Right To Life

[InHisSpirit]

ya'll know this can be argued for the rest of days...all argements like these result in anger, fustration, and animosity. Why continue? What's the point?

 

[charmtrap]

ya'll know this can be argued for the rest of days...all argements like these result in anger, fustration, and animosity. Why continue? What's the point?

Better than working.

 

[butterfoot]

no I'd rather err on the side of liberty for the mother as her rights are worth more in my eyes.

That is the convoluted ideas that the distored thinkers like you have. To you it is more important that a woman have fun than to think about the life someone has created. You are totally warped and SICK.


-cw

 

[Carri20]

SIMPLE SOLUTION (but I know this won't stop the pro-choice bickering)

1) WOMAN HAD SEX WILLINGLY AND BECAME PREGNANT: She purposefully committed an act that she knew might bring about a child and has no business ending that child's life. Her options include parenting and adoption.

2) WOMAN WAS RAPED AGAINST HER WILL AND BECAME PREGNANT: She was wronged and sinned against but has no business ending the child's life. Things don't always go as planned and she is now responsible for the life inside her regardless of the circumstances. Her options include parenting and adoption.

3) WOMAN BECOMES PREGNANT AND UNBORN CHILD IS DISABLED OR ILL IN SOME WAY: Again, things don't always go as planned and she is now responsible for the life inside her. She has no business ending that child's life. Her options include parenting and adoption.


A common misconception is that the Christian pro-life side only considers the wellbeing of the child while ignoring the wellbeing of the mother. This is not true. The mother is equally as important as the child in the eyes of God and God's people. A well-researched person knows that the physical and emotional consequences of abortion are generally far more severe than those of parenting or adoption, and any Christian should know that to kill a child--born or unborn--is to commit murder.

If you are unexpectedly pregnant and have questions, please feel free to come to me. I've been there and I know the options inside and out. I've also experienced much of the same fears and concerns that you're probably having. Anyway, I'm always open to talk. =)

 

[Cassandra]

On Abortion: I think the option should be available, but I personally do not agree with abortion as a means of birth control.

On the Death Penalty: I do not think the [United States] government or any government should be allowed to terminate its people. On the other hand, [we] are paying to keep them jailed for life. And the possibility and truth that many innocent people have been put to death makes you think.

 

[butterfoot]

ya'll know this can be argued for the rest of days...all argements like these result in anger, fustration, and animosity. Why continue? What's the point?

Because this is the way we get things changed for the better or sometimes worse. To argue in favor of what we believe to make the world a better place.


-cw

 

[Cassandra]

SIMPLE SOLUTION (but I know this won't stop the pro-choice bickering)

1) WOMAN HAD SEX WILLINGLY AND BECAME PREGNANT: She purposefully committed an act that she knew might bring about a child and has no business ending that child's life. Her options include parenting and adoption.

That would be nice. I don't like the idea of "forcing" a woman to carry a child to term. I think, instead, the alternatives should be looked on in a better light. I'd hate to think anyone gets an abortion just because they want to "kill their unborn child".

2) WOMAN WAS RAPED AGAINST HER WILL AND BECAME PREGNANT: She was wronged and sinned against but has no business ending the child's life. Things don't always go as planned and she is now responsible for the life inside her regardless of the circumstances. Her options include parenting and adoption.

Have you ever been the victim of rape? What you are asking is easier said than done.

3) WOMAN BECOMES PREGNANT AND UNBORN CHILD IS DISABLED OR ILL IN SOME WAY: Again, things don't always go as planned and she is now responsible for the life inside her. She has no business ending that child's life. Her options include parenting and adoption.

I agree. Unless the mother/child/both is beyond saving. There are cases when abortion is necessary (such as ectopic pregancies, child developing without a brain, etc...). Sad, but true.

If you are unexpectedly pregnant and have questions, please feel free to come to me. I've been there and I know the options inside and out. I've also experienced much of the same fears and concerns that you're probably having. Anyway, I'm always open to talk. =)

There's the trouble. Most people will just say "YOU'RE A ROTTEN BABY KILLER!" and offer no help. If more people were like you, there wouldn't be a need for convenience abortions. A church near my home has a big sign that says basically the same thing (though in fewer words).

 

[charmtrap]

SIMPLE SOLUTION (but I know this won't stop the pro-choice bickering)

Funny how all of your situations end up with the same options, parenting or adoption. I think you forgot one, though...abortion, which is legal, as I'm sure you know.

A common misconception is that the Christian pro-life side only considers the wellbeing of the child while ignoring the wellbeing of the mother.

I think a more common perception is that pro-lifers are concerned with the embryo right up until the moment of birth, and then their attitude changes to "don't raise my taxes to pay for it."

A well-researched person knows that the physical and emotional consequences of abortion are generally far more severe than those of parenting or adoption,

Presumably you have a cite for this claim?

 

[Green Man]

ok, so you'd like to expand the mandate of the government from not only protecting society but exacting revenge for those that are wronged?
I'd rather have a government without emotion that rules using only reason and logic. And if you think your idea serves a purpose other then revenge... you might want to look to how effective the death penalty is as a deterrent for crime.

It's called the death penalty for a reason.It's not suppossed to be a deterrent.If convicted killers were executed in the same manner as their victims they just might think twice before they do it.If not,they get what they deserve.

 

[InHisSpirit]

Because this is the way we get things changed for the better or sometimes worse. To argue in favor of what we believe to make the world a better place.

i don't see anything changing or getting better. I see non-believers hating christians and God more. i see christians sounding like the very people the non-believers are citing as those who turn them off to Jesus.
Show me the good here.

