You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Would you support military action in the US to end abortion?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
I gave you one with the peeping tom who killed the rapist and the rape victim.illegal unintended death?
That is a new one. Please explain how you can have either a legal or an illegal unintended death.
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
The strawman is your pro-war and anti-abortion position. Our differences, though you try and spin it differently is you think the death of innocents in Iraq are justified somehow or dismissed completely because you fear terrorists and support the decision to go to war to protect a national interest and non-Americans. Your agenda is not the protection of life regarding abortion because if it was, the near million killed in abortion clinics every year in America would cause such a ‘moral’ person as you to use the military, unless you are a hypocrite. Some in the poll seem to think you are.The whole premise of this thread was a monumental strawman.
I see.I gave you one with the peeping tom who killed the rapist and the rape victim.
You mean accidental death.
Seems to me no omne in this thread has said enough to make any such claims about position. Including yourself.The strawman is your pro-war and anti-abortion position. Our differences, though you try and spin it differently is you think the death of innocents in Iraq are justified somehow or dismissed completely because you fear terrorists and support the decision to go to war to protect a national interest and non-Americans. Your agenda is not the protection of life regarding abortion because if it was, the near million killed in abortion clinics every year in America would cause such a ‘moral’ person as you to use the military, unless you are a hypocrite. Some in the poll seem to think you are.
Perhaps you would care to quote the specific posts in this thread that back your conjecture…
E
estesbob
Guest
The Church says my position is in line with their teachings.The strawman is your pro-war and anti-abortion position. Our differences, though you try and spin it differently is you think the death of innocents in Iraq are justified somehow or dismissed completely because you fear terrorists and support the decision to go to war to protect a national interest and non-Americans. Your agenda is not the protection of life regarding abortion because if it was, the near million killed in abortion clinics every year in America would cause such a ‘moral’ person as you to use the military, unless you are a hypocrite. Some in the poll seem to think you are.
I gave you one with the peeping tom who killed the rapist and the rape victim.
So I again must ask…I see.
You mean accidental death.
Is it your intent to equate the murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
Accidental only if the peeping tom was authorized to peep in windows. He was committing a crime when he say the assult taking place and took matters into his own hands.I see.
You mean accidental death.
Are you suggesting the ends justify the means?
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
You pro-war people are really bad about providing some support for claims of Church approval.The Church says my position is in line with their teachings.
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
Do you excuse the crime of the peeping tom?So I again must ask…
Is it your intent to equate the murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
The death came with absolutely no intent to kill.Accidental only if the peeping tom was authorized to peep in windows. He was committing a crime when he say the assult taking place and took matters into his own hands.
That is the definition of accidental death.
Now…
Is it your intention to equate the murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
you seem to know a great deal of the thinking of the people in this thread. Knowledge that is not readily apparent with anything that has been posted here.
What is really telling is that no one has told you what you are thinking. Instead we are asking clarification so we understand you correctly.
After all, it is uncharitable to assume the position of someone until that person makes it clear. It is also unwise.
So please answer so we can understand your position and move on from there…
Is it your intention to equate the murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
The peeping tom was guilty of trespassing.Do you excuse the crime of the peeping tom?
He may also be guilty of murder. It would be up to a jury to decide. But given the limited information, I cannot know.
Now given that I politely answered your question…
How about mine.
Is it your intention to equate the murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
E
estesbob
Guest
No one claimed the church approved the war . What has been stated, correctly, is that the Church did not declare war unjust and stated Catholics in good conscience can disagree with the Vatrican on the war.You pro-war people are really bad about providing some support for claims of Church approval.
. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment.** There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death** penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
Cardinal Ratzinger.
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
You keep trying to qualify accidental in a vacuum and you can’t. It wasn’t an accident I was in the get-away car as the guy robbed the bank when he killed everyone inside when he meant to kill only one or two inside. Are the others that died accidental and therefore dismissed? I am just as guilty as if I was in the bank and pulled the trigger.Is it your intention to equate the murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
Great, thanks. Now post his reasoning with that justify your position on Iraq since you use him to justify your stance on abortion and voting for the lesser evil. What agressor is being expelled in America? Does the Church give nations the right to take it upon ourselves do so for others. Does our law?. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, **but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
**
Cardinal Ratzinger.
I have politely gone through your questions and answered them to the best of my ability.You keep trying to qualify accidental in a vacuum and you can’t. It wasn’t an accident I was in the get-away car as the guy robbed the bank when he killed everyone inside when he meant to kill only one or two inside. Are the others that died accidental and therefore dismissed? I am just as guilty as if I was in the bank and pulled the trigger.
