OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Non-Religious Topics => Topic started by: sprtslvr1973 on July 16, 2012, 08:22:59 PM

Title: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: sprtslvr1973 on July 16, 2012, 08:22:59 PM
     If it is why do we not treat it as such? If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands? Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.
     I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience. If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention? For illustration, to me shooting and killing Adolf Eichmann walking to his mail box may not be ethical, but to stop him from ordering a shipment of Jewish civilians to Auschwitz is entirely justified. There are options of course. Rather than killing someone, other forms of incapacitation may be considered. Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.
     All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison. Therefore, while I respect the person who has acted as a vigilante, I can not in good conscience recommend some one else take the risk that I can not.
     Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Alveus Lacuna on July 16, 2012, 08:55:42 PM
Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?

I would say that the fetus is an actual person feeling the pain of being killed. That being said, I'm also not going out and attacking soldiers for killing in what I consider to be an unjust conflict. I'm also not reducing my oil usage that fuels the guarding of the new pipeline in east Afghanistan. So I'm a big bundle of rationalizations and contradictions. Basically, I'm a human being.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: yeshuaisiam on July 16, 2012, 09:08:32 PM
As a parent of 5 children and having lost 4 nieces or nephews to abortion, I can assure you it is murder.
We should treat it as such.   It is wicked, evil, and vile.


There is no excuse for this wretchedness being legal.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: kevlev on July 16, 2012, 09:24:58 PM
A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction between its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.

-Saint Basil the Great
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on July 16, 2012, 09:29:48 PM
The reason why it's not treated as murder is because there are too many people who erroneously believe it to be not.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Asteriktos on July 16, 2012, 09:38:06 PM
People seem to be answering the thread title, but not the OP...
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 16, 2012, 10:04:17 PM
If it is why do we not treat it as such?

Our society suffers from what I have tagged, the “Me Syndrome”.  What’s in it for me?  What do I get out of it?  How does this affect me?  It’s all about “me” and no one else.  Even parenting suffers from this affliction.  You see it in almost every aspect of modern life today, which is why I believe America is falling into shambles.  Homosexuals say they were born that way thinking this somehow justifies their life choices of sin.  Parents kill their living children because its inconvenient to have them any longer.  Pregnancy and motherhood suffer as well.  I have heard women actually, in defense of abortion, ask why they should destroy their bodies just to have a child ignoring their own actions caused their condition.  Lack of responsibility.  The world is a sick and evil place.  Since most of society suffers from the Me Syndrome, they see no problem with killing unborn children.  They have convinced themselves it is not only ok, but the child is not real.  Lately, some have even been so bold as to proclaim a born child is not a viable personality and can be killed up to two years old.  Evil controls the country and it is only getting stronger.  Those of us who see it for what it really is are the minority.  Abortion has absolutely become birth control.

If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands?

Because this creates Anarchy, which easily spirals out of control.  At least now we still maintain some semblance of authority.

Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.

But then, we become the criminal and the scourge of society and culture.  Usually those who conduct this type of action are unstable anyway and dangerous to anyone.  Abortion is only a means for them to focus their aggression.  Until we are able to change laws, it is a losing battle to engage in this type of warfare.  At best, the person or persons will be called extremists or religious zealots.

I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience.

One of the things I believe the Roman Catholic Church as gotten right is this.  Their response to abortion is respectable.  A very dear friend of mine who is Catholic is very involved in prayer vigils at abortion clinics and state buildings, etc.  Peaceful, but they let their voices be heard in the silence of prayer.  No violence, no loudness, only peaceful non-resistance to show there is a better way.  My wife and I once convinced a young woman to not abort and instead give the child over for adoption simply by talking to her for a few hours.  If you feel very strongly and want to participate, I encourage to you ask your Catholic friends if you can join.

If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention?

I see your reasoning, but again, this results in chaos, which does no good for anyone.  Until the state has its mind changed, all efforts would be wasted.

Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.

What you must understand is if we all went around beating the dog snot out of people we disagreed with, we would have no time left for anything else and everyone would be engaged in fighting and hurting one another.  Violence is rarely the right response and only as a last resort when all lesser means have failed.  Vandalizing machinery still gets people hurt.  If your goal is to end abortion, you must win the hearts of others and convince their minds it is wrong.  Being a vigilante would not accomplish this goal.  They would only think you were a nutjob and dismiss anything you had to say.

All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison.

Sounds like a good reason to me.  

Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?

This is the multi-billion dollar question.  When does life actually begin?  Ask 10 people and you will get 10 different answers.  Until we know for certain, I say be cautious and start at conception, to make sure we do not kill anyone.

Since we are talking about this, I was convinced by the abovementioned Catholic friend the abortion pill is also wrong.  Took some time, but he won me over.  I mention this because this is how you will change a person’s mind.  
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: choy on July 17, 2012, 12:09:55 AM
I am a staunch Pro-Lifer.  Definitely abortion is murder.  Any Christian cannot claim otherwise.  The opening chapters of the Gospel of St. Luke is a testament to life in the womb.  St. John the Forerunner received the Holy Spirit in the womb, and while within the womb he recognized the presence of Christ also in the womb.  Within the Theotokos was not a clump of cells who became Jesus at the Nativity.  He was God incarnate from the Annunciation.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on July 17, 2012, 12:38:46 AM
     If it is why do we not treat it as such? If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands? Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.
     I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience. If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention? For illustration, to me shooting and killing Adolf Eichmann walking to his mail box may not be ethical, but to stop him from ordering a shipment of Jewish civilians to Auschwitz is entirely justified. There are options of course. Rather than killing someone, other forms of incapacitation may be considered. Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.
     All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison. Therefore, while I respect the person who has acted as a vigilante, I can not in good conscience recommend some one else take the risk that I can not.
     Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?


These are excellent yet difficult questions. I wrestled with them for many years, and ultimately this issue led me to become a pacifist. If violence is ever justifiable in order to save the innocent, then most surely it is justifiable to save the unborn from the brutality of abortion. However, I am convinced that violent solutions are never Christian solutions. Somehow we must try to fight, defend, and rescue our neighbors without killing our neighbors. Both the unborn child and the abortionist are our neighbors, and both need deliverance and salvation. I wish more Christians had the honesty and courage to ask and wrestle with the questions you have asked here.

"Lord have mercy."


Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Basil 320 on July 17, 2012, 12:46:33 AM
Look at ultrasound videos, and you decide, if that baby (promoted as a fetus by abortionists) is taken out of the mother's womb, and laid down, what would you see happening?  

Why do you think supporters of abortion do not want the mother to be shown what is in her womb?  

So, is abortion murder just because what is removed from the womb is not necessarily seen?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesRottnek on July 17, 2012, 01:26:04 AM
I am a staunch Pro-Lifer.  Definitely abortion is murder.  Any Christian cannot claim otherwise.  The opening chapters of the Gospel of St. Luke is a testament to life in the womb.  St. John the Forerunner received the Holy Spirit in the womb, and while within the womb he recognized the presence of Christ also in the womb.  Within the Theotokos was not a clump of cells who became Jesus at the Nativity.  He was God incarnate from the Annunciation.

Does killing equal murder?  Are soldiers murderers?  Are policemen murderers?  Have you murdered someone when they die because you crashed your car into them?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cognomen on July 17, 2012, 01:46:16 AM
I am a staunch Pro-Lifer.  Definitely abortion is murder.  Any Christian cannot claim otherwise.  The opening chapters of the Gospel of St. Luke is a testament to life in the womb.  St. John the Forerunner received the Holy Spirit in the womb, and while within the womb he recognized the presence of Christ also in the womb.  Within the Theotokos was not a clump of cells who became Jesus at the Nativity.  He was God incarnate from the Annunciation.

Does killing equal murder?  Are soldiers murderers?  Are policemen murderers?  Have you murdered someone when they die because you crashed your car into them?

Not sure I'm quite following, other than the part about not all killing is necessarily murder. 

I don't think soldiers and policemen (who take lives in legitimate circumstances; soldiers and policemen are not immune from committing murder) , or people who accidentally kill other humans can readily be compared with abortion doctors.  Aren't they doing pretty different things, the first two being somewhat sanctioned by the Church, and the latter being an unintentional killing?

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: choy on July 17, 2012, 02:01:57 AM
I am a staunch Pro-Lifer.  Definitely abortion is murder.  Any Christian cannot claim otherwise.  The opening chapters of the Gospel of St. Luke is a testament to life in the womb.  St. John the Forerunner received the Holy Spirit in the womb, and while within the womb he recognized the presence of Christ also in the womb.  Within the Theotokos was not a clump of cells who became Jesus at the Nativity.  He was God incarnate from the Annunciation.

Does killing equal murder?  Are soldiers murderers?  Are policemen murderers?  Have you murdered someone when they die because you crashed your car into them?

Abortion is a deliberate act on an innocent life.  Abortion is not an accident.  The term is miscarriage for accidents.  Abortion is certainly not something policemen and soldiers do.  They kill as part of their duty to protect.  Who are we protecting when we abort?  The personal, selfish interests of the mother?  When policemen and soldiers kill, it is for the benefit of society, and not just one or two people.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Russell on July 17, 2012, 02:18:47 AM
I am a staunch Pro-Lifer.  Definitely abortion is murder.  Any Christian cannot claim otherwise.  The opening chapters of the Gospel of St. Luke is a testament to life in the womb.  St. John the Forerunner received the Holy Spirit in the womb, and while within the womb he recognized the presence of Christ also in the womb.  Within the Theotokos was not a clump of cells who became Jesus at the Nativity.  He was God incarnate from the Annunciation.

Does killing equal murder?  Are soldiers murderers?  Are policemen murderers?  Have you murdered someone when they die because you crashed your car into them?

Abortion is a deliberate act on an innocent life.  Abortion is not an accident.  The term is miscarriage for accidents.  Abortion is certainly not something policemen and soldiers do.  They kill as part of their duty to protect.  Who are we protecting when we abort?  The personal, selfish interests of the mother?  When policemen and soldiers kill, it is for the benefit of society, and not just one or two people.

Is it still murder when both the baby and the mother are going to die, and the only way to save the mother is an abortion?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cognomen on July 17, 2012, 02:32:36 AM
I am a staunch Pro-Lifer.  Definitely abortion is murder.  Any Christian cannot claim otherwise.  The opening chapters of the Gospel of St. Luke is a testament to life in the womb.  St. John the Forerunner received the Holy Spirit in the womb, and while within the womb he recognized the presence of Christ also in the womb.  Within the Theotokos was not a clump of cells who became Jesus at the Nativity.  He was God incarnate from the Annunciation.

Does killing equal murder?  Are soldiers murderers?  Are policemen murderers?  Have you murdered someone when they die because you crashed your car into them?

Abortion is a deliberate act on an innocent life.  Abortion is not an accident.  The term is miscarriage for accidents.  Abortion is certainly not something policemen and soldiers do.  They kill as part of their duty to protect.  Who are we protecting when we abort?  The personal, selfish interests of the mother?  When policemen and soldiers kill, it is for the benefit of society, and not just one or two people.

Is it still murder when both the baby and the mother are going to die, and the only way to save the mother is an abortion?

According to the logic of trying to prevent death, it seems not.  I'm not saying it's good or preferred, just that it wouldn't be murder according to the other examples.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: choy on July 17, 2012, 02:32:46 AM

Is it still murder when both the baby and the mother are going to die, and the only way to save the mother is an abortion?


Yes.  Because doctors have attested that there is no such scenario.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: choy on July 17, 2012, 02:35:24 AM
According to the logic of trying to prevent death, it seems not.  I'm not saying it's good or preferred, just that it wouldn't be murder according to the other examples.

I have yet to come across a concrete example where aborting the baby is the only way to save the mother.  It is always hypothetical, and some doctors have already come out and said that no such scenario exists.

An ectopic pregnancy is a different thing.  The fetus is implanted in the Fallopian tube where it has zero chance of survival.  It is dying if not already dead.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cognomen on July 17, 2012, 02:42:23 AM
Ok, I guess I was just responding to the hypothetical then.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: choy on July 17, 2012, 02:46:04 AM
Ok, I guess I was just responding to the hypothetical then.

I don't want to claim to be an authority on the matter, but that is what I have learned so far.   As I said, I am staunchly pro-life.  I like reading up on things like this.  And so far there has been no concrete evidence of abortion as an only option to save the mother.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 17, 2012, 11:24:35 AM
Since we are talking about this, I was convinced by the abovementioned Catholic friend the abortion pill is also wrong.  Took some time, but he won me over.  I mention this because this is how you will change a person’s mind.  


I mean birth control pill.  I always knew the day after pill was wrong.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cognomen on July 17, 2012, 01:24:52 PM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Jharek Carnelian on July 17, 2012, 02:02:49 PM
I am a staunch Pro-Lifer.  Definitely abortion is murder.  Any Christian cannot claim otherwise.  The opening chapters of the Gospel of St. Luke is a testament to life in the womb.  St. John the Forerunner received the Holy Spirit in the womb, and while within the womb he recognized the presence of Christ also in the womb.  Within the Theotokos was not a clump of cells who became Jesus at the Nativity.  He was God incarnate from the Annunciation.

Does killing equal murder?  Are soldiers murderers?  Are policemen murderers?  Have you murdered someone when they die because you crashed your car into them?

