|
Post by bsutravis on Sept 6, 2008 0:03:43 GMT -5
OIS: This Nation is full of rules, passed by MAN which are an attempt to FORCIBLY prevent MAN from doing wrong actions. A law to prevent abortion is no different than a law to prevent murder, or a law to prevent you from exceeding the posted speed limit.
I have the RIGHT to voice my opinion on the topic, and how I feel about those who disagree with my viewpoint, just as much as you have the RIGHT to cast judgement on how you feel I am somehow circumventing God's wishes by voicing my opinion. Am I guilty of a sin in judging someone for their belief? Yes, I absolutly am........ but there are some things in MY viewpoint are worth standing up and accepting what punishment I might have coming for judging what I feel is pure evil in todays society.
"And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death." -Numbers 35:16
|
|
|
Post by huntnprayn on Sept 6, 2008 10:34:11 GMT -5
(Jesuit Theosophy hat on...) Actually Greyhound, GOD gives a woman that "right" - even if he deplores the decision. He has always given Mankind the Right to choose between Good and Evil. Only MAN(kind) has taken it upon HIMSELF to decide to stand in the place of GOD and Judge his fellow man for that taking the choice that God has allowed - and will HIMSELF judge Men upon. I, for one, will not suppose to be more precient than God and do not believe that MEN should create Laws to deny the CHOICE that GOD has given to men. That doesn't mean I have to LIKE those choices, and it doesn't mean I have to personally accept those choices when they directly threaten me, but it is not my place to otherwise tell any man or woman what they may or may not do when GOD has given them that choice. Their choice, their soul. All we can do - without hubristically acting in God's stead - is provide an example of Right... not mandate it. For to do so is to mandate more than God does. Let me get this right.......God commanded that we should not kill one another.......yet since we have free will we should not make laws against such activity? I'm scratching the little bit of hair that I have left on my head here.
|
|
|
Post by raporter on Sept 6, 2008 10:58:09 GMT -5
Will someone please answer this question for me. I live in an area that is predominately Catholic and overwhelmingly Democrat. HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? I am talking on the Pro life/choice only.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Sept 6, 2008 11:04:40 GMT -5
Of course we all have the right to voice our opinions on this and any other matters. That would be our constitutional freedom of speech in action.
That right and many others are guaranteed by our constitution to all citizens, regardless of their religious beliefs, and regardless of their personal stance on the exact moment when human life begins.
At one time, many religious leaders held that eggs and sperm were human life, and that it was a mortal sin to waste them by not giving them every possible chance to meet up and become another complete human. No argument that the egg and the sperm are human, each carrying the complete genetic blueprint for another person. And they're certainly alive. So are they human life? If so, not only are ALL forms of contraception murder, but so is willfully preventing the opportunity for the sperm and egg to get together and bond. See Onan, among other examples of this principle.
Fortunately for the earth and those of us creeping around on it looking for a parking space, we have drifted from that advice to a more realistic view of being fruitful and multiplying. One that realizes that the job of replenishing the earth as directed was finished some time back, and we can now shift our attention to some other directive like loving our neighbors or being good husbands of the gift of nature that was bestowed on us by our creator (even if we disagree on the name and nature of said creator).
Whether natural or supernatural, the same creator who gave us the world and the ability to reproduce was probably the one who supplied us with a brain capable of doing mathematics and figuring out that excessive procreation beyond the replenishment stage will eventually be disastrous. The same brain should be capable of inventing means of preventing such overpopulation while preserving the wonderful gift of delightful intimacy, just as we can count calories or carbs and enjoy the wonders of bountiful food supplies without gorging ourselves into morbid obesity.
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Sept 6, 2008 15:25:06 GMT -5
Existentialism doesn't translate very well in the realm of the practical world. It also leaves an awful lot unexplained.
|
|
|
Post by nodog on Sept 7, 2008 5:58:54 GMT -5
As a father, I have been with my wife during some of her ultrasounds. I have seen the baby's heart beating at 8 weeks old. (That is 8 weeks after conception.) I don't know how anyone could say that the baby in a womans womb is a.) not a person b.) ok to kill That being said, I would vote on this one issue alone if need be. Stopping the murder of baby's is more important to me than my job or the nations economy or any other social issue. If only that vote would actually bring about a change unfortunately the morals of both parties are in the tank and a baby is proof that trust has been broken. Getting rid of the evidence is too strong an option to loose. It amazes me that we can legalize this heinous act on the smallest, most defenseless among us. People may do it but to condone it... their isn't a pathetic enough word to describe it. History has condemned every cilvilization that ever did it. At least we have company.
|
|
|
Post by beehunter on Sept 7, 2008 6:23:26 GMT -5
I am Pro life all the way, how anyone can kill their own child in the womb is beyond me.
|
|
|
Post by lugnutz on Sept 7, 2008 22:49:59 GMT -5
I could care less either way, but if were put in a situation to where i needed to abort a fetus, it would be nice to make that decision ourselves. Too me i could completely understand why someone would need to abort a fetus. When the doctor say's only one of the two will live(mother or baby) you have a decision to make. Pro life- their is no decision to make, you bury your wife. Unless YOUR put in that situation how can you judge anyone for the decision(s) they make?
