I said there was nothing specifically wrong with that. It's the effects of that, taken by the immoral, which are often negatives.
It's not a villification of single mothers. It's a villification of the ethically immoral.
The logic. This is the starting point of life : the fetus is alive ,he grows, he moves ... This is even known in medecine
Think about it. Where does the life begin? When is he alive ? When does he begin to grow as doctors say? It is from the 1st second he's created, the fact that he's alive is enough.That's nice for you, but I don't believe that. What does that have to do with my legal rights?
Think about it. Where does the life begin? When is he alive ? When does he begin to grow as doctors say? It is from the 1st second he's created, the facts that he's alive is enough.
And what does your legal rights have to do with killing a person?! This isn't a right. Your rights are to not become pregnant before . But once you carry a person , it isn't your right anymore, it's his right to live
No. You're forgetting that this is what you & the law are defining , but it isn't necessarily the truth.The legal definition of a person is someone who has been born. You keep forgetting that.
No. You're forgetting that this is what you & the law are defining , but it isn't necessarily the truth.
& the legal definition should come from moral facts & not the opposite, you can't think as the law says: the law is the result of thinking. Law isn't the originThe legal definition of a person is someone who has been born. You keep forgetting that.
Apparently not. The conservatives think that spending 1% of the defense budget helping mothers will somehow bankrupt the country. I kid you not.
Yes. Which means legal rights shouldn't be considered in such case, because we all know law doesn't & can't affect every single thing in this life, law isn't the base of the life , it is the result of the need for common regulations & to organize most of the encountered casesIf we are talking about legal rights, then we must also use the legal definition of what a person is. The legal definition requires a live birth.
But it's not. I don't believe it's enough. An embryo is alive, yes, obviously. I'm still pro-choice.Think about it. Where does the life begin? When is he alive ? When does he begin to grow as doctors say? It is from the 1st second he's created, the fact that he's alive is enough.
Do you really think that WIC is going to bankrupt the country? Seriously?
Sorry, but you just demonstrated that you can't be taken seriously.
No, the nature of the conflict is a matter of life and death, not a matter of debating skills. In the short term, you win: we have abortion on demand. In the long run, you die, and then you discover you're still alive, and judged by a set of standards that are fixed by the judge, and not debatable with him. Your standard results in the infliction of death and is horrendously evil. So, you "win" the debate with another set of men - by main force - and because you "won" and got your way, you lose everything.
This is why there cannot really be a debate. You're arguing with gravity. Some things are so. God is one of them, he has an opinion, and he doesn't debate it with anybody. In the long run you are much better off learning what that opinion is and conforming yourself to it, because the final exam is graded on His criteria, not yours, and it's pass/fail.
He already told the world the right answer on this subject: don't kill babies. You're arguing for death - the death of babies here, and your own death on the other side. It's dumb and you should stop it. You don't "win" anything when you shout down the right side in a discussion of morality. You lose bigger.
Long term politically, the oligarchic right and the vote-pandering left have decided to replace the imploding US white population with cheap Hispanic labor and voters. Contraception and abortion opened up a gaping demographic hole in the white population, and rather than pay for scarcer labor, the Right has successfully agitated for importing vast numbers of Latinos to fill the labor gap very cheaply. The Democrat Left has connived at the same thing for different reasons: Hispanics are poor and support social welfare, and therefore vote Democrat in heavy numbers.
If you look at Latin America, you discover that the only nation down there that has abortion on demand is Communist Cuba. Latin America is Catholic, and all Latin nations except Cuba are FAR more restrictive of abortion than America is.
So, in the long run, the Democrats "win", in the sense that they will have imported a new electorate. But los Estados Unidos Norte Americanos will have far more restrictive abortion laws than the current USA, because Latinos outlaw abortion in all of their countries and do not like the practice.
So, in the long run, I win. I win because the compromise I am willing to make: a very heavily taxed social welfare state to PAY FOR those 2 million additional, currently aborted, children per year, half of them of the very poor, is what we are headed towards with a Latino Democrat party that, like Latin culture, is likely to be socially conservative and fiscally liberal.
I am happy to trade money and empire to preserve life. That's Catholic. And the American future is Catholic, thanks to immigration.
So in the long long run, when facing God, when it comes to the matter of life, I win and you lose. And in the long run politically, thanks to immigration trends, I win temporally as well. The fact that you and your ilk manage to shout me down in a "debate" is of no consequences. The borders are open and you are importing millions of me's. And God is and has said what I told you.
So you "win" like Eve "won". You grabbed the forbidden fruit and ate it. It tasted good, for a moment. That moment didn't last. Reality closed in, and with it, the inevitable calamity that comes from doing evil. Supporting abortion is doing evil. You should learn something from our grandmother and not emulate her.
Managed to find that scripture where God says not to abort yet? Ipsie dixit just lacks... flavor somehow.
Sorry, my post had a typo.
What scripture specifically states that ensoulment takes place at conception?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?