These are not apt comparisons. I cannot understand why you introduce them. The third example in particular is bothersome as such an event could be a murder if you crash a car into someone due to neglect or driving under the influence of drugs or drinks, yet it might also be purely accidental. Killing does not equal murder and that is a strawman, Orthodoxy (like my own Church) recognises there are legitimate circumstances in which one may defend their life or the nation. Abortion is something rather different.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on July 17, 2012, 02:48:38 PM
The way I see it is that a person is a person the moment that sperm fertilizes that egg. Period. Whether or not that person was born yet or not is irrelevant to me; I just like to see it as different stages of life. I think that a fetus is a person but just in a different stage of his life than the rest of us. To me, saying that a fetus is not a person because it has not been born yet is no different than saying that an elderly person is not a person because they are old or that an African and/or Latino is not a person because they have a darker skin color.

Does killing equal murder?  Are soldiers murderers?  Are policemen murderers?  Have you murdered someone when they die because you crashed your car into them?

Some abuse their power and wrongfully kill people, so yes. But, however, provided that they use their authority justly and only kill someone when they have to, I would not say that they are murderes. While it is indeed true that it would be even better if they did not have to kill anyone at all, I think that given our fallen state of the world, God is merciful to them and understands that sometimes they have to kill for the greater good of society. As for the last scenerio though, that depends on many things. If your car malfunctioned and you could not control it from impacting on another's car, then no, you are not guilty of anything. However, if you were under the influence of alcohol/drugs or were driving foolishly, then yes, I would say that you are guilty. But guilty in a different way. You would only be guilty of being stupid and careless--but of course, the murder was an accident. However, if you were intentionally trying to murder them, then I would say that you are purely guilty of intended murder.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: jmbejdl on July 18, 2012, 03:20:01 AM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on July 18, 2012, 03:21:24 AM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cognomen on July 18, 2012, 03:29:49 AM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James


Fair enough; my mistake.  Keep up the good work then.  The zero-sum arguments seem to be doing wonders!
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 18, 2012, 03:51:58 AM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam

Nope.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on July 18, 2012, 03:57:48 AM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam

Nope.


Yes, often it actually does act as an abortifacient, preventing implantation of the fertilized egg on the uteran wall.


Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: jmbejdl on July 18, 2012, 04:44:42 AM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam

Nope.


Yes, often it actually does act as an abortifacient, preventing implantation of the fertilized egg on the uteran wall.


Selam

Indeed. As it often works by preventing implantation (it can also work by preventing ovulation which would be contraceptive but you can't guarantee which way it will work in any given instance) and implantation occurs days after conception, the only way you can argue that the pill is not an abortifacient is to define life as beginning at implantation rather than conception. I reiterate what I said before - the pill should not be an acceptable 'contraceptive' method for Orthodox Christians.

James
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 18, 2012, 02:11:21 PM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam

Nope.


Yes, often it actually does act as an abortifacient, preventing implantation of the fertilized egg on the uteran wall.


Selam
Indeed.  I'm a "show me" sort of person and my friend presented the evidence, so I change my view to fit the facts.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 18, 2012, 02:24:31 PM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam

Nope.


Yes, often it actually does act as an abortifacient, preventing implantation of the fertilized egg on the uteran wall.


Selam
Indeed.  I'm a "show me" sort of person and my friend presented the evidence, so I change my view to fit the facts.

This will be rich. I was just going to link to where Gebre and others have been shut down in the past on this forum when asked for "evidence".

So please show me peer-reviewed studies showing that women on oral birth control have a higher rate passing fertilized eggs than women are not on oral contraception.

Don't give me testimonies from physicians or drug warning labels or theoretical discussions of how it could possibly be the case.

Studies with sufficient data that have been reproduced and verified.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Ortho_cat on July 18, 2012, 02:37:47 PM
the guy who killed george tiller took it into his own hands...shot him in his own church.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 18, 2012, 03:07:56 PM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam

Nope.


Yes, often it actually does act as an abortifacient, preventing implantation of the fertilized egg on the uteran wall.


Selam
Indeed.  I'm a "show me" sort of person and my friend presented the evidence, so I change my view to fit the facts.

This will be rich. I was just going to link to where Gebre and others have been shut down in the past on this forum when asked for "evidence".

So please show me peer-reviewed studies showing that women on oral birth control have a higher rate passing fertilized eggs than women are not on oral contraception.

Don't give me testimonies from physicians or drug warning labels or theoretical discussions of how it could possibly be the case.

Studies with sufficient data that have been reproduced and verified.

Thanks.


My friend showed me.  The birth control pill makes the womb inhospitable to the fertilized egg, it does not prevent fertilization.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 18, 2012, 03:15:17 PM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James



Correct.



Selam

Nope.


Yes, often it actually does act as an abortifacient, preventing implantation of the fertilized egg on the uteran wall.


Selam
Indeed.  I'm a "show me" sort of person and my friend presented the evidence, so I change my view to fit the facts.

This will be rich. I was just going to link to where Gebre and others have been shut down in the past on this forum when asked for "evidence".

So please show me peer-reviewed studies showing that women on oral birth control have a higher rate passing fertilized eggs than women are not on oral contraception.

Don't give me testimonies from physicians or drug warning labels or theoretical discussions of how it could possibly be the case.

Studies with sufficient data that have been reproduced and verified.

Thanks.


My friend showed me. 

Showed you what?

Please provide the only thing approaching evidence for your claims which is what I described above.

Again, I don't care what a physician says, a drug company offers in disclaimer, the PDR suggests, theories might explain about how certain mechanisms in which the pills acts might correlate with decreased degree of fertilized egg implantation.

Baring the above clear empirical and repeatable evidence, you have nothing that amounts to more than conjecture. And that is not evidence.

 

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 18, 2012, 03:29:58 PM


Showed you what?

Please provide the only thing approaching evidence for your claims which is what I described above.

Again, I don't care what a physician says, a drug company offers in disclaimer, the PDR suggests, theories might explain about how certain mechanisms in which the pills acts might correlate with decreased degree of fertilized egg implantation.

Baring the above clear empirical and repeatable evidence, you have nothing that amounts to more than conjecture. And that is not evidence.

 



You certainly are defensive.  There is no reason to be.  I said he showed me and convinced me, which was not easy, but I was open to the possibility and realized he was right.  He had the information as he is very active in the anti-abortion movement.  Mine was a personal inquiry.  If you have some reason to disbelieve what I have said, by all means believe what you want, but if you think I am going to “forum battle” with you, you are mistaken.  I do not have the relevant information you request, I never did and you seem unwilling to digest it appropriately anyway.  If you are, I suggest you get in touch with those who do have the information you are looking for, but from your list of unapproved sources, I have serious doubts you will ever find anything convincing.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 18, 2012, 03:39:06 PM


Showed you what?

Please provide the only thing approaching evidence for your claims which is what I described above.

Again, I don't care what a physician says, a drug company offers in disclaimer, the PDR suggests, theories might explain about how certain mechanisms in which the pills acts might correlate with decreased degree of fertilized egg implantation.

Baring the above clear empirical and repeatable evidence, you have nothing that amounts to more than conjecture. And that is not evidence.

 



You certainly are defensive.  There is no reason to be.  I said he showed me and convinced me, which was not easy, but I was open to the possibility and realized he was right.  He had the information as he is very active in the anti-abortion movement.  Mine was a personal inquiry.  If you have some reason to disbelieve what I have said, by all means believe what you want, but if you think I am going to “forum battle” with you, you are mistaken.  I do not have the relevant information you request, I never did and you seem unwilling to digest it appropriately anyway.  If you are, I suggest you get in touch with those who do have the information you are looking for, but from your list of unapproved sources, I have serious doubts you will ever find anything convincing.

I am not defensive, I am arguing a point.

You and the piety police come through here and make unsubstantiated and possibly hurtful claims. Do you know who might be taking oral contraception right now and be reading what your are writing and are worried they are effectively engaged in abortion?

I am not.

I am not having sex.

No need for me to be defensive. However, outside of the patently false claims made in such a blase manner by you all above, you make them without considering the affect they might have on others.

Not only are you wrong and incapable of defending your decision, you are being reckless.

So let's be clear:

You have no evidence other than the secret info you have and the fact you claim I would be unwilling to "digest" it.

There are others reading here.

If you are so sure it is abortion and thus murder (which you don't believe either), then it would seem it would be the least you could do stop further murders from occurring.

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ZealousZeal on July 18, 2012, 03:42:32 PM
Seems misguided to me.  Seems if you wanted to stop "murders" you would support methods that reduce the likelihood of "murder" occurring.

Presuming that you were replying to the comment about the pill above yours, I'm afraid that you are the one who appears to be misguided on this. The pill shouldn't be an acceptable 'contraceptive' for Orthodox or anyone who consider themselves 'pro-life' (I hate that term) because it doesn't actually work by preventing conception at all - it's an abortifacient.

James

What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: yeshuaisiam on July 19, 2012, 05:00:26 PM
From the OP, he was also talking about doing harm to an abortion doctor....

"I tell you do not resist an evil person"....  From the scriptures.

Now, it is talking about YOU resisting an evil person, and not saving another person from being murdered.
Also, we have the "better to tie a millstone" scripture/words of God.

I honestly am pegged and don't know how to respond to your question.  But if I ever shook the hand of an abortion doctor, I would probably break it, which would be my own issue.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cognomen on July 19, 2012, 05:35:15 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

So taking an oral contraceptive isn't the same thing as terminating a 5 month pregnancy (baby)?

Not sure it's completely on point (and I haven't been able to drag up the articles I wanted), but there have been some interesting studies on the recent public opinion shift on abortion.  From what I read, the increase in opposition has been largely credited to campaigns focusing on the more obviously nasty elements of the practice, e.g. late-term, partial-birth. 

In other words, most people don't really believe that a recently fertilized egg is the same thing as a baby you can see swimming around in an ultrasound.

So as a follow up question to the OP, what are folks supposed to do?  With the danger of sounding utilitarian, it seems that people should try to fight the practice through persuasive arguments, rather than sticking to rigid positions which are likely to be dismissed.  Maybe I'm wrong; I'm new to this debate.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: akimori makoto on July 19, 2012, 06:23:26 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

So taking an oral contraceptive isn't the same thing as terminating a 5 month pregnancy (baby)?

Not sure it's completely on point (and I haven't been able to drag up the articles I wanted), but there have been some interesting studies on the recent public opinion shift on abortion.  From what I read, the increase in opposition has been largely credited to campaigns focusing on the more obviously nasty elements of the practice, e.g. late-term, partial-birth. 

In other words, most people don't really believe that a recently fertilized egg is the same thing as a baby you can see swimming around in an ultrasound.

So as a follow up question to the OP, what are folks supposed to do?  With the danger of sounding utilitarian, it seems that people should try to fight the practice through persuasive arguments, rather than sticking to rigid positions which are likely to be dismissed.  Maybe I'm wrong; I'm new to this debate.

I always begin any discussion on abortion by trying to have the interlocutor agree that late-term abortion is entirely horrific and clearly repugnant -- then I argue backwards from there to try to say there is no clear point at which you can say the child is not a child but simply a mass of cells. Is this kinda what you have in mind?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 07:06:20 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

So taking an oral contraceptive isn't the same thing as terminating a 5 month pregnancy (baby)?

Not sure it's completely on point (and I haven't been able to drag up the articles I wanted), but there have been some interesting studies on the recent public opinion shift on abortion.  From what I read, the increase in opposition has been largely credited to campaigns focusing on the more obviously nasty elements of the practice, e.g. late-term, partial-birth.  

In other words, most people don't really believe that a recently fertilized egg is the same thing as a baby you can see swimming around in an ultrasound.

So as a follow up question to the OP, what are folks supposed to do?  With the danger of sounding utilitarian, it seems that people should try to fight the practice through persuasive arguments, rather than sticking to rigid positions which are likely to be dismissed.  Maybe I'm wrong; I'm new to this debate.

I always begin any discussion on abortion by trying to have the interlocutor agree that late-term abortion is entirely horrific and clearly repugnant -- then I argue backwards from there to try to say there is no clear point at which you can say the child is not a child but simply a mass of cells. Is this kinda what you have in mind?

Sorry, but I would have stymied you quite quickly with that line of reasoning.

Perhaps more on this later. I like Cognomen's angle he is going. It is surprising under which conditions within the Western world the fewest abortions (thus acts of pre-natal murder according to the people here equating the two while not truly believing it) occur.  

Really no can worms gets opened in the way Cognomen is suggesting as along as people don't get caught up in the idolatry of ideals, which is usually is exactly what happens when people discuss the lives of others and never what happens when it comes to their own lives, in fact quite the opposite, they live as nearly absolute hypocrites.

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: akimori makoto on July 19, 2012, 07:33:11 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

So taking an oral contraceptive isn't the same thing as terminating a 5 month pregnancy (baby)?

Not sure it's completely on point (and I haven't been able to drag up the articles I wanted), but there have been some interesting studies on the recent public opinion shift on abortion.  From what I read, the increase in opposition has been largely credited to campaigns focusing on the more obviously nasty elements of the practice, e.g. late-term, partial-birth. 

In other words, most people don't really believe that a recently fertilized egg is the same thing as a baby you can see swimming around in an ultrasound.

So as a follow up question to the OP, what are folks supposed to do?  With the danger of sounding utilitarian, it seems that people should try to fight the practice through persuasive arguments, rather than sticking to rigid positions which are likely to be dismissed.  Maybe I'm wrong; I'm new to this debate.

I always begin any discussion on abortion by trying to have the interlocutor agree that late-term abortion is entirely horrific and clearly repugnant -- then I argue backwards from there to try to say there is no clear point at which you can say the child is not a child but simply a mass of cells. Is this kinda what you have in mind?

Sorry, but I would have stymied you quite quickly with that line of reasoning.

Perhaps more on this later. I like Cognomen's angle he is going. It is surprising under which conditions within the Western world the fewest abortions (thus acts of pre-natal murder according to the people here equating the two while not truly believing it) occur. 

