The husband of our vice president is telling men to "step up" to defend the right to kill a child. Real men will see through this evil charade.

[stevil]

Simple.

It’s a human that doesn’t deserve to die in the name of choice. Not wanting pre born humans dead isn’t “forcing” anyone.

It is forcing, if you support a law on them so that they can't use the abortion procedure.

 

[Bradskii]

This isn’t even about Christians or religion. There are pro life atheists and agnostics.

I'm pro life. I think that in an ideal world there should be no abortions at all. I'm prepared to listen to any arguments that can reduce the numbers.

 

[Bradskii]

I vote that men learn to keep their penises in their pants...

You know there are two people involved?

 

[Bradskii]

No, saying they have very strong desires is just a cop out.

It would help if we didn't have those almost overwhelming desires. Especially at an age when the ability to make important decisions is abysmally low.

You know, it's almost like we were designed like that.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You know there are two people involved?

Exactly. That's why I brought up the point in a thread topic [i.e. abortion] that usually centers on women. Besides, being I have a penchant for history, I like to take the looooong view.

 

[NxNW]

I'm not following you here. What are you referring to?

The difference in Christian thinking on abortion before and after 1980, and why it's logical to be skeptical of the current position.

Goody for Mormons. Goody for charlatan TV preachers. Either way, I don't care about that, nor do either of those positions stand as some sore of comparison for contrast against what Christians think, have thought, can think, or should think.

It was a direct answer to your question about revelation.

 

[RileyG]

It would help if we didn't have those almost overwhelming desires. Especially at an age when the ability to make important decisions is abysmally low.

You know, it's almost like we were designed like that.

Yes. For reproduction which is why we have those desires. It's just part of biology.

 

[RileyG]

It is forcing, if you support a law on them so that they can't use the abortion procedure.

So?

 

[RileyG]

It's not a cop out, it is just an observation of reality.

I mean, if you are going to use that line on your kids. "Well, you should have thought about that earlier, shouldn't have you"
That's up to you.

But um, if you go over to the neighbor's kids and spout that gem onto them. You're certainly not going to have friendly neighbors any more.

All I can say, from my own personal opinion, is that people should keep their opinions to themselves. No one want's judgy neighbors spying on them.

The reality is people can control themselves. If they choose to have unprotected sex and the woman gets pregnant, no one is the victim here. Saying an actions wrong is NOT judging.

 

[RileyG]

I'm pro life. I think that in an ideal world there should be no abortions at all. I'm prepared to listen to any arguments that can reduce the numbers.

Comprehensive sex education and understanding consent for one.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The difference in Christian thinking on abortion before and after 1980, and why it's logical to be skeptical of the current position.

But you haven't established what "THE" Christian thinking was specifically before 1980. And so, because you haven't, and I have to go look it up, your point is lost on me ................

What I was expecting for you to do that you didn't do is to begin offering some support for your statement, something like the following:

History of Christian thought on abortion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

​

​

It was a direct answer to your question about revelation.

I don't buy the ol' "What aboutism?" canard that Christians have to be overly concerned about their own revelation because there are other, competing revelations out there to consider. As if the Christian revelation in Christ somehow isn't more than what these others offer.

 

[KCfromNC]

Try not to make category errors.

I'll worry about it when posts can actually identify a case in which I do so.

 

[KCfromNC]

Abortion is not health care.

Assertions are not evidence, even when they're repeated.

What they do look like is a way to avoid addressing the obvious special pleading in the posts I'm referencing.

 

[KCfromNC]

Lol. No one is being forced to give up organs.

Yep, exactly, even though parents made a decision when they decided to have sex. It's almost as if that decision doesn't automatically sign them up for other obligations that outside observers want to force onto them.

 

[KCfromNC]

No, saying they have very strong desires is just a cop out.

Says the group trying to force their desires about bodily autonomy onto other people's lives.

 

[RileyG]

Says the group trying to force their desires about bodily autonomy onto other people's lives.

I'm not trying to force anything, only protecting the most innocent.

Nice try, though.

Saying abortion is related to bodily autonomy is just a cop out.

 

[RileyG]

Yep, exactly, even though parents made a decision when they decided to have sex. It's almost as if that decision doesn't automatically sign them up for other obligations that outside observers want to force onto them.

Nope! They made their decision to have sex and consequences follow afterwards.

 

[RileyG]

Assertions are not evidence, even when they're repeated.

What they do look like is a way to avoid addressing the obvious special pleading in the posts I'm referencing.

It kills the unborn child. That's a fact.

I already addressed the issue. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean I didn't address it.

 

[RileyG]

I'll worry about it when posts can actually identify a case in which I do so.

Yeah, you went off topic and complained about "health care."

 

[KCfromNC]

I'm not trying to force anything, only protecting the most innocent.

What exactly is your proposal to do this?