Abortion

[Electric Sceptic]

He is clearly stating there is a difference between the two, hense the injected choice.

Just as I stated that there is a difference between the two. In short, Eisenhower and I agree on that issue.

 

[Seeking...]

The complete acceptance of responsability towards God for the gifts He gave us.

I accept the gifts and I am thankful to God. I am responsible to myself and others in my life. God hasn't told me he has a problem with that.

 

[Electric Sceptic]

Lots and lots of pleas regarding abortion being a sin, with bible verses and claims that God says this or that to support it.

Guess what? That's irrelevant. America isn't a theocracy; you do not have the luxury of imposing your notion of what's 'sin' and what isn't on the rest of the country. I know you'd like to have that luxury, but you don't.

 

[]RiSeN[]

Your perception of God differs greatly from mine. I don't see God as a paternal figure. You also must have had a very different childhood from mine. Sometimes a child is the only one who knows what is best for himself, having a child doesn't imbue you with special and secret knowledge of everything you need to know in the world. Part of what damages parent-child relationships is that some parents have the arrogance to believe they intuitively know what is best for their child without ever discussing anything with them...

Then you dont believe God has any authority over you? Are you serving your God or is your God serving you? Your logic seemingly implies that an overall truth cannot exist simply because of the possibility of erroneous applications.

 

[]RiSeN[]

Lots and lots of pleas regarding abortion being a sin, with bible verses and claims that God says this or that to support it.

Guess what? That's irrelevant. America isn't a theocracy; you do not have the luxury of imposing your notion of what's 'sin' and what isn't on the rest of the country. I know you'd like to have that luxury, but you don't.

Theocracy or not, morality exists. Although im pretty sure what you believe to be 'morality' is in fact only socially advantageous behavior fueled by ego.

 

[Seeking...]

Then you dont believe God has any authority over you? Are you serving your God or is your God serving you? Your logic seemingly implies that an overall truth cannot exist simply because of the possibility of erroneous applications.

God has authority, but it is a moot point since it isn't really something He exercises. God doesn't require or request that He be "served". I don't believe God's true nature or intentions have been revealed to mankind through any religion - so an overall truth could exist, but isn't currently known.

 

[]RiSeN[]

God has authority, but it is a moot point since it isn't really something He exercises. God doesn't require or request that He be "served". I don't believe God's true nature or intentions have been revealed to mankind through any religion - so an overall truth could exist, but isn't currently known.

Does your God have a name? Why do you believe in God? What is the purpose of your God? To me he appears to only serve as peace of mind.

 

[jesusfreak3786]

I am done with this thread, I would just like to say before I go

If I was the President of the United States, or the Queen of England, someone with power, the first thing I would do is make abortion illigal, and the poeple who didn't like it could scream, and yell untill they're blue in the face, I really don't care. Someone has to stand up for those who can't stand up for themselves. Sianora.

 

[Electric Sceptic]

Theocracy or not, morality exists. Although im pretty sure what you believe to be 'morality' is in fact only socially advantageous behavior fueled by ego.

Of course, morality exists. And I'm pretty sure that what EVERYONE, you included, believe to be 'morality' is in fact only socially advantageous behavior fueled by ego.

 

[]RiSeN[]

Of course, morality exists. And I'm pretty sure that what EVERYONE, you included, believe to be 'morality' is in fact only socially advantageous behavior fueled by ego.

Could you elaborate on your definition of being a moral being?

 

[Electric Sceptic]

Could you elaborate on your definition of being a moral being?

Consult any dictionary.

 

[U R my Sonshine]

This is not a refutation of my argument. In fact, it tells me more about you not having a decent argument to make. Oh, and "selfish party"? Is a rape victim selfish?

It is a tired arguement. And this is why....only 2-5 percent of abortions preformed are for rape victims. Yet the pro-choicers KNOW this and continue to grasp this tired old, attempt to justify killing the baby. It isn't even a valid arguement because MOST women who have abortions have not been raped.

I am not even going to pass judgement on the actual women who get abortions, they have enough to deal with, they ususally end up regretting it any way. It is you "pro-choicers" encouraging them to do this and stripping them of all moral conscience by constantly battering into their minds your ideas of " a womans rights" at ever turn that is truly naseating.

 

[peepnklown]

I am done with this thread, I would just like to say before I go

If I was the President of the United States, or the Queen of England, someone with power, the first thing I would do is make abortion illigal, and the poeple who didn't like it could scream, and yell untill they're blue in the face, I really don't care. Someone has to stand up for those who can't stand up for themselves. Sianora.

You want dictatorship powers.

You are going to stand up for cells that cannot stand up for themselves?

 

[]RiSeN[]

Consult any dictionary.

I have and it says nothing of being moral with having to do with ones egocentricity.

 

[]RiSeN[]

You are going to stand up for cells that cannot stand up for themselves?

Alot of people do, thats why theres Viagra.

 

[Seeking...]

Does your God have a name? Why do you believe in God? What is the purpose of your God? To me he appears to only serve as peace of mind.

God is God - He is the creator of everything and if He has another name for Himself, I don't know it. I believe in God because everything in nature tells me He exists and I have had personal experience with Him moving in my life. I don't know that God has a purpose - if He does, I don't know it. For me, belief in God is logical - it isn't about peace of mind, He isn't sitting around waiting to save me or anyone else. There have been times I have been sure He was working in my life and there have been equally turbulent times when I did not. I imagine God serves His own purpose, and again, I don't know what that is.