Really no can worms gets opened in the way Cognomen is suggesting as along as people don't get caught up in the idolatry of ideals, which is usually is exactly what happens when people discuss the lives of others and never what happens when it comes to their own lives, in fact quite the opposite, they live as nearly absolute hypocrites.



[redacted]
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ZealousZeal on July 19, 2012, 07:36:15 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cognomen on July 19, 2012, 07:46:44 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.

I failed to clarify that I was kidding, and that I very much welcomed your comments to the discussion.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 07:47:07 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Asteriktos on July 19, 2012, 07:48:52 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 07:50:27 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Kerdy is at a loss even in his own opinions based on fact. Don't confuse him anymore.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ZealousZeal on July 19, 2012, 07:53:06 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.

I failed to clarify that I was kidding, and that I very much welcomed your comments to the discussion.

LOL. Clearly, I was confused. What do I know about nuance? ;)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 07:55:49 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Perhaps, but this is where science begins to fail miserably and the only place to obtain the answers being sought is within what God has already provided.  I was going to add no one has ever been able to supply the answer outside conception (which modernists abhor), but I thought someone would actually try.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 07:57:08 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.

In the end science will not win the day, but it is good when people are making arguments which resort science fictionals.

Your bolded statement is a point of mine among many except I don't care if people get offended. Good offense is the best the defense.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 07:58:26 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Kerdy is at a loss even in his own opinions based on fact. Don't confuse him anymore.
I have little interest in petty, emotionally driven, personal jabs. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ZealousZeal on July 19, 2012, 08:00:37 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.

In the end science will not win the day, but it is good when people are making arguments which resort science fictionals.

Your bolded statement is a point of mine among many except I don't care if people get offended. Good offense is the best the defense.

I agree that it will not win the day, but I think it helps. That may be my bias. I think scientific misinformation can help you lose, though.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 08:00:55 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Perhaps, but this is where science begins to fail miserably and the only place to obtain the answers being sought is within what God has already provided.  I was going to add no one has ever been able to supply the answer outside conception (which modernists abhor), but I thought someone would actually try.

There you are just wrong again.

If I am going to have to keep correcting you, I want remuneration. I find that wagering on propositions reduces the noise to signal ratio quite effectively.

So $100, if I find an argument for the beginning of human life outside of conception? Heck, I'll even give it to charity.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 08:01:19 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.

In the end science will not win the day, but it is good when people are making arguments which resort science fictionals.

Your bolded statement is a point of mine among many except I don't care if people get offended. Good offense is the best the defense.

I agree that it will not win the day, but I think it helps. That may be my bias. I think scientific misinformation can help you lose, though.

I don't see how we are disagreeing.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 08:03:40 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Perhaps, but this is where science begins to fail miserably and the only place to obtain the answers being sought is within what God has already provided.  I was going to add no one has ever been able to supply the answer outside conception (which modernists abhor), but I thought someone would actually try.

There you are just wrong again.

If I am going to have to keep correcting you, I want remuneration. I find that wagering on propositions reduces the noise to signal ratio quite effectively.

So $100, if I find an argument for the beginning of human life outside of conception? Heck, I'll even give it to charity.

I understand.  You are right.  I will try to remember that in the future.  My apologies.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ZealousZeal on July 19, 2012, 08:08:15 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.

In the end science will not win the day, but it is good when people are making arguments which resort science fictionals.

Your bolded statement is a point of mine among many except I don't care if people get offended. Good offense is the best the defense.

I agree that it will not win the day, but I think it helps. That may be my bias. I think scientific misinformation can help you lose, though.

I don't see how we are disagreeing.

I didn't think we were. I'm on a godforsaken, rainy highway on my way to NY so typing a longer response was more entertaining than a simple "Agreed".
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 08:08:47 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Kerdy is at a loss even in his own opinions based on fact. Don't confuse him anymore.
I have little interest in petty, emotionally driven, personal jabs. 

Petty? No.
Emotional? No.
Personal? Yes. What other kind are there when persons engage each other?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 08:09:50 PM
I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Perhaps, but this is where science begins to fail miserably and the only place to obtain the answers being sought is within what God has already provided.  I was going to add no one has ever been able to supply the answer outside conception (which modernists abhor), but I thought someone would actually try.

There you are just wrong again.

If I am going to have to keep correcting you, I want remuneration. I find that wagering on propositions reduces the noise to signal ratio quite effectively.

So $100, if I find an argument for the beginning of human life outside of conception? Heck, I'll even give it to charity.

I understand.  You are right.  I will try to remember that in the future.  My apologies.

Awesome.

So the second time in this thread where you haven't been able to substantiate a primary claim you have made.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 08:15:11 PM
What pill are we talking about here? Progestogen-only pills? Combined oral contraceptive pills? And even then, what dosage? A pill's mechanism of action depends on exactly what kind of pill we are talking about. Some do indeed make the uterus inhospitable for a fertilized egg, others suppress gonadotropins (GnRH and thereby FSH and LH) thereby suppressing ovulation.

Please don't bring nuance or scientificy words/distinctions into this discussion.

I'm not trying to muddy the waters with nuance, but the statement "The pill is an abortifacient" is so vague as to be meaningless (no offense intended). So, I responded.

Also, the nature of the abortion topic makes nuance and science inevitable, IMO.

In the end science will not win the day, but it is good when people are making arguments which resort science fictionals.

Your bolded statement is a point of mine among many except I don't care if people get offended. Good offense is the best the defense.

I agree that it will not win the day, but I think it helps. That may be my bias. I think scientific misinformation can help you lose, though.

I don't see how we are disagreeing.

I didn't think we were. I'm on a godforsaken, rainy highway on my way to NY so typing a longer response was more entertaining than a simple "Agreed".

Gotcha. I just didn't want you to think I was micturating on your point.

I am usually pretty clear when I am.

EDIT: Speaking of which, I am up to 12 times today, micturating that is. I am concerned it is a benign bladder infection, hoping for kidney failure, but like when I am micturating on other's points it has alas been clear. Perhaps diabetes. Oh the possibilities!
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 09:54:17 PM
Now, I feel it safe to say unless someone can clearly prove life starts at any time after conception the answer to abortion is, "Yes.  In the overwhelming majority of abortion cases it should be considered murder."  Additionally, if any medicine does in fact create an inhospitable environment for a conceived embryo to survive, which at least several do, it also should be considered murder.  There will be people who attempt to justify their actions and present circular arguments resisting anything produced to counter their arguments.  What they fail to realize is burden of proof is not only left for one side of the debate, rather each group must be able to support whatever it is they claim.  This support, of course, is left for those engaged in the fight.  In other words, asking your service station attendant to prove Loving vs. Virginia is a race case, not a marriage case is foolhardy and done for the sole purpose of making oneself feel superior.

Is abortion murder?  Probably, are you willing to risk it is not?

Is the pill the same?  Many people have seen the evidence to suggest it is.  Are you willing to risk it is not?

The choice is left to the individual.  Research the information, but do not look for the answer you want to find, look for the truth.  That burden is upon each person as an individual.  The one who makes the most noise has historically been proven to usually be wrong.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on July 19, 2012, 10:18:51 PM
     If it is why do we not treat it as such? If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands? Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.
     I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience. If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention? For illustration, to me shooting and killing Adolf Eichmann walking to his mail box may not be ethical, but to stop him from ordering a shipment of Jewish civilians to Auschwitz is entirely justified. There are options of course. Rather than killing someone, other forms of incapacitation may be considered. Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.
     All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison. Therefore, while I respect the person who has acted as a vigilante, I can not in good conscience recommend some one else take the risk that I can not.
     Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?


These are excellent yet difficult questions. I wrestled with them for many years, and ultimately this issue led me to become a pacifist. If violence is ever justifiable in order to save the innocent, then most surely it is justifiable to save the unborn from the brutality of abortion. However, I am convinced that violent solutions are never Christian solutions. Somehow we must try to fight, defend, and rescue our neighbors without killing our neighbors. Both the unborn child and the abortionist are our neighbors, and both need deliverance and salvation. I wish more Christians had the honesty and courage to ask and wrestle with the questions you have asked here.

"Lord have mercy."


Selam

***Bump***
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 10:27:37 PM
If it is why do we not treat it as such?

Our society suffers from what I have tagged, the “Me Syndrome”.  What’s in it for me?  What do I get out of it?  How does this affect me?  It’s all about “me” and no one else.  Even parenting suffers from this affliction.  You see it in almost every aspect of modern life today, which is why I believe America is falling into shambles.  Homosexuals say they were born that way thinking this somehow justifies their life choices of sin.  Parents kill their living children because its inconvenient to have them any longer.  Pregnancy and motherhood suffer as well.  I have heard women actually, in defense of abortion, ask why they should destroy their bodies just to have a child ignoring their own actions caused their condition.  Lack of responsibility.  The world is a sick and evil place.  Since most of society suffers from the Me Syndrome, they see no problem with killing unborn children.  They have convinced themselves it is not only ok, but the child is not real.  Lately, some have even been so bold as to proclaim a born child is not a viable personality and can be killed up to two years old.  Evil controls the country and it is only getting stronger.  Those of us who see it for what it really is are the minority.  Abortion has absolutely become birth control.

If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands?

Because this creates Anarchy, which easily spirals out of control.  At least now we still maintain some semblance of authority.

Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.

But then, we become the criminal and the scourge of society and culture.  Usually those who conduct this type of action are unstable anyway and dangerous to anyone.  Abortion is only a means for them to focus their aggression.  Until we are able to change laws, it is a losing battle to engage in this type of warfare.  At best, the person or persons will be called extremists or religious zealots.

I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience.

One of the things I believe the Roman Catholic Church as gotten right is this.  Their response to abortion is respectable.  A very dear friend of mine who is Catholic is very involved in prayer vigils at abortion clinics and state buildings, etc.  Peaceful, but they let their voices be heard in the silence of prayer.  No violence, no loudness, only peaceful non-resistance to show there is a better way.  My wife and I once convinced a young woman to not abort and instead give the child over for adoption simply by talking to her for a few hours.  If you feel very strongly and want to participate, I encourage to you ask your Catholic friends if you can join.

If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention?

I see your reasoning, but again, this results in chaos, which does no good for anyone.  Until the state has its mind changed, all efforts would be wasted.

Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.

What you must understand is if we all went around beating the dog snot out of people we disagreed with, we would have no time left for anything else and everyone would be engaged in fighting and hurting one another.  Violence is rarely the right response and only as a last resort when all lesser means have failed.  Vandalizing machinery still gets people hurt.  If your goal is to end abortion, you must win the hearts of others and convince their minds it is wrong.  Being a vigilante would not accomplish this goal.  They would only think you were a nutjob and dismiss anything you had to say.

All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison.

Sounds like a good reason to me.  

Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?

This is the multi-billion dollar question.  When does life actually begin?  Ask 10 people and you will get 10 different answers.  Until we know for certain, I say be cautious and start at conception, to make sure we do not kill anyone.

Since we are talking about this, I was convinced by the abovementioned Catholic friend the abortion pill is also wrong.  Took some time, but he won me over.  I mention this because this is how you will change a person’s mind.  


***Double bump***

I hope I at least made a valiant effort to address each of his concerns.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on July 19, 2012, 10:36:07 PM
I'm surprised the whole "spilling seed" thing never entered into the Orthodox Church's thought, or maybe I missed it.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Iconodule on July 19, 2012, 10:38:11 PM
So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on July 19, 2012, 10:41:32 PM
So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?
I have very good reason to believe Kerdy is right because a friend of mine showed me something that said a friend of his showed him something exactly the same as the friend of Kerdy showed the rest of us.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 10:46:42 PM
So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?

You are not supposed to believe anything I say.  In fact, I encourage most people not to believe me about anything and research it themselves.  I supplied that engagement with my friend for people to know the information exists.  I went looking for the information to satisfy my own concerns, and found it.  If you want to see it, by all means go look for it.  If not, that is your choice.  I am not here to sway you in any direction.  As I previously stated, I did not collect the information to convince others in the future.  For anyone to think I should have I can only ask if every conversation they have ever had their mind changed on a topic, did they maintain all proof to share with others?  Doubtful.  In other words, its food for thought for those who realize they may be wrong.  For those who stand firm, there is nothing which will change your mind, which is why I did not collect it all to provide to others.  You don’t have to agree with my thinking process, but I feel if people really want to know, they will look into what they have questions about.  I am not a person equipped to get into detail about that topic, so I refrain from doing so and leave it to those who are.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 10:49:23 PM
So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?
I have very good reason to believe Kerdy is right because a friend of mine showed me something that said a friend of his showed him something exactly the same as the friend of Kerdy showed the rest of us.
Scoff if you like, but if we didn’t talk about what we learned from others, no one would ever say anything, or learn anything, would they?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 10:52:41 PM
So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?
I have very good reason to believe Kerdy is right because a friend of mine showed me something that said a friend of his showed him something exactly the same as the friend of Kerdy showed the rest of us.
Scoff if you like, but if we didn’t talk about what we learned from others, no one would ever say anything, or learn anything, would they?

If you were swayed by scientific evidence, which is the only that has any merit here on the topic being argued about oral contraception, that is EASY to reproduce.

I already gave you the form in which it takes and which it doesn't.

