, especially a bishop, their word carries more weight than that of an anonymous layman. And that is how it should be… isn’t it? More educated, more experienced, more knowledgeable, what is wrong with that? Would you call their words to be an example of the "fallacy of authority’?

No, because they have studied and been exposed to the issues.

But your IQ does not tell me anything about your education, experience or knowledge.

For these reasons, I would put more weight on their words than on yours. And do, especially on the issue of abortion.

ETA: no idea about the book, but good play on words

 

[IQ170]

But your IQ does not tell me anything about your education, experience or knowledge.

Well, no. Not directly. But the measurement - while not an exact science - is not like a thermometer placed under your tongue, and read the result. It is a long process, many hours, involving many facets of knowledge and the process to obtain knowledge. A high value does not designate a Jack-of-all-trades. So you accept or discard whatever I say at your convenience.

ETA: no idea about the book, but good play on words

The book is “Ender’s Game” by Orson Scott Card. Highly recommended and not only for science fiction fans.

 

[Lea101]

i get your sentiment, but you know…it takes two to make a baby. We are all necessary for the future of mankind!

 

[IsaiahSpirit]

That’s true we are a human family; whereby God’s Perfect Knowledge & plan made particular relational purpose. The husband has unique intrinsic valuable purposes;
and the wife and unique intrinsic valuable purposes.
Annie, as you well know asserted a point regarding a woman’s intrinsic valuable purpose.
Peace.

 

[otjm]

You speak of genocide; it would seem that 55 to 60 million children killed by abortion might qualify. And if you don’t like that generalization, the fact that a disproportionate number of abortuaries are set up in or adjacent to Black communities, and that per capita it appears that a disproportionate number per capita of black children are executed in the womb should apply.

Fanatical obsession? If you take the 10 largest cities - New York, L.A., Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas and San Jose - a total population of a bit more than 26 million people and wiped every last one of them out, do you think people would be a bit fanatical? And that appears to be less than half the number of children who have been executed for nothing more than beginning life.

 

[MamaJewel]

I never said that rape was justififed. I recognized what you said about one human not having a right to be inside another.

But the legal deliberate, killing of that offending human, by definition, would be an exercise of Capital Punishment.

Why would this human not be entitled to the basic human right of a fair trial before his or her execution (for the crime of violating anothers body).

The death penalty is a state sanctioned punishment for a person who has been convicted of committing certain crimes that warrant the sentence of death penalty. So, Capital Punishment does not apply between mother/fetus.

In the mother-child relationship, the courts don’t often allow a child to sue its mother for prenatal injury (outside of fetal alcohol syndrome or car accident) and the mother can’t sue the child for causing injury to her body from pregnancy/birth. For the most part, the courts consider the fetus as an extension of the pregnant woman’s body.

 

[MamaJewel]

Women are made first-class citizens by being allowed to decide to have their unborn children killed.

Women are made first class citizens when pregnant women have the same rights to their privacy, bodily integrity and autonomy that every other adult class of people with legal capacity have.

To have children in fact makes women more important to a society, as it is they who provide the future of the society.

From what I’ve seen of other women’s experiences and in my own personal experience, the courts, corporations, and most education and religious institutions don’t believe this. Their actions toward women in general, and mothers specifically, indicate that they view pregnancy/ motherhood in a negative light and as incompatible with productivity.

At the end of the day, social capital is given to the ones who are free to produce results, not to the ones who are hindered by reproduction and/or care giving (whether it’s infants, children, the disabled, or elders).

I am sorry that you miscarried some of your children; I too have been through that and it is very painful.

Thank you for compassion. I can honestly say that there was a time it bothered me and that I felt like I had lost something substantial. But because of those miscarriages, I have two living children in the here and now. I don’t hurt over it anymore. I just wish that there had been some way to donate the miscarriages for research. Maybe those little never-were Carnegie Stage 13-14 bodies could have been useful in finding a cure for the chronic illness their siblings have. (But wait, they’re only people if they’re electively aborted by most folks standards, including many pro-lifers, even Alabama legislators).

Please, Annie, take my very argument about bodily integrity and autonomy, and run with it for an embryo/ fetus. Heck, even I make that compelling argument when I play devil’s advocate against abortion.

 

[MamaJewel]

right to bodily autonomy more important than the right to life

Bodily integrity/autonomy is the the foundation for all other human rights. The right to have one’s body intact (inviolability of the body) and right of self-determination, including with what is done to one’s body and by whom it is done.

 

[Lea101]

The right to have one’s body intact (inviolability of the body) and right of self-determination, including with what is done to one’s body and by whom it is done.

But I mean…if you admit the fetus is a person, wouldn’t the fetus have that same right? I get that the fetus is in the mother’s body, but by your logic, the fetus would have a right to remain intact and not be crushed and sucked out of a vacuum?

Unless we say that the fetus isn’t a person, which then would bring us to the ‘when does life begin’ territory, not the bodily autonomy argument. I think this part is basically the root of the disagreement for 99% of debates regarding abortion.

That being said, I don’t always approve of the right to autonomy (or rather the way you said it) because it supports euthanasia and suicide. I would say that it’s wrong and society shouldn’t assist in suicides because innocent life from conception to natural death should be protected. But i think this would be a discussion for a more appropriate thread?