I guess i don't hold myself higher than others, like alot of folks do.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Sept 8, 2008 5:23:14 GMT -5
1. Rape or incest 2. Continuing the pregnancy would result in the mothers death
The only options I could seriously consider, and then only with reluctance. Abortion is premeditated murder no matter how you look at it.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Sept 8, 2008 9:17:24 GMT -5
Only if: 1. Rape or incest 2. Continuing the pregnancy would result in the mothers death. These are the only reasons that I feel that abortion is not evil. I just don't feel that a woman should have to endure a lifetime sentence for a crime that she was the victim of. When a person goes with his wife/girlfriend to view a sonogram they are watching something that they created thru love and both are exceedingly happy with their creation.
|
|
|
Post by schall53 on Sept 8, 2008 10:15:36 GMT -5
There are other options for victoms of rape and incest than abortion. I am speaking as one that wanted children and was unable to. There are more people wanting to adopt a child than are available without a very long wait. Any of these would love to take such a child!!
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Sept 8, 2008 14:10:01 GMT -5
And yet the astigmatism of having carried a child and given it away will follow the woman for years. The sentence for a woman that carries a child of rape starts from the day she was assaulted until the day she dies. She has enough burden to carry mentally from that criminal assault, she does not need a visual one too.
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Sept 8, 2008 15:35:54 GMT -5
On a related note, I happened by a television this past weekend that was tuned to MSNBC where Barbara Boxer was being interviewed. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard her say that Sarah Palin was an extremist ( an EXTREMIST people! ) because she was anti- abortion. Excuse me, but when our society has reached the point that respect for the sanctity of life is labeled extremist, then we may already be past the point of redemption. This just proves how far the liberal left has sunk.
|
|
|
Post by raporter on Sept 8, 2008 18:34:43 GMT -5
On a related note, I happened by a television this past weekend that was tuned to MSNBC where Barbara Boxer was being interviewed. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard her say that Sarah Palin was an extremist ( an EXTREMIST people! ) because she was anti- abortion. Excuse me, but when our society has reached the point that respect for the sanctity of life is labeled extremist, then we may already be past the point of redemption. This just proves how far the liberal left has sunk. Hux, you did say MSNBC and Barbara Boxer. Nuf said.
|
|
|
Post by Harley on Sept 8, 2008 18:50:25 GMT -5
And to think this whole time I have been calling it bacon and eggs and I should have been saying bacon and chicken... I believe in the right to choose.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Sept 9, 2008 7:29:31 GMT -5
Absolutely. We don't legalize shooting innocent people dead on the street for no reason, so why should we legalize killing innocent babies in the womb just because they have not been born yet?
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on Sept 9, 2008 15:14:14 GMT -5
bacon and chicken... That's apples and oranges.
|
|
|
Post by beehunter on Sept 10, 2008 13:55:07 GMT -5
Pro life all the way here .
|
|
|
Post by mudstrider on Sept 10, 2008 15:24:13 GMT -5
Pro-life all the way, too.
"The Freedom to Choose" is simply a smoke screen that excuses the freedom to murder for the sake of convenience.
In the case of rape or incest, the infant should be given up for adoption at birth (if unwanted)... then hang the rapist.
In the case of the mother's life being endangered, which is EXTREMELY RARE; of course, the mother's life takes precedence.
There simply is no excuse for the legality of abortion. Everybody has the choice whether or not to do bad things... but those bad things shouldn't be legal!
|
|
|
Post by nodog on Sept 11, 2008 6:17:50 GMT -5
And to think this whole time I have been calling it bacon and eggs and I should have been saying bacon and chicken... I believe in the right to choose. Good! So do I the rights of everyone to choose, even the baby. Lets let the baby's of rape decide weather or not they want to live with the shame of being the product of a crime. To kill it, the most defenseless among us, the victim of the crime, is not a choice, and at the hands of it's only link to life, it's whole world... words cannot express the cruelty of the act. To support abortion is to support your own doom. Some day someone will decide that your life, a burden to them isn't worth it and their "right to choose" will be upheld. China does it in their own way. It's no different. Maybe you don't care much if it happens to you, but what if it was someone else, someone who couldn't defend themselves, someone denied the rite to speak. "The right to choose" is a sham. It should be "The right to dictate", "The right to decide who lives and who dies".
|
|