Get in touch with your friend and produce those studies. No big deal. Take a month. Just let us know when you get it.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on July 19, 2012, 11:02:27 PM
So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?
I have very good reason to believe Kerdy is right because a friend of mine showed me something that said a friend of his showed him something exactly the same as the friend of Kerdy showed the rest of us.
Scoff if you like, but if we didn’t talk about what we learned from others, no one would ever say anything, or learn anything, would they?
And if I learned anything from others is that it makes it harder to love thy neighbor.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 19, 2012, 11:41:40 PM
     If it is why do we not treat it as such? If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands? Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.
     I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience. If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention? For illustration, to me shooting and killing Adolf Eichmann walking to his mail box may not be ethical, but to stop him from ordering a shipment of Jewish civilians to Auschwitz is entirely justified. There are options of course. Rather than killing someone, other forms of incapacitation may be considered. Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.
     All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison. Therefore, while I respect the person who has acted as a vigilante, I can not in good conscience recommend some one else take the risk that I can not.
     Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?


These are excellent yet difficult questions. I wrestled with them for many years, and ultimately this issue led me to become a pacifist. If violence is ever justifiable in order to save the innocent, then most surely it is justifiable to save the unborn from the brutality of abortion. However, I am convinced that violent solutions are never Christian solutions. Somehow we must try to fight, defend, and rescue our neighbors without killing our neighbors. Both the unborn child and the abortionist are our neighbors, and both need deliverance and salvation. I wish more Christians had the honesty and courage to ask and wrestle with the questions you have asked here.

"Lord have mercy."


Selam

***Bump***

***Bump***
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 19, 2012, 11:43:31 PM
So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?
I have very good reason to believe Kerdy is right because a friend of mine showed me something that said a friend of his showed him something exactly the same as the friend of Kerdy showed the rest of us.
Scoff if you like, but if we didn’t talk about what we learned from others, no one would ever say anything, or learn anything, would they?
And if I learned anything from others is that it makes it harder to love thy neighbor.

Nice. Very anti-Shane.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ZealousZeal on July 20, 2012, 12:42:50 PM
Is abortion murder?  Probably, are you willing to risk it is not?

Is the pill the same?  Many people have seen the evidence to suggest it is.  Are you willing to risk it is not?

The choice is left to the individual.  Research the information, but do not look for the answer you want to find, look for the truth.  That burden is upon each person as an individual.  The one who makes the most noise has historically been proven to usually be wrong.

I don't believe you're speaking to me specifically, but since I am "making noise" here (without comment on the veracity of your last sentence) you will be relieved to hear that I am not an abortion supporter and the only pill I take is the occasional Excedrin when gin is not immediately handy.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on July 20, 2012, 01:36:00 PM
Orthonorm, at which point do you think life begins?  I ask as a matter of interest not as one of debate.

I will withhold my own opinion on the matter because I'd be interested in what you have to say without my own opinion being called into question without knowing what page you are on first.


ZZ, I'd be interested in knowing yours as well.  Once again, as a matter of interest.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 20, 2012, 01:52:27 PM
I will withhold my own opinion on the matter because I'd be interested in what you have to say without my own opinion being called into question without knowing what page you are on first.

In light these words, I can't help but recall Bill Hicks' (RIP) famous remark about the subject (paraphrased):

Quote
You're not a person till your name turns up in the phone book.

I used to rip the guy off all the time when I was seriously playing with Tollhouse 23. People would be dismayed by my smoking in bars (this is a feat given how much I was drinking that their concern would turn toward my smoking).

They would always ask: how many do you smoke a day?

I would answer: I am up to a two lighter a day habit.

Maybe I get to your question in earnest later. Maybe suggest another one. After all, one of the interesting traditional dichotomies which fell away some time ago from a strictly empirical basis is the difference between that which is alive and that which isn't.

The advent of the literature undead and all its fictional imaginings and its steady increase has more than a little to say on the matter.

In short, I could give you many answers. I just don't know if this is the proper question upon the question of abortion hangs much less the use of oral contraception.

In a strictly existential sense, I could use the old quip to the question is there life after death?

I am still waiting to see if there is life before.

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on July 20, 2012, 01:57:25 PM
I will withhold my own opinion on the matter because I'd be interested in what you have to say without my own opinion being called into question without knowing what page you are on first.

In light these words, I can't help but recall Bill Hicks' (RIP) famous remark about the subject (paraphrased):

Quote
You're not a person till your name turns up in the phone book.

I used to rip the guy off all the time when I was seriously playing with Tollhouse 23. People would be dismayed by my smoking in bars (this is a feat given how much I was drinking that their concern would turn toward my smoking).

They would always ask: how many do you smoke a day?

I would answer: I am up to a two lighter a day habit.

Maybe I get to your question in earnest later. Maybe suggest another one. After all, one of the interesting traditional dichotomies which fell away some time ago from a strictly empirical basis is the difference between that which is alive and that which isn't.

The advent of the literature undead and all its fictional imaginings and its steady increase has more than a little to say on the matter.

In short, I could give you many answers. I just don't know if this is the proper question upon the question of abortion hangs much less the use of oral contraception.

In a strictly existential sense, I could use the old quip to the question is there life after death?

I am still waiting to see if there is life before.



No other factors being considered, supposing two people screw and do all the steps necessary that would under any circumstance result in pregnancy, at which point would you consider the resulting mass of cells to be a human life?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on July 20, 2012, 02:19:50 PM
Start in a new thread non-religious topics for a couple of reasons:

So that the unsubstantiated remarks by Kerdy, Gebre, and company linking oral contraception to abortion and thus murder do not get buried.

Those having views non-religious can add to the discussion.

And those having manifold views including the religious can answer without the restrictions placed on them without too much of the piety police conflating such views with views regarding abortion.

It would allow a more concentrated debate, if that is possible.

 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on July 20, 2012, 02:25:38 PM
Start in a new thread non-religious topics for a couple of reasons:

So that the unsubstantiated remarks by Kerdy, Gebre, and company linking oral contraception to abortion and thus murder do not get buried.

Those having views non-religious can add to the discussion.

And those having manifold views including the religious can answer without the restrictions placed on them without too much of the piety police conflating such views with views regarding abortion.

It would allow a more concentrated debate, if that is possible.

 

Done
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ZealousZeal on July 20, 2012, 03:57:25 PM
Orthonorm, at which point do you think life begins?  I ask as a matter of interest not as one of debate.

I will withhold my own opinion on the matter because I'd be interested in what you have to say without my own opinion being called into question without knowing what page you are on first.


ZZ, I'd be interested in knowing yours as well.  Once again, as a matter of interest.

I think life begins at conception- I don't think there's any denying that at that point the embryo has genetic information making it unique from its parents. A separate, unique, human life.

I think a more interesting question is when does ensoulment occur? I don't know. I think of the spontaneous abortions that occur before a woman even knows she's pregnant and wonder if God is allowing these souls to pass or how that works. I just don't know. It's above my pay grade. I stick with conception.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Antonis on July 21, 2012, 01:27:01 AM
The way I look at it, our government effectively endorses abortion, which has killed far more people than Herod killed in his slaying of the innocent. We condemn Herod, and yet even those that are pro-life are pretty complacent when it comes to active opposition to the evil actions of our government. To put it into a more recent context, our government has endorsed the killing of more people than any recorded genocide. And yet we are relatively content to sit and be armchair critics. I am guilty of this myself.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on July 21, 2012, 01:29:28 AM
The way I look at it, our government effectively endorses abortion, which has killed far more people than Herod killed in his slaying of the innocent. We condemn Herod, and yet even those that are pro-life are pretty complacent when it comes to active opposition to the evil actions of our government. To put it into a more recent context, our government has endorsed the killing of more people than any recorded genocide. And yet we are relatively content to sit and be armchair critics. I am guilty of this myself.
I've never actually thought about putting Herod in the equation. Thanks for that.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on July 21, 2012, 01:37:45 AM
I would point out that those who are engaged in illegal or questionably legal activity in this or any other area are unlikely to talk about it here just to make themselves look less hypocritical...
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Antonis on July 21, 2012, 03:24:40 AM
The way I look at it, our government effectively endorses abortion, which has killed far more people than Herod killed in his slaying of the innocent. We condemn Herod, and yet even those that are pro-life are pretty complacent when it comes to active opposition to the evil actions of our government. To put it into a more recent context, our government has endorsed the killing of more people than any recorded genocide. And yet we are relatively content to sit and be armchair critics. I am guilty of this myself.
I've never actually thought about putting Herod in the equation. Thanks for that.
"When two or more are gathered in My Name..." :) I have likewise learned a lot from you and many others here. Thank you!
Quote
I would point out that those who are engaged in illegal or questionably legal activity in this or any other area are unlikely to talk about it here just to make themselves look less hypocritical...
Oh, totally, I agree and would never expect them to.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: IoanC on July 22, 2012, 04:50:50 AM
As far as why a fetus is a person, it is really very simple to answer. I think people get stuck in the fact that the fetus is a very early stage of human development. But, the true and full understanding is that no matter what stage a person is in, we are also talking about a soul; we believe that since the moment of conception a new soul joins the universe. Otherwise it's plain to see that the very purpose of conception is to bring new life into the world. What, when one wants children the fetus is good, and when one doesn't want children the fetus is bad? How subjective is that? And then, if you let a fetus grow it will most certainly become an adult, unless external factors come in (such as abortion or illness).  How many of us have not been a fetus at one point? Obviously, all of as have, so we could at least consider the fetus as potential life, if we do not believe the fetus is actually the soul of one who is the image and to become the likeness of God.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Opus118 on July 22, 2012, 11:13:47 PM
Kerdy, I am just going back in time to see how I might have played a role in you disgust of this particular topic and my potential role in it in another thread.

If it is why do we not treat it as such?

Our society suffers from what I have tagged, the “Me Syndrome”.  What’s in it for me?  What do I get out of it?  How does this affect me?  It’s all about “me” and no one else.  Even parenting suffers from this affliction.  You see it in almost every aspect of modern life today, which is why I believe America is falling into shambles.  Homosexuals say they were born that way thinking this somehow justifies their life choices of sin.  Parents kill their living children because its inconvenient to have them any longer.  Pregnancy and motherhood suffer as well.  I have heard women actually, in defense of abortion, ask why they should destroy their bodies just to have a child ignoring their own actions caused their condition.  Lack of responsibility.  The world is a sick and evil place.  Since most of society suffers from the Me Syndrome, they see no problem with killing unborn children.  They have convinced themselves it is not only ok, but the child is not real.  Lately, some have even been so bold as to proclaim a born child is not a viable personality and can be killed up to two years old.  Evil controls the country and it is only getting stronger.  Those of us who see it for what it really is are the minority.  Abortion has absolutely become birth control.

If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands?

Because this creates Anarchy, which easily spirals out of control.  At least now we still maintain some semblance of authority.

Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.

But then, we become the criminal and the scourge of society and culture.  Usually those who conduct this type of action are unstable anyway and dangerous to anyone.  Abortion is only a means for them to focus their aggression.  Until we are able to change laws, it is a losing battle to engage in this type of warfare.  At best, the person or persons will be called extremists or religious zealots.

I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience.

One of the things I believe the Roman Catholic Church as gotten right is this.  Their response to abortion is respectable.  A very dear friend of mine who is Catholic is very involved in prayer vigils at abortion clinics and state buildings, etc.  Peaceful, but they let their voices be heard in the silence of prayer.  No violence, no loudness, only peaceful non-resistance to show there is a better way.  My wife and I once convinced a young woman to not abort and instead give the child over for adoption simply by talking to her for a few hours.  If you feel very strongly and want to participate, I encourage to you ask your Catholic friends if you can join.

If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention?

I see your reasoning, but again, this results in chaos, which does no good for anyone.  Until the state has its mind changed, all efforts would be wasted.

Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.

What you must understand is if we all went around beating the dog snot out of people we disagreed with, we would have no time left for anything else and everyone would be engaged in fighting and hurting one another.  Violence is rarely the right response and only as a last resort when all lesser means have failed.  Vandalizing machinery still gets people hurt.  If your goal is to end abortion, you must win the hearts of others and convince their minds it is wrong.  Being a vigilante would not accomplish this goal.  They would only think you were a nutjob and dismiss anything you had to say.

All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison.

Sounds like a good reason to me.  

Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?

This is the multi-billion dollar question.  When does life actually begin?  Ask 10 people and you will get 10 different answers.  Until we know for certain, I say be cautious and start at conception, to make sure we do not kill anyone.

Since we are talking about this, I was convinced by the abovementioned Catholic friend the abortion pill is also wrong.  Took some time, but he won me over.  I mention this because this is how you will change a person’s mind.  


Overall I concur with this post. The "Me Syndrome" stems from a political philosophy of a particular party and I will not participate in private forums.

I mean birth control pill.  I always knew the day after pill was wrong.

This is where the problem starts as far as I can see and I am in the process of changing my opinion based on what I have read recently as a result of your inquiry.

Indeed.  I'm a "show me" sort of person and my friend presented the evidence, so I change my view to fit the facts.

Based on what I just read and you were equally informed, the evidence is likely statistically insignificant. I could  be wrong, but let us continue on this path.

My friend showed me.  The birth control pill makes the womb inhospitable to the fertilized egg, it does not prevent fertilization.

This is both right and wrong. The birth control pill primarily prevents fertilization. It does have the "potential" of preventing implantation of the embryo. A lot of things that have potential prove not to be relevant such that you should regulate you life according to your beliefs rather that scientific evidence because from what I can see it does not exists. More on this later.


You certainly are defensive.  There is no reason to be.  I said he showed me and convinced me, which was not easy, but I was open to the possibility and realized he was right.  He had the information as he is very active in the anti-abortion movement.  Mine was a personal inquiry.  If you have some reason to disbelieve what I have said, by all means believe what you want, but if you think I am going to “forum battle” with you, you are mistaken.  I do not have the relevant information you request, I never did and you seem unwilling to digest it appropriately anyway.  If you are, I suggest you get in touch with those who do have the information you are looking for, but from your list of unapproved sources, I have serious doubts you will ever find anything convincing.

