If you're a Christian and pro-choice, you're on the wrong side of the issue.

[SteveB28]

It's amazing that so many people have no problem with this.

I'll never cease to be amazed by how many people will be enraged when a lion (with a human name) is killed, or if they hear that the whales are being hunted, or glaciers are melting....but when children are sucked piece-by-piece out of their mother's womb and mailed in boxes as spare parts, well, they think that's ok.

I guess this is what enlightened, evolved, tolerant, liberal humans have become in 2015. We really need to pray, brother!

What should "amaze" you is the incoherence of your argument! What do endangered species and climate change have to do with choosing to terminate a pregnancy!?

Further, do you raise your voice when deceased person's organs are used as "spare parts"?

 

[bhsmte]

Right, I consider natural life to be reasonably good and I consider anything that causes death to be reasonably bad. Death being natural is still in direct conflict with life which is also natural.

So what's your point?

The same point many have pointed out to you; you contradict yourself and don't make a lot of sense.

 

[appleofhiseye]

If you're a Christian,

This is the caveat. Of course, Christians believe all children are gifts from God! And as such, should be embraced and cherished.
No matter when or how conceived.
Is anyone claiming a Christian faith and advocating abortion rights? Why?

 

[SteveB28]

Right, I consider natural life to be reasonably good and I consider anything that causes death to be reasonably bad. Death being natural is still in direct conflict with life which is also natural.

So what's your point?

I have used this example before, but do you consider the worm which burrows into the eyeballs of babies and then eats them from the inside out to be "reasonably good"?

 

[SteveB28]

If you're a Christian,

This is the caveat. Of course, Christians believe all children are gifts from God! And as such, should be embraced and cherished.
No matter when or how conceived.
Is anyone claiming a Christian faith and advocating abortion rights? Why?

And you are completely at liberty to hold those beliefs.

Just refrain from attempting to force them onto others!

 

[appleofhiseye]

Thanks. Do you (steve) think that if I were a health care provider I could withhold abortion services to
patients on the ground of my belief? Or should your beliefs be forced onto me?

 

[Chriliman]

If you're a Christian,

This is the caveat. Of course, Christians believe all children are gifts from God! And as such, should be embraced and cherished.
No matter when or how conceived.
Is anyone claiming a Christian faith and advocating abortion rights? Why?

The only fuzzy area for me is when the pregnancy is threatening to kill the woman. She should have the right to self defense.

In the case of rape I think the best outcome is to be compassionate towards the woman because it would be understandable if she wanted to do an early abortion.

What do you think regarding these situations?

 

[SteveB28]

Thanks. Do you (steve) think that if I were a health care provider I could withhold abortion services to
patients on the ground of my belief? Or should your beliefs be forced onto me?

"Health care provider" is too vague, so let me narrow it down for you.

If you are engaged in a profession that includes the provision of certain health services, then I think it is reasonable to expect you to do your job!

If some of the tenets of the job offend your personal philosophy, then I think you have a couple of choices:

Offend your philosophy and do the job you agreed to do, or get out and find a new line of work!

 

[SteveB28]

The only fuzzy area for me is when the pregnancy is threatening to kill the woman. She should have the right to self defense.

In the case of rape I think the best outcome is to be compassionate towards the woman because it would be understandable if she wanted to do an early abortion.

What do you think regarding these situations?

Ah, so it would seem that, like most reasonable people, you don't view this as a black-and-white issue? That there is a continuum of opinion and that people, therefore, should be permitted the liberty of choosing for themselves where they stand on that continuum!

 

[Chriliman]

Ah, so it would seem that, like most reasonable people, you don't view this as a black-and-white issue? That there is a continuum of opinion and that people, therefore, should be permitted the liberty of choosing for themselves where they stand on that continuum!

I think in every individual situation there can be a positive outcome and that positive outcome should never involve death if at all possible.

 

[SteveB28]

I think in every individual situation there can be a positive outcome and that positive outcome should never involve death if at all possible.