You have yet to answer a simple question.
Would you rather we filled in the blank with whatever answer was convenient as you have done us?
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
This is basic responsibility for ones actions. If the first action is wrong (going into Iraq illigitimately), each subsiquent action is tainted by the first. You cannot call the unintended death in Iraq an accident only in that case.I have politely gone through your questions and answered them to the best of my ability.
You have yet to answer a simple question.
Would you rather we filled in the blank with whatever answer was convenient as you have done us?
If the greater evil is abortion in your view, why do you not support sending in the military among US abortion clinics to stop it like you do in Iraq to kill terrorists? If you say it would be unjust and agaisnst the law to do so, I say it is also unjust and against the law to do so in Iraq. Yet you advocate the use of the military for a lesser evil of Iraq rather than the greater evil of abortion.
S
Steve40
Guest
The Declaration of Independence allows for Civil War and Revolution. When inalienable rights are violated the people have the right to rise up against the government and replace it. This is part of our American heritage.
Yes, I can. Because accidental deaths are exactly that.This is basic responsibility for ones actions. If the first action is wrong (going into Iraq illigitimately), each subsiquent action is tainted by the first. You cannot call the unintended death in Iraq an accident only in that case.
Sorry if the definition of accidental death is not to your liking, but that is simply the way it is.
You cannot compare the two until you tell us precisely what you are equating.If the greater evil is abortion in your view, why do you not support sending in the military among US abortion clinics to stop it like you do in Iraq to kill terrorists? If you say it would be unjust and agaisnst the law to do so, I say it is also unjust and against the law to do so in Iraq. Yet you advocate the use of the military for a lesser evil of Iraq rather than the greater evil of abortion.
Is it your intent to equate the deliberate murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
The entirety of your comparison between the abortion issue and the war in Iraq is predicated upon equating something between the two. If you cannot equate something between the two of these items, then there is no comparison. And you are simply attempting a cheap smear at the military.
Either you equate abortion with the death of a terrorist being brought to justice, or you equate abortion with the accidental death of people when this terrorist is brought to justice, or you equate abortion with the deaths caused by the terrorists.
So which is it?
What of the three that I outlined are you comparing the murder of the innocent unborn with?
More an more it looks like the post was right:
It appears the intention is slime the troops as being the moral equivalent of abortionists.
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
Because you lack simple comprehension and/or ignore basic civics I use simple analogies of a bank robber or peeping tom to explain common sense concepts of personal responsibility. You obviously don’t grasp the obvious which is the civillian policy order to deploy the troops is the error that soils any greater good you are claiming being performed in Iraq. You wrap yourself in this false nobility with smugness of an imagined rightousness.Yes, I can. Because accidental deaths are exactly that.
Sorry if the definition of accidental death is not to your liking, but that is simply the way it is.
Pity you can’t understand.You cannot compare the two until you tell us precisely what you are equating.
Your continued inability to comprehend is not my problem.Is it your intent to equate the deliberate murder of the innocent unborn with accidental death?
Did the military make the mission in Iraq? Was it their idea to attack Iraq, leaving Afghanistan too early and threaten Iran? If you told someone whose job it is is to protect you to punch another person in the nose because they threatened you, and they go punch 5 people in the nose because you aren’t sure who it was that threatened you, when the person you told learns you lied about being threatened was his punch in the nose of a stranger justified? Even if he hit the one you really wanted punched despite your lie, are the other four that got punched in the nose an acident? Newsflash: that is not an accident. You bare the guilt for underserve agression and damage, not the person who was tasked to protect you that you lied to.The entirety of your comparison between the abortion issue and the war in Iraq is predicated upon equating something between the two. If you cannot equate something between the two of these items, then there is no comparison. And you are simply attempting a cheap smear at the military.
Either you equate abortion with the death of a terrorist being brought to justice, or you equate abortion with the accidental death of people when this terrorist is brought to justice, or you equate abortion with the deaths caused by the terrorists.
So which is it?
What of the three that I outlined are you comparing the murder of the innocent unborn with?
You are making a straw man out of Verisimilitude’s argument.
Are you a veteran? You have difficulty with simple responsibility concepts so maybe you have difficulty understanding my desire is to preserve the integrity and honor of our military and keep them safe so they can keep us safe when it is really needed rather than continue the misadventures they have been ordered into now.More an more it looks like the post was right:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.