Here it is apparent that your issue is with Orthonorm rather than the topic. My take on Orthonorm is someone who I would consider tries to serve as an educator with an emphasis on critical thinking. I likewise dislike debating and if you start debating I will likewise cease what I am trying to introduce as a conversation.

I feel it important, prior to discussing what is or is not wrong, a clear explanation of exactly when life begins should be established.  Without that, all views are subjective and nothing more than opinion. 

Here you start to tackle the the issue.

We'd have to define life first, and then human life... wouldn't we?

Here Asteriktos, in his wisdom, states what I inquired in a different thread.

Despite my  rejection of Asteriktos's taste in music and videos and despite his on-going ambivalency, I respect and pay attention to his posts. And it is not because we agree in this  particular, isolated, instance.

Here you complain about Asterkitos query:

Perhaps, but this is where science begins to fail miserably and the only place to obtain the answers being sought is within what God has already provided.  I was going to add no one has ever been able to supply the answer outside conception (which modernists abhor), but I thought someone would actually try.

And here you apparently reject the definition of life by scientists without a replacement. Although it is so obscure I have no idea of what you are talking about.

This should be a start to the discussion of this matter, a post that you have not apparently looked at although I cited it specifically for  you:
http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/pcbe/transcripts/jan03/session1.htm
l "Let me again try to begin by defining life and I think there exists a reasonable consensus amongst biologists on this definition, namely that life consists of all of the self-contained units of nature considered primarily of organic matter, autonomously and I stress the autonomously capable of undergoing development, reproduction and evolution. Note that this definition excludes the viruses because they're not autonomously capable of undergoing development and reproduction."

You do absolutely need to deal with the definition of life before going on with this discussion. This is something in your ball court and not ours.

Now, I feel it safe to say unless someone can clearly prove life starts at any time after conception the answer to abortion is, "Yes.  In the overwhelming majority of abortion cases it should be considered murder."  Additionally, if any medicine does in fact create an inhospitable environment for a conceived embryo to survive, which at least several do, it also should be considered murder.  There will be people who attempt to justify their actions and present circular arguments resisting anything produced to counter their arguments.  What they fail to realize is burden of proof is not only left for one side of the debate, rather each group must be able to support whatever it is they claim.  This support, of course, is left for those engaged in the fight.  In other words, asking your service station attendant to prove Loving vs. Virginia is a race case, not a marriage case is foolhardy and done for the sole purpose of making oneself feel superior.

Is abortion murder?  Probably, are you willing to risk it is not?

Is the pill the same?  Many people have seen the evidence to suggest it is.  Are you willing to risk it is not?

The choice is left to the individual.  Research the information, but do not look for the answer you want to find, look for the truth.  That burden is upon each person as an individual.  The one who makes the most noise has historically been proven to usually be wrong.

I did not have objections to this post but I do now:
Quote
Is the pill the same?  Many people have seen the evidence to suggest it is.  Are you willing to risk it is not?

By reason rather than faith I have doubt about the truthfulness of this statment.

So the only evidence for the pill being an "abortifacient" presented so far on this thread is that Kerdy says that his friend showed him something which I guess we're all supposed to believe. Am I following this right?

You are not supposed to believe anything I say.  In fact, I encourage most people not to believe me about anything and research it themselves.  I supplied that engagement with my friend for people to know the information exists.  I went looking for the information to satisfy my own concerns, and found it.  If you want to see it, by all means go look for it.  If not, that is your choice.  I am not here to sway you in any direction.  As I previously stated, I did not collect the information to convince others in the future.  For anyone to think I should have I can only ask if every conversation they have ever had their mind changed on a topic, did they maintain all proof to share with others?  Doubtful.  In other words, its food for thought for those who realize they may be wrong.  For those who stand firm, there is nothing which will change your mind, which is why I did not collect it all to provide to others.  You don’t have to agree with my thinking process, but I feel if people really want to know, they will look into what they have questions about.  I am not a person equipped to get into detail about that topic, so I refrain from doing so and leave it to those who are.

I did research it, and your premise is woefully wanting. Where do you want to go from here?

From what I know this is were this line of inquiry ended  with a new thread essentially dedicated in your honor that I posted in response to issues that I thought you had.


This is what I learned:

If the naturally occurring abortion rate due to the absence of embryonic implantation is 50-60%, who is going to fund the huge amount of money it would take to make a statement that that a 56.1% vs 56.2% natural abortion rate is statistically significant. And of course we should include how late, unknowingly pregnant women go to bed, whether they smoke, drink coca cola or beer, eat luncheon meats with nitrates, have sex, dance, watch soap operas, get distraught due to reading the newspaper, are unemployed, are impoverished,  have in the past been beaten by their husbands, and this list goes on. What are you willing to pay once fractional rises have been quantified? I suspect most of the hypothetical rise of natural abortion rates is not voluntary, like taking normal contraceptives, but nevertheless is preventable. You started out with the "Me Syndrome".  You must decide if the "Me Syndrome" is a good economic model or not. I reject it.


Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on July 23, 2012, 11:21:17 AM
     If it is why do we not treat it as such? If a woman and her "doctor" actually commit murder, with the state's permission if not actual blessing, why do we not take the law into our own hands? Moreover, if a person shoots and kills an abortionist in order to literally save the lives of children, we should reach out to him with some degree of empathy.
     I have often pondered in my head the right form and level of civil disobedience. If the abortion industry is in fact the  holocaust that it's been called, is it not justified to kill the murderer, not so much as means of punishment, but rather as a form of prevention? For illustration, to me shooting and killing Adolf Eichmann walking to his mail box may not be ethical, but to stop him from ordering a shipment of Jewish civilians to Auschwitz is entirely justified. There are options of course. Rather than killing someone, other forms of incapacitation may be considered. Examples include injuring an abortionists hands or eyes so that he or she has to give their practice. I have also pondered forms of non-violent methods such as vandalizing machinery.
     All the while I have abstained from any of these actions. I'd like to give a more noble reason, but the truth is I am too cowardly and selfish to face prison. Therefore, while I respect the person who has acted as a vigilante, I can not in good conscience recommend some one else take the risk that I can not.
     Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?


These are excellent yet difficult questions. I wrestled with them for many years, and ultimately this issue led me to become a pacifist. If violence is ever justifiable in order to save the innocent, then most surely it is justifiable to save the unborn from the brutality of abortion. However, I am convinced that violent solutions are never Christian solutions. Somehow we must try to fight, defend, and rescue our neighbors without killing our neighbors. Both the unborn child and the abortionist are our neighbors, and both need deliverance and salvation. I wish more Christians had the honesty and courage to ask and wrestle with the questions you have asked here.

"Lord have mercy."


Selam

***Bump***

***Bump***

***Bump***

That's the sound of my fifties as they bump in my trunk?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on July 23, 2012, 11:23:08 AM
Orthonorm, at which point do you think life begins?  I ask as a matter of interest not as one of debate.

I will withhold my own opinion on the matter because I'd be interested in what you have to say without my own opinion being called into question without knowing what page you are on first.


ZZ, I'd be interested in knowing yours as well.  Once again, as a matter of interest.

I think life begins at conception- I don't think there's any denying that at that point the embryo has genetic information making it unique from its parents. A separate, unique, human life.

I think a more interesting question is when does ensoulment occur? I don't know. I think of the spontaneous abortions that occur before a woman even knows she's pregnant and wonder if God is allowing these souls to pass or how that works. I just don't know. It's above my pay grade. I stick with conception.

I agree with you on all points.

I would guess that ensoulment occurs at conception as well.  "In sins did my mother conceive me", etc.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 23, 2012, 12:29:30 PM
Orthonorm, at which point do you think life begins?  I ask as a matter of interest not as one of debate.

I will withhold my own opinion on the matter because I'd be interested in what you have to say without my own opinion being called into question without knowing what page you are on first.


ZZ, I'd be interested in knowing yours as well.  Once again, as a matter of interest.

I think life begins at conception- I don't think there's any denying that at that point the embryo has genetic information making it unique from its parents. A separate, unique, human life.

I think a more interesting question is when does ensoulment occur? I don't know. I think of the spontaneous abortions that occur before a woman even knows she's pregnant and wonder if God is allowing these souls to pass or how that works. I just don't know. It's above my pay grade. I stick with conception.

I agree with you on all points.

I would guess that ensoulment occurs at conception as well.  "In sins did my mother conceive me", etc.
I was waiting to get to this point when evolution was brought into the picture, but one step at a time.  Ensoulment most likely happens at the same time or after life begins, so until we can answer that question, all else is conjecture.

The entire point of my engagement in these discussions is to reveal the origin of human life is unable and will never be able to accurately be answered.  Without clarity, people HOPE what they do is ok, but it could very well not be.  This isn’t combat or other persons lives hanging in the balance where split second choices must be made.  Abortion is an act of selfishness and is now used as a means of birth control, which is very, very wrong.  The bottom line is, if you do not want children, do not have sex.  If you get pregnant due to your own choices of taking the chance you could get pregnant, show a little responsibility for your actions and act like an adult.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Ortho_cat on July 23, 2012, 04:34:28 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 23, 2012, 05:29:10 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?


What is sobering is more people kill their babies on purpose than nature does by accident, according to these figures.

Almost 1 in 4 people will abort.  That is horrifying.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Ortho_cat on July 23, 2012, 06:37:10 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?


What is sobering is more people kill their babies on purpose than nature does by accident, according to these figures.

Almost 1 in 4 people will abort.  That is horrifying.

It hasn't always been that way. i'll bet nature was ahead up until the last 100 years.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on July 23, 2012, 07:17:04 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?


What is sobering is more people kill their babies on purpose than nature does by accident, according to these figures.

Almost 1 in 4 people will abort.  That is horrifying.

It hasn't always been that way. i'll bet nature was ahead up until the last 100 years.

There is a massive difference between miscarriage and abortion.  Worlds apart.  So, yes, I think you are probably right.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesRottnek on July 23, 2012, 09:46:26 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?


What is sobering is more people kill their babies on purpose than nature does by accident, according to these figures.

Almost 1 in 4 people will abort.  That is horrifying.

What is even more sobering is that countless people would rather spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to try and conceive a child, when there is some medical issue or another, rather than adopt the baby of an unwed teen mother.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on September 15, 2012, 05:47:37 PM
I have a question. Should we make criminals out of those that want to do harmful things to their body? Not only does that include abortion, but drug use, suicde, self-mutilation etc. I wouldn't want a government to make a decision about what I do to my body; it is not in their jurisdiction. That's not to say certain drugs aren't dangerous, there is, but you shouldn't make criminals out of them for what they do to themselves and they don't compromise the rights of others.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on September 15, 2012, 06:13:05 PM
but you shouldn't make criminals out of them for what they do to themselves and they don't compromise the rights of others.

Agreed. The counter argument to any of those is to show how they may affect society or others. For example, abortion is much bigger than the woman, drugs use can affect society, etc.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: TheMathematician on September 15, 2012, 06:43:55 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?


What is sobering is more people kill their babies on purpose than nature does by accident, according to these figures.

Almost 1 in 4 people will abort.  That is horrifying.
that is not true, or at least, has to be. all it says is that nearly 25% of babies were aborted, but it is possible (and likely, in my own personal opinion) that one person had multiple abortions.

Just like the divorce rate is (i forget the exact numbers, but they dont matter) is like, 50 percent, but yet, the percentage of people who have had a divorce is much lower.

Horrific, yes, it is.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on September 15, 2012, 06:49:10 PM
but you shouldn't make criminals out of them for what they do to themselves and they don't compromise the rights of others.

Agreed. The counter argument to any of those is to show how they may affect society or others. For example, abortion is much bigger than the woman, drugs use can affect society, etc.
And that seems to be the Achilles heel anytime you try to advocate more individual freedom because of the ramifications.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on September 15, 2012, 07:29:41 PM
I have a question. Should we make criminals out of those that want to do harmful things to their body? Not only does that include abortion, but drug use, suicde, self-mutilation etc. I wouldn't want a government to make a decision about what I do to my body; it is not in their jurisdiction. That's not to say certain drugs aren't dangerous, there is, but you shouldn't make criminals out of them for what they do to themselves and they don't compromise the rights of others.
To fit your description, you would need to remove abortion from your list, at the very least.  That action does compromise another person.  At a minimum the baby.  It also ignores the father.  Even with others on your list, the situation dictates.  Some actions would be criminal and cause a person to be institutionalized.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Quinault on September 15, 2012, 08:43:18 PM
As ZZ mentioned earlier, different contraceptive pills work in different ways.

Look at this site to see how various methods work:
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/preventingpregnancy/birthcontrolfailure.html
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Quinault on September 15, 2012, 08:50:28 PM
http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-pills

Quote
Hormonal contraceptives (the pill, the patch, and the vaginal ring) all contain a small amount of man-made estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work to inhibit the body's natural cyclical hormones to prevent pregnancy. Pregnancy is prevented by a combination of factors. The hormonal contraceptive usually stops the body from ovulating. Hormonal contraceptives also change the cervical mucus to make it difficult for the sperm to find an egg. Hormonal contraceptives can also prevent pregnancy by making the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation.

I think what mucks up the works on this argument is that the birth control pill doesn't exactly work the same for everyone. There are some women that ovulate while taking the pill. There is no way to know without extensive ultrasound testing thru the cycle if you are one of those people. Most people don't ovulate at all while on a hormonal birth control product. But there is a precentage that do not have cervical mucus changes, that do ovulate, and the only change is the lining of the uterus.

The reason why we know this is true is because one of the first things they do when you have problems with heavy cycles is suggest you go on the pill. This will make dangerously heavy cycles lighter, and can help a great number of women.