 

[Cheli]

If I was the President of the United States, or the Queen of England, someone with power

The Queen of England is a figurehead and not involved in law making at any real level.

It is a tired arguement. And this is why....only 2-5 percent of abortions preformed are for rape victims.

The percentages are beside the point. If only one rape ever resulted in pregnancy, that women should still have the right to an abortion.

I am not even going to pass judgement on the actual women who get abortions, they have enough to deal with, they ususally end up regretting it any way.

Can you provide a statistic to back this up, please? How many or what percentage of women who have aborted an embryo conceived through rape regret their choice?

It is you "pro-choicers" encouraging them to do this and stripping them of all moral conscience by constantly battering into their minds your ideas of " a womans rights" at ever turn that is truly naseating.

1) Pro-choicers do not encourage women to get abortions. We merely support their right to. The choice is their's to make. I will support the woman who continues the pregnancy just as much as I will support the one who chooses to abort.
2)Pro-choicers have a moral conscience. Just because our morals aren't identical to yours does not mean that they are any less moral. At least we consider the woman and don't want to strip her of her rights.
3)What is truly nauseating is forcing a woman to do something with her body that she feels is a violation. Those who would force a rape victim to continue with a pregnancy are only one step behind the rapist.

 

[WhatIsTruth]

It is a tired arguement. And this is why....only 2-5 percent of abortions preformed are for rape victims. Yet the pro-choicers KNOW this and continue to grasp this tired old, attempt to justify killing the baby. It isn't even a valid arguement because MOST women who have abortions have not been raped.

I am not even going to pass judgement on the actual women who get abortions, they have enough to deal with, they ususally end up regretting it any way. It is you "pro-choicers" encouraging them to do this and stripping them of all moral conscience by constantly battering into their minds your ideas of " a womans rights" at ever turn that is truly naseating.

What's nauseating is your condescending attitude. What's nauseating is what you people will do in the "pro-life" movement to make sure your "morals" are followed. Not to mention your little quip a few posts back. Its funny you call yourself a "lady"

As other people have said would you like to supply PROOF, and figures of all your assumptions.

You are biologically a woman are you not? Do you not think women should have the right to do as they want with their own bodies. (well obviously for some backward reason you don't) Why should other people's "morals" be the law? Morals are relative and seperate from religion. Please try to remember that.

 

[]RiSeN[]

God is God - He is the creator of everything and if He has another name for Himself, I don't know it..

How can you have a close relationship with someone who's name you dont know? Would one be justified in speaking of someones personnality and how well they know it if they didnt know the name of that person?

I believe in God because everything in nature tells me He exists and I have had personal experience with Him moving in my life. I don't know that God has a purpose - if He does, I don't know it.

So its a logical explanation satisfactory to you in explaining the natural world. How does this not offer peace of mind?

For me, belief in God is logical - it isn't about peace of mind, He isn't sitting around waiting to save me or anyone else.

Logic is how you came to the answer. But wasnt the reason why you answered your own question was for peace of mind?

There have been times I have been sure He was working in my life and there have been equally turbulent times when I did not. I imagine God serves His own purpose, and again, I don't know what that is.

"One night a man had a dream. He dreamed he was walking along the beach with the Lord. Across the sky flashed scenes from his life. For each scene,he noticed two sets of footprints in the sand; one belonged to him, and the other to the Lord.


When the last scene of his life flashed before him, he looked back at the footprints in the sand. He noticed that many times along the path of his life there was only one set of foot - prints. He also noticed that it happened at the very lowest and saddest times in his life.

This really bothered him and he questioned the Lord about it. "Lord, you said that once I decided to follow you, you'd walk with me all the way. But I have noticed that during the most troublesome times in my life, there is only one set of footprints. I don't understand why when I needed you most you would leave me." The Lord replied, "My precious, precious child, I love you and would never leave you. During your times of trial and suffering, when you see only one set of footprints, it was then that I carried you."

(This poem always bring tears to my eyes as i take it quite personaly.)

So to recap, you are not aware of Gods name, you 'imagine' He has a plan, and you dont know of His personnality? It still sounds like your stepping upto the plate simply because your on a baseball field so therefor its logical that you should, yet havent bothered to learn about baseball.

 

[Fledge]

That is difficult. One could look at it the way you have implied Fledge. Another might be to look at is as the parents being hurt, and requiring justice for their loss, as opposed to the fetus being considered as valuable as someone who has been born.

The tip-off to me here is the a judge requiring the offender to pay the parents money, as opposed to the offender being put to death as one would expect the penalty to be for killing a human who has been born.

I'm not sure what the whole "mischief" issue is. Maybe that is where an offender continues to hurt the mother? In which case he must be hurt in the way he has hurt the mother?

That could be it, but I think another way of looking at it gets rid of the trouble of the word "mischief". I'll outline it, and see whether you think it's even remotely logical.

I looked up the bit about the "fruit depart" in an online concordance, and it was pretty clear that it means the child leaving the womb. Not necessarily death, simply the (premature) birth of the child. Given that, I think it would make some sense for there to be a fine, as a birth of that sort would be done without benefit of a mid-wife, adding another element of risk to an already dangerous proposition. Then, the whole "mischief" bit could be injury to the child that resulted from being born too early. If the child survives with no damage, then there would be no reason to punish the offender any further. However, if the child is maimed/killed/disabled in some way, then the offender was to receive the same injury that he inflicted.

Anyway, let me know what you think. I don't have access to the proper resources to look this up, but I will if I get the chance.