Pro-Abortion?

[brightmorningstar]

SonofTheWest,

Actually no....it doesn't. You just have to understand what the word "choice" means.

Well your definition was good, "choice" involves decisions between multiple items, outcomes,etc. So its ‘human being’ that needs the definition.​

It wasn't an analogy. It was pointing out what the word choice entails in the situation. Sorry if that is lost on you. Also your question is so monumentally vague it's nonsensical.

So choice isn’t the issue then, choice to allow someone to paedophilia and choice to allow someone to abort.

 

[Catherineanne]

Catherineanne,
Sorry, but that is my position on your views, wanting to give women the choice to kill their own baby is in my view pro-abortion because it allows it by choice.

You are entitled to think what you like, however misinformed. You clearly still do not grasp the meaning of 'choice'.

You are not entitled to slander me by saying I am pro abortion, because I certainly am not.

　
Sure, it was the legality I was referring to.

No, I dont go with that or we could also not that we cant legislate child abuse away either.
If we educate people and provide abortion in cases where life was threatened.
Remember, in back street abortions where the mother may be in danger, the unborn baby is still being killed.

I had not forgotten. In illicit abortions the chances are very high that both the mother and the unborn child will die. That is not an option I will ever be in favour of.

Make no mistake; there is licit abortion and there is illicit abortion. There is no such thing as a country without abortion, and this side of eternity, there never will be. Either the young girls travel abroad, or they find some unscrupulous person to carry out the termination, and risk their own lives in the process.

Given the choice between two evils, choosing the lesser of the two becomes the morally right thing to do. Therefore I choose to place young women under the protection of the law, rather than leaving them outside it.

 

[brightmorningstar]

CatherineAnne,

You are not entitled to slander me by saying I am pro abortion, because I certainly am not.

The slander may be uniquely your problem, my remark was that your views are to me pro-abortion by approving of its possibility by choice. I did not actually say you were pro-abortion or felt pro-abortion.

In illicit abortions the chances are very high that both the mother and the unborn child will die. That is not an option I will ever be in favour of.

So in any abortion the unborn child is the target of elimination, I don’t think it makes any difference whether people think its illicit or not.

Make no mistake; there is licit abortion and there is illicit abortion.

Make no mistake there is no such thing as licit or illicit abortion,, until you can see the position of the unborn I see no reason why I should see the position of the mother. Fair?

 

[Catherineanne]

Make no mistake there is no such thing as licit or illicit abortion,, until you can see the position of the unborn I see no reason why I should see the position of the mother. Fair?

Not at all. You can't bend reality to this extent and then expect other people to share your world view, however emotive your language.

Licit means (in this context) legal, illicit means illegal. As long as abortion is legal then it is licit, whether or not it is morally acceptable to you, me or anyone else. That is simply a fact.

Here is a parallel. I am very strongly anti the death penalty. I can accept that in some states of the US capital punishment is licit, even though to me it is morally repugnant (as indeed is abortion, except in some few cases, imo). Because it is legal I cannot call such execution murder, however much I dislike it, because murder entails unlawful killing, and killing within the law cannot be unlawful.

The question then is, given that there exists such lawful killing in the US, and until the US becomes a shade more civilised in this matter, anyone who is opposed to capital punishment must campaign, alongside abolition, to ensure that if and when it happens it is carried out properly, and within appropriate perameters, and not by lynchmobs hanging people from a tree.

To campaign for appropriate parameters and to accept that such executions happen is not the same thing as wanting them to happen, or even approving of them when they do. Accepting that executions happen and wanting them to be carried out properly and within the law is not being pro-execution. It is a matter of legality, and, as I already said, of seeking the lesser evil.

Personally I see no reason to get all worked up about unborn babies, and pretty well disregard those who are already here and struggling. There are plenty of starving and dying children around; who campaigns for them? There are plenty of disadvantaged and sick people without an advocate, and who we never give a passing thought to. Defending sweet little babies is always easier, isn't it? But what about when those babies grow up, and shoplift, or use drugs and end up in prison. Who cares about them then?

I do hope that helps.

 

[chris4243]

Chris4243,
Not quite, the only thing in discussion here is abortion, in one option it isnt supproted and in the other it may be.

Isn't carrying the pregnancy to term also an option?

 

[brightmorningstar]

CatherineAnne,

Not at all. You can't bend reality to this extent and then expect other people to share your world view, however emotive your language.

There is no bending of reality in my argument, the unborn will be aborted in any abortion, so as far as the unborn is concerned it makes no difference whether its considered licit or illicit.

Licit means (in this context) legal, illicit means illegal. As long as abortion is legal then it is licit, whether or not it is morally acceptable to you, me or anyone else. That is simply a fact.

Ok but in some countries there is only illicit.