I for one am not willing to take the risk of possibly inhibiting implantation. But, that is a choice my husband and I made together. I won't be picketing the local pharmacy anytime soon. ::)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on September 16, 2012, 04:49:16 AM
http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-pills

Quote
Hormonal contraceptives (the pill, the patch, and the vaginal ring) all contain a small amount of man-made estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work to inhibit the body's natural cyclical hormones to prevent pregnancy. Pregnancy is prevented by a combination of factors. The hormonal contraceptive usually stops the body from ovulating. Hormonal contraceptives also change the cervical mucus to make it difficult for the sperm to find an egg. Hormonal contraceptives can also prevent pregnancy by making the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation.

I think what mucks up the works on this argument is that the birth control pill doesn't exactly work the same for everyone. There are some women that ovulate while taking the pill. There is no way to know without extensive ultrasound testing thru the cycle if you are one of those people. Most people don't ovulate at all while on a hormonal birth control product. But there is a precentage that do not have cervical mucus changes, that do ovulate, and the only change is the lining of the uterus.

The reason why we know this is true is because one of the first things they do when you have problems with heavy cycles is suggest you go on the pill. This will make dangerously heavy cycles lighter, and can help a great number of women.

I for one am not willing to take the risk of possibly inhibiting implantation. But, that is a choice my husband and I made together. I won't be picketing the local pharmacy anytime soon. ::)

So you have clearly advocated the "Pro-Choice" position. If you personally believe - based on medical and biological evidence - that birth control pills may indeed inhibit the conceived human life from implanting on the uteran wall, then why would you want anyone to have the choice to kill such life by artificially (and I would argue violently) denying it the natural ability of implantation? How is your position philosophically and morally different from the "right to abortion" position?


Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Quinault on September 17, 2012, 12:58:55 AM
My position is that I should not interfere in the family planning aspects of anyone else's life. I don't believe that the public should have the right to make those types of choice for other people. If that were the case in my area I would have already been sterilized for having too many children. If I have the right to tell someone that they can't use birth control pills, I don't want them to have the right to say that I have to permanently sterilize myself.

And the fact remains that hormonal birth control pills are a godsend for women with certain medical conditions. There are people that are not sexually active that use them to control hormonal issues. My good friend had the option of going on hormonal birth control pills or having a hysterectomy. She chose the hysterectomy. I personally would have chosen the pill with a barrier method to prevent conception. I don't think I should lose my uterus instead of taking a birth control pill. The health risks of a hysterectomy are much higher than taking birth control pills.

I am stuck right in the middle between "pro-life" and "pro-choice." I believe the majority of the country is right here with me. There is no amount of emotional appeal or accusation that will get me to join either side.

Look; I have been pregnant 9 times with 10 babies. I have 5 babies, I wish I had all 10. I am anything BUT a person that promotes abortion. But I am sane enough to see that forcing a population to have "unplanned" children is extremely unwise. The foster care system can't keep up with the crappy parents we already have.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on September 17, 2012, 01:28:47 AM
Unplanned children have been part of life for a minimum of 6000 years.  We survived.    In fact, I was an unplanned child.  The only one of my siblings.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on September 17, 2012, 01:38:38 AM
Unplanned children have been part of life for a minimum of 6000 years.  We survived.    In fact, I was an unplanned child.  The only one of my siblings.

Amen.

And Quinalt, thanks for your answer. But please stop with the "forcing the population to have unplanned children" nonsense. Nobody is forcing anyone to have children. Before abortion was legalized, nobody was strapping women to beds and forcing them to give birth. If a woman wants to kill her baby, she will find a way to do so. But I certainly don't believe that we should make that murder safe and convenient for her.

God help this sick world.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Quinault on September 17, 2012, 02:09:39 AM
You sort of missed where my quotes were there. The fact that I said "unplanned" is rather important. I know that the population has dealt with unplanned children in the past quite well. But I don't think in our current very secular society that it is a good idea to try and work on discouraging hormonal birth control use. We can't even work toward something close to that until people see life as beginning at conception. And before we can even get people to see that, they have to see abortion as the tragic thing that it is. Think of it as a "first things first" issue for me.

Would I like society to embrace children? Of course. Do I think that it is realistic to try to discourage the use of birth control pills when abortion is already a big issue up for debate in the culture? Absolutely not.

I honestly think that the "pro-life" groups are going about this the wrong way. Abortion is quite dangerous to a woman's health. Outside of the fact that they are ending the life of a person, they are also damaging themselves. The argument for abortion is from a selfish "me" standpoint. The only way to show them how dangerous/wrong it is will be to show them how much it is dangerous to the woman.

And when it comes to birth control pills they need to argue from a water quality and health standpoint rather than a pregnancy standpoint. We were able to get the populace to use less antibiotics by pointing out how dangerous it is to use them too often. That same logic needs to be used with hormonal birth control.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on September 17, 2012, 03:04:08 AM

I honestly think that the "pro-life" groups are going about this the wrong way. Abortion is quite dangerous to a woman's health. Outside of the fact that they are ending the life of a person, they are also damaging themselves. The argument for abortion is from a selfish "me" standpoint. The only way to show them how dangerous/wrong it is will be to show them how much it is dangerous to the woman.



I very much agree with you on this point. That's also why I rarely brought up adoption during my days as a sidewalk counsellor trying to deter women from abortion. I think adoption is a beautiful thing, and certainly preferable to abortion. But as you correctly point out, most women who seek abortion are driven by selfish instincts. The thought of bringing a baby to term and then being separated from it rarely persuades a woman not to have an abortion.

If we focused more on how unhealthy abortion is for women, it would also expose the hypocrisy of the pro abortion feminists. We know that abortion is physically, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually detrimental. Legal abortion has not made abortion safe or rare, it has only made it legal.


Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gunnarr on September 23, 2012, 01:46:39 AM
A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction between its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.

-Saint Basil the Great

With that, why is there still a need to argue about this? The answer is there. Abortion is murder
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on September 23, 2012, 04:55:13 AM
A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction between its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.

-Saint Basil the Great

With that, why is there still a need to argue about this? The answer is there. Abortion is murder

You're new to this forum, so you obviously haven't learned to understand the nuance of the situation. In time, certain others here will disabuse you of such such an iron clad, black and white view of abortion. Of course, 50 million unborn babies have been "nuanced" to pieces over the past four decades, but let's not lose any sleep over that. After all, Christ clearly taught that it ain't important unless it's happening to us.


Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gunnarr on September 23, 2012, 06:47:57 PM
A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction between its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.

-Saint Basil the Great

With that, why is there still a need to argue about this? The answer is there. Abortion is murder

You're new to this forum, so you obviously haven't learned to understand the nuance of the situation. In time, certain others here will disabuse you of such such an iron clad, black and white view of abortion. Of course, 50 million unborn babies have been "nuanced" to pieces over the past four decades, but let's not lose any sleep over that. After all, Christ clearly taught that it ain't important unless it's happening to us.


Selam

The thing I do not understand is why people continue to debate about it when the fathers have already done it for us and have given us that answer. We are not going to get a better answer than those of the fathers
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on September 25, 2012, 11:10:29 AM
A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction between its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.

-Saint Basil the Great

With that, why is there still a need to argue about this? The answer is there. Abortion is murder

You're new to this forum, so you obviously haven't learned to understand the nuance of the situation. In time, certain others here will disabuse you of such such an iron clad, black and white view of abortion. Of course, 50 million unborn babies have been "nuanced" to pieces over the past four decades, but let's not lose any sleep over that. After all, Christ clearly taught that it ain't important unless it's happening to us.


Selam

The thing I do not understand is why people continue to debate about it when the fathers have already done it for us and have given us that answer. We are not going to get a better answer than those of the fathers

The debate between the people who accept the writings of the Fathers comes in two areas:

1- Where does conception start?  I think this is the crux between the hormonal birth control pill that blocks the bits from implanting.  Is blocking this considered killing a baby?  Is a condom?  Is a spermicide?  These questions must be answered before we can agree on 'what is an abortion'.  (FWIW, I don't think that anyone with and embryo's worth of brain cells equates a spontaneous abortion, i.e. a miscarriage, with murdering a baby.)

2- Once you have determined what constitutes as an abortion, what are you going to do about it?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthros on October 06, 2012, 01:07:39 PM
Someone had asked about medical details behind the abortifacient qualities of the Pill.  Here is one Q&A that addresses it quite plainly:

http://www.pfli.org/faq_oc.html


Scientific backing has demonstrated clearly, for many (20+) years, that women on the Pill have a 25%+ breakthrough ovulation pregnancy rate per annum. 

This means that if you are on the Pill for 20 years, and you are a reasonably (ahem) active individual, you are having, on average, about 5 abortions during that time period.

This isn't meant to create abnormal guilt, but merely to share the reality.

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Cyrillic on October 06, 2012, 01:19:11 PM

This means that if you are on the Pill for 20 years, and you are a reasonably (ahem) active individual, you are having, on average, about 5 abortions during that time period.


You made me feel very sad within two posts. Is this a new record?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: HabteSelassie on October 06, 2012, 02:36:17 PM
Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction between its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.

-Saint Basil the Great

With that, why is there still a need to argue about this? The answer is there. Abortion is murder

As divisive as this issue is, the upside is it points out just how much the Church is not an anachronism, the realities of the early Church age are IDENTICAL to the era we live in today, and Her solutions are equally valid.  However, we must always be careful to follow to Orthodox ontological approach, which tends to be more carrot, less stick.  We can't use Orthodox as a vault to support bigotry or prejudice, even against murderers (remember Matthew 25?) and other such sinners and criminals.  Even Cain was granted mercy..  We must ourselves fall back all the more on Grace through Prayer to forgive our communities of sin.  We don't convert them by the soundness of our philosophy, we convert them by the sheer miracle of our love for them and the endless compassion of our Savior.  We don't go around insulting sinners, we don't go around looking for fight, be they promiscuous, greedy, selfish, homosexual, and even murderers!  We show the sinning world the love of God when we love them who are the guiltiest!  So we need to continue to pray all the more for Grace.  The early Church didn't save the world from the evils of the Roman Empire by force of will or persuasive theology, rather by day in and day out loving the most  miserable of our societies, deep in the trenches.

In other words, approach is everything.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on October 06, 2012, 04:29:00 PM
That ORTHODOX could even debate this "issue" is astounding to me.

Any who think it is not murder should please explain to me how our Lord and Savior was just some fetal tissue until the Theotokos gave birth.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Basil 320 on October 06, 2012, 07:29:22 PM
Re. Reply No. 112

Excellent, concise point.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: 88Devin12 on October 06, 2012, 08:50:46 PM
Was Christ fully God and fully Man from the moment of his conception? Whatever we apply to Christ we also must apply to ourselves.

If we are Orthodox we have to answer yes, and therefore believe all life begins at conception, so yes, abortion is murder.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on October 06, 2012, 10:03:13 PM
Someone had asked about medical details behind the abortifacient qualities of the Pill.  Here is one Q&A that addresses it quite plainly:

http://www.pfli.org/faq_oc.html


Scientific backing has demonstrated clearly, for many (20+) years, that women on the Pill have a 25%+ breakthrough ovulation pregnancy rate per annum. 

This means that if you are on the Pill for 20 years, and you are a reasonably (ahem) active individual, you are having, on average, about 5 abortions during that time period.

This isn't meant to create abnormal guilt, but merely to share the reality.


There are also other considerations.  For instance, the pill doesn't prevent implantation, as designed, but does cause several birth problems.  Premature birth, weight, size, organ development, etc., from which many infants can not recover and subsequently expire.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on October 06, 2012, 10:04:46 PM
Re. Reply No. 112

Excellent, concise point.
No kidding!  Excellent post indeed!
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on October 06, 2012, 10:07:26 PM
That ORTHODOX could even debate this "issue" is astounding to me.

Any who think it is not murder should please explain to me how our Lord and Savior was just some fetal tissue until the Theotokos gave birth.

The key is, "until she gave birth." If He had been miscarried, or stillborn, you would refer to the baby as not a murder victim, but a dead body.

Important difference.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on October 06, 2012, 10:22:13 PM
That ORTHODOX could even debate this "issue" is astounding to me.

Any who think it is not murder should please explain to me how our Lord and Savior was just some fetal tissue until the Theotokos gave birth.

The key is, "until she gave birth." If He had been miscarried, or stillborn, you would refer to the baby as not a murder victim, but a dead body.

Important difference.
Not really.  One is a natural, unpreventable occurrence.  The other is an overt action taken for the purpose of preventing life from existing.

And you missed his "key" point completely.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shanghaiski on October 06, 2012, 10:57:25 PM
That ORTHODOX could even debate this "issue" is astounding to me.

Any who think it is not murder should please explain to me how our Lord and Savior was just some fetal tissue until the Theotokos gave birth.

Well, if they're crypto-Nestorian Adoptionists, no need for explanation.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shanghaiski on October 06, 2012, 10:59:23 PM
That ORTHODOX could even debate this "issue" is astounding to me.

Any who think it is not murder should please explain to me how our Lord and Savior was just some fetal tissue until the Theotokos gave birth.

The key is, "until she gave birth." If He had been miscarried, or stillborn, you would refer to the baby as not a murder victim, but a dead body.

Important difference.

An intentional miscarriage is murder.

An unintentional miscarriage is an accidental death.

The former is penanced heavily. The latter may or may not be penanced, depending on circumstances.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on October 07, 2012, 09:56:19 PM
in the Old Testament, God commanded that if a man injures a pregnant woman and she loses her child than you must pay life for life therefore an unborn child is a full child.  There is NEVER any justification for any type of killing. 
As for being answerable for your crimes... Jesus basically got rid of the death penalty in John 8:1-7.  Just like in the OT God said that there blood will he on their own heads, they will not inherit the Kingdom of God and we must leave there fate at the Hands of God. 