 

[:æ:]

Regardless if the child is viable and will live outside the woom the baby will be if left in its natural place until it is time to be born.

That's not entirely true. Anencephalic babies often do not, for example.

If the woman decided to take the chance and have sex she has to know what the possibilities are.

So what? I know that if I invite a stranger into my home, it is possible he may steal my things or hurt me, but that I am aware of those possiblities does not make it MY fault if he does steal my things. He has no right to do that, despite my invitation onto the premises. I know that if I hired an employee to manange my finances, it is possible he will embezzle some money from me, but its not my fault if he does. He is still accountable.

Your argument doesn't withstand scrutiny because it is inconsistent with ordinary legal principles. The mother does not owe any duty to the fetus, because her actions only embettered its condition. If she decides that she no longer wishes to have her body occupied and injected with imbalancing hormones, she may decided to terminate that arrangement, because no person, born or unborn, has the right to occupy another person's body, forcefully extract nutrients from their body, and forcefully inject their bloodstream with waste and hormones without that person's consent.

:æ:

 

[Green Man]

If she decides that she no longer wishes to have her body occupied and injected with imbalancing hormones, she may decided to terminate that arrangement, because no person, born or unborn, has the right to occupy another person's body, forcefully extract nutrients from their body, and forcefully inject their bloodstream with waste and hormones without that person's consent.

And how pray tell would you go about obtaining that consent.This is not two people engaged in combat here.

 

[Carri20]

Have you ever been the victim of rape? What you are asking is easier said than done.

As a matter of fact I have, and you're right that it's easier said than done. Doing the right thing often is difficult, but that does not excuse you from the responsibility of doing it.

If you need an easy way out, why not give the situation to God and let him handle it so you don't have to? That's just as easily said as done.

 

[flicka]

Have you ever been the victim of rape? What you are asking is easier said than done.

Uh-oh...

Although I agree with you post above I always avoid asking leading questions like this because the answer is often "yes". Whether true or not there seems to be an unusually high number of people posting on this board who claim to have experienced horrible and/or miraculous things which they feel gives them liberty to speak with authority. Or make their point while appealing to emotion instead of providing facts. I'm not saying people lie but misrepresentation on forums is pretty common and anonymous personal testimony adds nothing to most debates.

EDIT: DAMN! TOO LATE! ::am i the only one who saw that coming?::

 

[butterfoot]

That's not entirely true. Anencephalic babies often do not, for example.


So what? I know that if I invite a stranger into my home, it is possible he may steal my things or hurt me, but that I am aware of those possiblities does not make it MY fault if he does steal my things. He has no right to do that, despite my invitation onto the premises. I know that if I hired an employee to manange my finances, it is possible he will embezzle some money from me, but its not my fault if he does. He is still accountable.

Your arguement cannot compare with abortion. By your comparisons you are saying that its the fetus's fault that it is in the predicament it is in.

Your argument doesn't withstand scrutiny because it is inconsistent with ordinary legal principles. The mother does not owe any duty to the fetus, because her actions only embettered its condition. If she decides that she no longer wishes to have her body occupied and injected with imbalancing hormones, she may decided to terminate that arrangement, because no person, born or unborn, has the right to occupy another person's body, forcefully extract nutrients from their body, and forcefully inject their bloodstream with waste and hormones without that person's consent.

:æ:

The mother does owe a duty to the fetus. It didn't get their by itself.


-cw

 

[Carri20]

Lol good timing, flicka...

Having experienced certain things doesn't give anyone authority, but it does prove that those things are survivable. A lot of girls who get pregnant unexpectedly for whatever reason tend to think of it as a life-wrecking event rather than a life-changing one that could actually turn out positively. Remember that God can take any situation and use it for good, if only we hand it over to him.

 

[Cassandra]

Uh-oh...

Although I agree with you post above I always avoid asking leading questions like this because the answer is often "yes". Whether true or not there seems to be an unusually high number of people posting on this board who claim to have experienced horrible and/or miraculous things which they feel gives them liberty to speak with authority. Or make their point while appealing to emotion instead of providing facts. I'm not saying people lie but misrepresentation on forums is pretty common and anonymous personal testimony adds nothing to most debates.

EDIT: DAMN! TOO LATE! ::am i the only one who say that coming?::

It was a sincere question. *shrugs*. But I see your point.

 

[charmtrap]

The mother does owe a duty to the fetus. It didn't get their by itself.

So it's just an a priori assumption that the fetus is a person who can hold rights and to whom we can owe duties? Is there a good argument for why this is so?

 

[Cassandra]

Lol good timing, flicka...

Having experienced certain things doesn't give anyone authority, but it does prove that those things are survivable. A lot of girls who get pregnant unexpectedly for whatever reason tend to think of it as a life-wrecking event rather than a life-changing one that could actually turn out positively. Remember that God can take any situation and use it for good, if only we hand it over to him.

You seem to be offering a rose-tinted view of the situation, though. Even the most positive of people experience conflict.

 

[Carri20]

no person, born or unborn, has the right to occupy another person's body, forcefully extract nutrients from their body, and forcefully inject their bloodstream with waste and hormones without that person's consent.

Do you honestly feel that threatened by a 6-pound, 19-inch person who can't so much as lift a finger to feed himself? You'd think we were talking about some kind of bizarre new torture method for foreign terrorist spies the way you describe pregnancy. Reproduction is 100% natural and the female body was built specifically for it.