Ok I am also against the death penalty, and I can accept what you say about it not being murder, but of course the death penalty is administered as punishment for a crime, the unborn baby has never committed any crimes. Furthermore you refer to the US, not all mothers and unborn babies are in the US, what is lawful in the US doesn’t not apply elsewhere.

Personally I see no reason to get all worked up about unborn babies, and pretty well disregard those who are already here and struggling.

Ok, but that’s just your view, I see no reason to get all worked up about those already here and struggling when they are alive and the unborn baby is going to be killed, doesn’t seem any point; if there is going to be any concern then it must be both.

There are plenty of starving and dying children around; who campaigns for them?

Good point, I have a regular voluntary direct debit to support aid charities but not to abortion agencies.

There are plenty of disadvantaged and sick people without an advocate, and who we never give a passing thought to.

I have worked with the homeless and given financial support, I think you need to speak for yourself.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Chris4243,

Isn't carrying the pregnancy to term also an option?

Isnt taht abortion or not? hello?
No its not an option.

 

[visionary]

You rights end where another's life begins.

 

[cordellia]

Isn't carrying the pregnancy to term also an option?

It is, and was discussed in the begining of this thread, which, incidentally, was about whether or not pro-choice people are pro-abortion.

Chris4243,
Isnt taht abortion or not? hello?
No its not an option.

Carrying the pregnancy to term isn't abortion and it is an option.

 

[chris4243]

You rights end where another's life begins.

Consistency check: would you support the right of a pregnant woman to take a pill that would remove her side of the placenta but not otherwise affect the fetus? Do the fetus' rights end where its mother's body begins?

 

[brightmorningstar]

where its mother's body begins?

The mother hs conceived, what has happened was her choice. Rights to you seems to be about expecting others will have to accept the way you look at things.

 

[Aeneas]

You rights end where another's life begins.

In this case, you should be just fine with abortifascient drugs that cause termination of pregnancy through menstruation. After all, the uterine lining is indisputably the woman's body.

 

[Aeneas]

The mother hs conceived, what has happened was her choice.

...Except when it isn't, which is why abortion exists.

Guess what is happening in this scene:

But I'm sure the babies she had after this scene occurred were "her choice". Any scholar of Homer would totally agree with you.

 

[If Not For Grace]

Exactly how does supporting the right of choice make one "Pro-Abortion"?

Let me be a bumper sticker: because it's a Baby; not a Choice..

& if it's not a baby then you are not pregnant....

 

[Aeneas]

Let me be a bumper sticker: because it's a Baby; not a Choice..

& if it's not a baby then you are not pregnant....

Then nobody should have a problem with women terminating the growth in their uterus at their leisure.

Because those of us who are pro-choice don't really necessarily think it is a baby, you see, so its nice that we're all on the same page now.

 

[brightmorningstar]

.Except when it isn't, which is why abortion exists.

No, that’s not pro-choice which is what we are talking about.

 

[Aeneas]

No, that’s not pro-choice which is what we are talking about.

Yes, rape would generally be considered antithetical to the spirit of choice for women. Anyways, now that'd we're agreed that you were wrong to say that pregnancy results from a woman making a choice every time lol...

 

[brightmorningstar]

Yes, rape would generally be considered antithetical to the spirit of choice for women.

So if a woman can choose to kill her own baby why are you so against a spirit of choice for men to rape a woman?
Surely you think killing is at least as bad as rape?

Anyways, now that'd we're agreed that you were wrong to say that pregnancy results from a woman making a choice every time lol...

So let me know when you are prepared to listen to the arguments being put.

 

[Aeneas]

So if a woman can choose to kill her own baby why are you so against a spirit of choice for men to rape a woman?
Surely you think killing is at least as bad as rape?

Think about that for five minutes, and let me know if you really still don't see the logical absurdity in your equivocation.

 

[tyronem]

In several threads on this Forum those of us who identify ourselves as being "Pro-Choice" have been accused of in fact being "Pro-Abortion". This term has even been applied to those who have clearly said that while they believe that the final choice should rest with the pregnant women--which could include the choice to carry the fetus to term--they themselves would never have an abortion unless their life or health were at risk or they were a victim of rape or incest.

Exactly how does supporting the right of choice make one "Pro-Abortion"?

If I tell someone that I support their right to help choose the next president of the US, does that make me "Pro-Obama" since that could be their potential choice, or am I simply "Pro-Republican Democracy"?

If I tell someone that I support their right to decide what they want for dinner, does that make me "Pro-Obesity" since their choice could include a fast-food burger and fries?

So, how can some justify the use of the term "Pro-Abortion" to describe those who are not in any way advocating abortion?

Please keep the discussion civil. No name calling or I will ask the mods to close the thread.

Are you going to stand for Christ or against Him?