He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
-Revelations 22:11
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on October 07, 2012, 09:58:59 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?


What is sobering is more people kill their babies on purpose than nature does by accident, according to these figures.

Almost 1 in 4 people will abort.  That is horrifying.

What is even more sobering is that countless people would rather spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to try and conceive a child, when there is some medical issue or another, rather than adopt the baby of an unwed teen mother.
Amen
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: akimori makoto on October 07, 2012, 10:06:04 PM
That ORTHODOX could even debate this "issue" is astounding to me.

Any who think it is not murder should please explain to me how our Lord and Savior was just some fetal tissue until the Theotokos gave birth.

The key is, "until she gave birth." If He had been miscarried, or stillborn, you would refer to the baby as not a murder victim, but a dead body.

Important difference.

I don't understand this analysis but feel it is because I am missing something.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: 88Devin12 on October 13, 2012, 11:36:38 PM
I'm surprised that no one has actually commented on the point I brought up. The issue of when conception happens and when it is a full human being is inevitably a Christological issue. Whatever we say about Christ as man must also be applied to us.

Was Jesus both fully God and fully Man from the moment of his conception in Mary's womb, or did he not become human until later? What was he inside her womb if not a full human being?

If Jesus was human from his conception, then due to our theology there is absolutely no way around it, we all become humans from the moment of conception. Therefore, from conception onward must be considered the murder of a full human being.

It isn't about a woman's right to harm her body because that child isn't her property and she doesn't have the right to end it's life, no matter how early it is in the stages of development.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: 88Devin12 on October 13, 2012, 11:42:13 PM
That ORTHODOX could even debate this "issue" is astounding to me.

Any who think it is not murder should please explain to me how our Lord and Savior was just some fetal tissue until the Theotokos gave birth.

The key is, "until she gave birth." If He had been miscarried, or stillborn, you would refer to the baby as not a murder victim, but a dead body.

Important difference.

I don't understand this analysis but feel it is because I am missing something.

Biro is taking a modern English translation and misreading it. When it says "until" we cannot assume that in the original Greek that means until the moment of. Like with her virginity, the original wording doesn't imply a change after a certain point.

If he had been aborted he would be a murder victim. If he had been stillborn, he would be a human being who had died in the womb.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Antonis on October 14, 2012, 02:18:34 AM
I'm surprised that no one has actually commented on the point I brought up. The issue of when conception happens and when it is a full human being is inevitably a Christological issue. Whatever we say about Christ as man must also be applied to us.

Was Jesus both fully God and fully Man from the moment of his conception in Mary's womb, or did he not become human until later? What was he inside her womb if not a full human being?

If Jesus was human from his conception, then due to our theology there is absolutely no way around it, we all become humans from the moment of conception. Therefore, from conception onward must be considered the murder of a full human being.

It isn't about a woman's right to harm her body because that child isn't her property and she doesn't have the right to end it's life, no matter how early it is in the stages of development.
A woman who deliberately destroys a fetus is answerable for murder. And any fine distinction between its being completely formed or unformed is not admissible among us.
-Saint Basil the Great
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on October 15, 2012, 08:59:16 AM
Very good, Antonis.
We should also add Canon XCI of the Council in Trullo:
"Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the fœtus, are subjected to the penalty of murder. "

and:

Canon XXI of the Council of Ancyra:
"Concerning women who commit fornication, and destroy that which they have conceived, or who are employed in making drugs for abortion, a former decree excluded them until the hour of death, and to this some have assented.  Nevertheless, being desirous to use somewhat greater lenity, we have ordained that they fulfill ten years [of penance], according to the prescribed degrees."

Both of these were received ecumenically in the following general synod. I do not know how much more specific it can be for us.

(Available at the CCEL website in The Seven Ecumenical Councils
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on November 28, 2012, 02:49:31 PM
If we focused more on how unhealthy abortion is for women, it would also expose the hypocrisy of the pro abortion feminists. We know that abortion is physically, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually detrimental. Legal abortion has not made abortion safe or rare, it has only made it legal.

Selam

Abortion is a major political issue that's affected many of the women the best and luckiest of those men spend their lives loving. Among the women I know best, who include a former abortion counselor, a woman who tried and failed to physically conceive a child, and a number of women who've had abortions themselves, the general sense is that the women's movement, whatever its privately and sometimes publicly articulated sensitivities, was remiss in failing to figure out a way to make its awareness of the ambiguities abortion involved clearer to the polity. In fear of the slippery slope certain truths got and get downplayed. But that said, there's no doubt that the mad intransigence and monumental insensitivity of the anti-abortion movement makes public clarity just about impossible; any nuance is certain to be distorted by the opposition. And it must also be said that the prevalence of penises among the punditocracy (not to mention legislators) insures that the distortions will have more life than the zero they should.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on November 28, 2012, 04:40:16 PM
If we focused more on how unhealthy abortion is for women, it would also expose the hypocrisy of the pro abortion feminists. We know that abortion is physically, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually detrimental. Legal abortion has not made abortion safe or rare, it has only made it legal.

Selam

Abortion is a major political issue that's affected many of the women the best and luckiest of those men spend their lives loving. Among the women I know best, who include a former abortion counselor, a woman who tried and failed to physically conceive a child, and a number of women who've had abortions themselves, the general sense is that the women's movement, whatever its privately and sometimes publicly articulated sensitivities, was remiss in failing to figure out a way to make its awareness of the ambiguities abortion involved clearer to the polity. In fear of the slippery slope certain truths got and get downplayed. But that said, there's no doubt that the mad intransigence and monumental insensitivity of the anti-abortion movement makes public clarity just about impossible; any nuance is certain to be distorted by the opposition. And it must also be said that the prevalence of penises among the punditocracy (not to mention legislators) insures that the distortions will have more life than the zero they should.
A couple of things.
First, if you think that for us proponents of the pro-life position, this is merely a political issue, you are mistaken. This is not about politics for us, but about ending institutionalized murder. This certainly has political implications, and my even be used by some politicians as a wedge, but in reality it is a human rights issue. It is not about left, vs. right, nor democrat vs. republican. It's about the fact that we live in a grossly unjust society which allows for the killing of its weakest members. Everyone who is a thinking person should be pro-life.
Second, you are mistaken if you think that members of the pro-life movement are insensitive to the women involved. Many pro-life organizations, such as Project Defending Life(  http://www.defendinglife.org/pro-life_new_mexico/index.htm (http://www.defendinglife.org/pro-life_new_mexico/index.htm)l ) offer ministry and charitable services to women in crisis pregnancies. We want to help both the mother and the child.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 04:46:07 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on November 28, 2012, 05:21:34 PM
Taking this to Politics. See my new thread Papist.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on November 28, 2012, 06:09:30 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".



Sounds good.

I wonder if any other anti-abortionists will ever grow the stones to agree.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 06:29:09 PM
I think what they are trying to say is the Abortion is really really really bad but don't have exact enough language to convey that idea, so they say "Murder".

But that is so extreme and has so many illogical implications as I pointed out that is alienates unconvinced people from seriously considering the moral and ethical implications. In other words, calling it Murder is a conversation stopper. It is unnecessary and only results in more abortions, not less.   
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on November 28, 2012, 06:41:59 PM
I think what they are trying to say is the Abortion is really really really bad but don't have exact enough language to convey that idea, so they say "Murder".

But that is so extreme and has so many illogical implications as I pointed out that is alienates unconvinced people from seriously considering the moral and ethical implications. In other words, calling it Murder is a conversation stopper. It is unnecessary and only results in more abortions, not less.   

I gotcha.  I usually prefer to use the term "state-sanctioned killings".  It's kinda like Rwanda in that regard.  It's not really "genocide" but rather one of two fighting sides got an edge and was supported by that state and decided to go chop-saki on the other guys.  Human tribalism, more or less.  Really, when you think about abortion, I don't think the state allows it because they are all Moloch-worshiping baby-murder fetishists (as awesome as that slur would be...).  I think the state sanctions it because it is convenient.  It appeases the feminists and it does a good job of keeping minority and trailer-park-folk populations in check.  Women are the greatest consumers in society so you have to keep the feminists happy and poor people are such a drag on society and you can't just wait til they are born and send them up the chimney.  That would require too much infrastructure and media compliance.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on November 28, 2012, 06:45:10 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".



Sounds good.

I wonder if any other anti-abortionists will ever grow the stones to agree.

So easily you buy that seductive argument, the false syllogism about "no civilized society would..." and ignore the obvious that those societies in fact are NOT civilized.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on November 28, 2012, 07:14:14 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".


Maybe in a truly civilized society there should be a prison term for abortion. The fact that there is not, is a good sign that Western society is no longer civilized.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 07:31:55 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".



Sounds good.

I wonder if any other anti-abortionists will ever grow the stones to agree.

So easily you buy that seductive argument, the false syllogism about "no civilized society would..." and ignore the obvious that those societies in fact are NOT civilized.

Oh okay.. I kinda thought they were.. England anyway.. ( excluding Scotland of course).
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 07:37:44 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".


Maybe in a truly civilized society there should be a prison term for abortion. The fact that there is not, is a good sign that Western society is no longer civilized.

 And that is why perfectly reasonable people reject the entire Pro Life argument. They hear childish stuff like that and figure they are in the right. Cant blame them.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfpJOTY5KWzbs0VDaCto-JH3fN4b6yZ3qyKeT7PosY1KEydjlMfw)

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQt-iQFuBhuJkhNcihpp-BMlMsje2g21NF_ZCmGY_k4osADdfuA)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on November 28, 2012, 07:39:51 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".


Maybe in a truly civilized society there should be a prison term for abortion. The fact that there is not, is a good sign that Western society is no longer civilized.

 And that is why perfectly reasonable people reject the entire Pro Life argument. They hear childish stuff like that and figure they are in the right. Cant blame them.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfpJOTY5KWzbs0VDaCto-JH3fN4b6yZ3qyKeT7PosY1KEydjlMfw)

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQt-iQFuBhuJkhNcihpp-BMlMsje2g21NF_ZCmGY_k4osADdfuA)
Ha! Reasonable like genghis khan.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gunnarr on November 28, 2012, 07:45:44 PM
Very good, Antonis.
We should also add Canon XCI of the Council in Trullo:
"Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the fœtus, are subjected to the penalty of murder. "

and:

Canon XXI of the Council of Ancyra:
"Concerning women who commit fornication, and destroy that which they have conceived, or who are employed in making drugs for abortion, a former decree excluded them until the hour of death, and to this some have assented.  Nevertheless, being desirous to use somewhat greater lenity, we have ordained that they fulfill ten years [of penance], according to the prescribed degrees."

Both of these were received ecumenically in the following general synod. I do not know how much more specific it can be for us.

(Available at the CCEL website in The Seven Ecumenical Councils
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on November 28, 2012, 07:47:54 PM
Just realized that this was the faith issues forum. I'm going to drop out of the thread as per forum rules. Sorry moderators.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 07:56:29 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".


Maybe in a truly civilized society there should be a prison term for abortion. The fact that there is not, is a good sign that Western society is no longer civilized.

 And that is why perfectly reasonable people reject the entire Pro Life argument. They hear childish stuff like that and figure they are in the right. Cant blame them.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfpJOTY5KWzbs0VDaCto-JH3fN4b6yZ3qyKeT7PosY1KEydjlMfw)

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQt-iQFuBhuJkhNcihpp-BMlMsje2g21NF_ZCmGY_k4osADdfuA)
Ha! Reasonable like genghis khan.

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQA871FyBdloW0_YY69RWyHx5CQR_Oj5zgoFPpPYl7KPZI_Udjc).

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTA_6ENZSZH82zmugp-Qm68UPcWa1Y8CUMKABOsrR57DxE319En)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRUCJLBlWq5klBLX8f-m39OiSf6bOKWlju_s9pn18MfNAElLdQq)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on November 28, 2012, 08:12:14 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on November 28, 2012, 08:25:00 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".



Sounds good.

I wonder if any other anti-abortionists will ever grow the stones to agree.

So easily you buy that seductive argument, the false syllogism about "no civilized society would..." and ignore the obvious that those societies in fact are NOT civilized.

I'm not entirely sure what you are arguing??
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: akimori makoto on November 28, 2012, 08:40:43 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".


Maybe in a truly civilized society there should be a prison term for abortion. The fact that there is not, is a good sign that Western society is no longer civilized.

 And that is why perfectly reasonable people reject the entire Pro Life argument. They hear childish stuff like that and figure they are in the right. Cant blame them.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfpJOTY5KWzbs0VDaCto-JH3fN4b6yZ3qyKeT7PosY1KEydjlMfw)

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQt-iQFuBhuJkhNcihpp-BMlMsje2g21NF_ZCmGY_k4osADdfuA)
Ha! Reasonable like genghis khan.

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQA871FyBdloW0_YY69RWyHx5CQR_Oj5zgoFPpPYl7KPZI_Udjc).

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTA_6ENZSZH82zmugp-Qm68UPcWa1Y8CUMKABOsrR57DxE319En)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRUCJLBlWq5klBLX8f-m39OiSf6bOKWlju_s9pn18MfNAElLdQq)

Who cares what ideas these allegedly reasonable women hold?

It is beyond argument that it is plainly immoral to terminate the life of a child eight or nine months old, even while still in the mother's womb (the heinousness of the act is even more plainly apprehended where the termination was over the objection of the mother). You and these other allegedly reasonable people wouldn't dare to argue that such a thing is subjective or subject to reasonable disagreement. You and these other allegedly reasonable people would demand the killer be subject to legal sanction, including potentially to a term of imprisonment.