You involve yourself in situations regularly wherein death is the outcome. If you eat meat, if you hunt, if you are in favour of capital punishment, if you agree with not prolonging the life of someone suffering mightily from a terminal illness, then the 'positive outcome' for you in each of these cases is death. All of us agree to the death of someone/thing at times as being 'good'.

 

[Chriliman]

You involve yourself in situations regularly wherein death is the outcome. If you eat meat, if you hunt, if you are in favour of capital punishment, if you agree with not prolonging the life of someone suffering mightily from a terminal illness, then the 'positive outcome' for you in each of these cases is death. All of us agree to the death of someone/thing at times as being 'good'.

Death for myself will be good because I know what's waiting for me, but the wrongful death of an innocent human being is never good...never!

That's not to say it won't serve a greater purpose that's beyond our understanding.

 

[SteveB28]

Death for myself will be good because I know what's waiting for me, but the wrongful death of an innocent human being is never good...never!

That's not to say it won't serve a greater purpose that's beyond our understanding.

And you have completely ignored my point. You claim that a "positive outcome" would not involve death. I outline at least four situations in which death would be part of a positive outcome. You choose to deflect from that, don't you?

 

[KWCrazy]

How do you possibly arrive at that, from what he said?

I stated a biological truth. Roughly 50% of all pregnancies spontaneously abort. Justifying infanticide because many babies do not make it to term is demented.
[/quote]Are we not entitled to intervene with "natural consequences"?[/QUOTE]
By intervening you are talking about ending a life that would otherwise be a healthy baby.

 

[civilwarbuff]

And you are completely at liberty to hold those beliefs.

Just refrain from attempting to force them onto others!

He is talking to Christians...you are an atheist...why bother to comment? Unless, of course, it strikes to your heart?

 

[pat34lee]

You involve yourself in situations regularly wherein death is the outcome. If you eat meat, if you hunt, if you are in favour of capital punishment, if you agree with not prolonging the life of someone suffering mightily from a terminal illness, then the 'positive outcome' for you in each of these cases is death. All of us agree to the death of someone/thing at times as being 'good'.

Wrong. Death of people is never the preferred outcome for any rational person, though at times it is necessary, as in capital crimes. What if someone could heal that terminal illness?

Animal death is another matter, but cruelty should never be condoned for any living creature.

 

[SteveB28]

I would agree, but some people are in favour of capital punishment as the preferred outcome for some crimes. For them, death is the positive outcome in those cases.

What if someone could heal that terminal illness?

We are talking here about people suffering mightily in the last days of their lives and who have made the decision that a speedier death is preferable. For those people, in those situations, death is a positive outcome.

Animal death is another matter, but cruelty should never be condoned for any living creature.

No one mentioned cruelty.

 

[Chriliman]

And you have completely ignored my point. You claim that a "positive outcome" would not involve death. I outline at least four situations in which death would be part of a positive outcome. You choose to deflect from that, don't you?

Im saying if the outcome involes the death of an innocent human then it's a negative outcome. This is what I believe. Are saying I can't hold this belief because you believe everyone should be able to believe what they want about abortion?

So you believe Everyone can believe what they want about abortion except the belief that it's immoral in all situations because it involves intentionally allowing innocent human life to die. Is this your stance on the issue?

 

[Chriliman]

Thats what this question comes down to. What you believe.
Good people believe differently, at least about early pregnancy.

Either human life begins at conception or it doesn't begin until you're fully born. If it doesn't begin until your fully out of the birth canal then this would mean it's moral to abort a baby while it's coming out of the birth canal. Would you find that to be moral? If not then how are you going to determine when human life becomes human life?

 

[bhsmte]

Sure. It's just that intentionally allowing innocent human life to die is wrong and this should be a moral belief that everyone should hold. And I believe human life begins at conception, otherwise judging when it becomes human life is impossible to definitively determine.

The country is not held to, what you believe.

The quicker you figure that out, the better off you will be.