While your argument may hold water at the "small mass of multiplying cells" stage of gestation, it is plain that any civilised society would, in fact, demand some punishment for the killer of a child at the late stages of its development in the womb. Pretending like this whole matter is one of subjective judgment about which people might civilly disagree while taking tea and scones is bizarre, especially as our knowledge of foetal development advances.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 09:13:34 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 09:23:59 PM
You can ascribe a logical train of thought that can lead you to call Abortion "Murder".

However the logic breaks down at certain points. For example, if you hire someone to kill you husband or wife, pay money for the act and then get caught you will either get the death penalty or life in prison.

If you are a Woman who hires a Doctor to end your pregnancy ( kill the fetus) no civilized society would then give that Woman the Death Penalty or life in prison.. So there is clearly a disconnect between taking a fetal life and what we normally label as "Murder".


Maybe in a truly civilized society there should be a prison term for abortion. The fact that there is not, is a good sign that Western society is no longer civilized.

 And that is why perfectly reasonable people reject the entire Pro Life argument. They hear childish stuff like that and figure they are in the right. Cant blame them.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfpJOTY5KWzbs0VDaCto-JH3fN4b6yZ3qyKeT7PosY1KEydjlMfw)

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQt-iQFuBhuJkhNcihpp-BMlMsje2g21NF_ZCmGY_k4osADdfuA)
Ha! Reasonable like genghis khan.

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQA871FyBdloW0_YY69RWyHx5CQR_Oj5zgoFPpPYl7KPZI_Udjc).

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTA_6ENZSZH82zmugp-Qm68UPcWa1Y8CUMKABOsrR57DxE319En)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRUCJLBlWq5klBLX8f-m39OiSf6bOKWlju_s9pn18MfNAElLdQq)

Who cares what ideas these allegedly reasonable women hold?

It is beyond argument that it is plainly immoral to terminate the life of a child eight or nine months old, even while still in the mother's womb (the heinousness of the act is even more plainly apprehended where the termination was over the objection of the mother). You and these other allegedly reasonable people wouldn't dare to argue that such a thing is subjective or subject to reasonable disagreement. You and these other allegedly reasonable people would demand the killer be subject to legal sanction, including potentially to a term of imprisonment.

While your argument may hold water at the "small mass of multiplying cells" stage of gestation, it is plain that any civilised society would, in fact, demand some punishment for the killer of a child at the late stages of its development in the womb. Pretending like this whole matter is one of subjective judgment about which people might civilly disagree while taking tea and scones is bizarre, especially as our knowledge of foetal development advances.

Who cares what ideas these allegedly reasonable women hold?


The electorate

any civilised society would, in fact, demand some punishment for the killer of a child at the late stages of its development in the womb.

But that isnt the whole story is it? I thought the soul enters the body at conception. Therefore, even the death of a zygote not attached to the uterine wall is a Murder too. Right or wrong?



 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Ashman618 on November 28, 2012, 09:43:58 PM
Is the assent to a thought of desire to have an abortion murder since you already murdered in your heart?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on November 28, 2012, 10:32:52 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on November 28, 2012, 11:01:31 PM
Is the assent to a thought of desire to have an abortion murder since you already murdered in your heart?

I would say that it is lesser because since it is legal the only thing stopping you is your conscience.  It is temptation.  To not go through with it is an act of mercy.  If I had a strong desire to kill you but thought better of it it could be said that fear of retribution stopped me.  If I were an autocrat and thought to kill you but decided against it despite having every opportunity and justification to do so, that would generally be considered clemency.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: akimori makoto on November 28, 2012, 11:18:11 PM
Who cares what ideas these allegedly reasonable women hold?


The electorate

Thank God for the common law.

any civilised society would, in fact, demand some punishment for the killer of a child at the late stages of its development in the womb.

But that isnt the whole story is it? I thought the soul enters the body at conception. Therefore, even the death of a zygote not attached to the uterine wall is a Murder too. Right or wrong?

Nice try, but that was not my contention. My contention was that there are certain types of "abortion" (what a hideous word, drawing as it does a false equivalence between aborting a project and ending a human life) which are plainly immoral and about which reasonably people would agree constitute murder, if not wilful manslaughter. I object to the picture you paint, wherein whether or not the dismembering of a "viable" human child is immoral is a question on which reasonable minds might differ, potentially while politely nibbling at crustless cucumber sandwiches.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 11:18:47 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 28, 2012, 11:25:54 PM
Who cares what ideas these allegedly reasonable women hold?


The electorate

Thank God for the common law.

any civilised society would, in fact, demand some punishment for the killer of a child at the late stages of its development in the womb.

But that isnt the whole story is it? I thought the soul enters the body at conception. Therefore, even the death of a zygote not attached to the uterine wall is a Murder too. Right or wrong?

Nice try, but that was not my contention. My contention was that there are certain types of "abortion" (what a hideous word, drawing as it does a false equivalence between aborting a project and ending a human life) which are plainly immoral and about which reasonably people would agree constitute murder, if not wilful manslaughter. I object to the picture you paint, wherein whether or not the dismembering of a "viable" human child is immoral is a question on which reasonable minds might differ, potentially while politely nibbling at crustless cucumber sandwiches.

Okay...That's pretty easy and by in large already in place. Very late term abortions are relatively easy to persuade people to avoid. They practically have to put a bullet behind the ear in some cases.. The issue is if a fetus at any stage including Zygotes are fully persons as the Church teaches. That is much harder to beleive and is really a matter of faith and religion, so it is difficult to legislate against. 

Since it is really a matter of religious faith then that probably should be the ground the battle should be fought on, persuading people.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: akimori makoto on November 28, 2012, 11:46:10 PM
Who cares what ideas these allegedly reasonable women hold?


The electorate

Thank God for the common law.

any civilised society would, in fact, demand some punishment for the killer of a child at the late stages of its development in the womb.

But that isnt the whole story is it? I thought the soul enters the body at conception. Therefore, even the death of a zygote not attached to the uterine wall is a Murder too. Right or wrong?

Nice try, but that was not my contention. My contention was that there are certain types of "abortion" (what a hideous word, drawing as it does a false equivalence between aborting a project and ending a human life) which are plainly immoral and about which reasonably people would agree constitute murder, if not wilful manslaughter. I object to the picture you paint, wherein whether or not the dismembering of a "viable" human child is immoral is a question on which reasonable minds might differ, potentially while politely nibbling at crustless cucumber sandwiches.

Okay...That's pretty easy and by in large already in place. Very late term abortions are relatively easy to persuade people to avoid. They practically have to put a bullet behind the ear in some cases.. The issue is if a fetus at any stage including Zygotes are fully persons as the Church teaches. That is much harder to beleive and is really a matter of faith and religion, so it is difficult to legislate against. 

Since it is really a matter of religious faith then that probably should be the ground the battle should be fought on, persuading people.

Fair enough, Marc.

I'm not sure I agree, but I appreciate your argument when it is properly confined in this way.

Let us also acknowledge that "abortions" are very rarely performed on a four, eight or sixteen cell organism. I find it disconcerting that the more we are learning about foetal development and the early complexity of the child, the more we seem to have little trouble ending its life.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 29, 2012, 01:06:03 AM
The law is a very imperfect (and sometimes amoral) application of morality. Abortion is murder in moral terms. Its legal standing is irrelevent.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 29, 2012, 11:26:20 AM
The law is a very imperfect (and sometimes amoral) application of morality. Abortion is murder in moral terms. Its legal standing is irrelevent.

But, as presented it has the opposite effect of ending or curtailing abortions.

This is especially true if people find out that many in the Pro-Life side, like Papist, desire to fill the Prisons with Women who have abortions because they are "Murderers". People then rightly conclude that this is an immature political formulation, untethered from reality and dismiss the entirety of the Pro-Life argument as crackpot.

So you can win the right to use extreme rhetorical language or you can find an effective way to persuade people. You cant do both.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 29, 2012, 11:28:55 AM
Let us also acknowledge that "abortions" are very rarely performed on a four, eight or sixteen cell organism.

I am not sure that is true. Doesn't the Morning After Pill do exactly that? Isnt it's use very wide spread?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 29, 2012, 12:22:18 PM
The law is a very imperfect (and sometimes amoral) application of morality. Abortion is murder in moral terms. Its legal standing is irrelevent.

But, as presented it has the opposite effect of ending or curtailing abortions.

This is especially true if people find out that many in the Pro-Life side, like Papist, desire to fill the Prisons with Women who have abortions because they are "Murderers". People then rightly conclude that this is an immature political formulation, untethered from reality and dismiss the entirety of the Pro-Life argument as crackpot.

So you can win the right to use extreme rhetorical language or you can find an effective way to persuade people. You cant do both.

Well, they all laughed at Jesus when he did it.

For that reason and others, I don't buy the idiotic "they're all going to laugh at us" argument. They're going to do that anyway. Why play the game? The Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but for us it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on November 29, 2012, 01:21:01 PM
Let us also acknowledge that "abortions" are very rarely performed on a four, eight or sixteen cell organism.

I am not sure that is true. Doesn't the Morning After Pill do exactly that? Isnt it's use very wide spread?

No it does not.

And that is all I have for this round of abortion nonsense.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 29, 2012, 02:03:13 PM
The law is a very imperfect (and sometimes amoral) application of morality. Abortion is murder in moral terms. Its legal standing is irrelevent.

But, as presented it has the opposite effect of ending or curtailing abortions.

This is especially true if people find out that many in the Pro-Life side, like Papist, desire to fill the Prisons with Women who have abortions because they are "Murderers". People then rightly conclude that this is an immature political formulation, untethered from reality and dismiss the entirety of the Pro-Life argument as crackpot.

So you can win the right to use extreme rhetorical language or you can find an effective way to persuade people. You cant do both.

Well, they all laughed at Jesus when he did it.

For that reason and others, I don't buy the idiotic "they're all going to laugh at us" argument. They're going to do that anyway. Why play the game? The Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but for us it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.

I think there are actual real World Consequences for exteme rhetoric past laughing. For example, most Women voted the other way and now the Supreme Court will be packed with Pro Choice Justices making the overturn of Roe v. Wade impossible for a generation or two... ya know..for one thing :)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on November 30, 2012, 05:26:01 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)

Since we are in the Faith Issues, I thought we were addressing OP's question as a faith issue, that is from an Orthodox Christian perspective. Once we agree on an Orthodox Christian answer to that question, then we could pursue it further in Politics to discuss how we can affect public discourse.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on November 30, 2012, 05:53:59 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)

Since we are in the Faith Issues, I thought we were addressing OP's question as a faith issue, that is from an Orthodox Christian perspective. Once we agree on an Orthodox Christian answer to that question, then we could pursue it further in Politics to discuss how we can affect public discourse.

As an aside to this, are there any Orthodox Christians out there who do not believe, as a matter of religion, that abortion is the ending of a human life at any point after conception?  Looking at this from an entirely religious perspective, I thought this should be clear cut.  Is there any acceptable reason to the Church to end a pregnancy?  I think this should really be the only thing up to debate.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 30, 2012, 10:22:16 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)

Since we are in the Faith Issues, I thought we were addressing OP's question as a faith issue, that is from an Orthodox Christian perspective. Once we agree on an Orthodox Christian answer to that question, then we could pursue it further in Politics to discuss how we can affect public discourse.

Oh okay..Christian Tradition and Scripture clearly considers having an abortion a sin of the highest order.

Now then, are you considering forcing your religion on others or will you try to find ways to be persuasive?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on November 30, 2012, 10:26:55 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)

Since we are in the Faith Issues, I thought we were addressing OP's question as a faith issue, that is from an Orthodox Christian perspective. Once we agree on an Orthodox Christian answer to that question, then we could pursue it further in Politics to discuss how we can affect public discourse.

As an aside to this, are there any Orthodox Christians out there who do not believe, as a matter of religion, that abortion is the ending of a human life at any point after conception?  Looking at this from an entirely religious perspective, I thought this should be clear cut.  Is there any acceptable reason to the Church to end a pregnancy?  I think this should really be the only thing up to debate.

The Roman Church allows an abortion if the life of the mother is in danger and nothing extra is done to specifically to end the life of the fetus.
I assume we follow the same idea.``
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on December 01, 2012, 01:54:30 AM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)

Since we are in the Faith Issues, I thought we were addressing OP's question as a faith issue, that is from an Orthodox Christian perspective. Once we agree on an Orthodox Christian answer to that question, then we could pursue it further in Politics to discuss how we can affect public discourse.

As an aside to this, are there any Orthodox Christians out there who do not believe, as a matter of religion, that abortion is the ending of a human life at any point after conception?  Looking at this from an entirely religious perspective, I thought this should be clear cut.  Is there any acceptable reason to the Church to end a pregnancy?  I think this should really be the only thing up to debate.

The Roman Church allows an abortion if the life of the mother is in danger and nothing extra is done to specifically to end the life of the fetus.
I assume we follow the same idea.``

They do? ...?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on December 01, 2012, 09:40:09 AM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)

Since we are in the Faith Issues, I thought we were addressing OP's question as a faith issue, that is from an Orthodox Christian perspective. Once we agree on an Orthodox Christian answer to that question, then we could pursue it further in Politics to discuss how we can affect public discourse.

As an aside to this, are there any Orthodox Christians out there who do not believe, as a matter of religion, that abortion is the ending of a human life at any point after conception?  Looking at this from an entirely religious perspective, I thought this should be clear cut.  Is there any acceptable reason to the Church to end a pregnancy?  I think this should really be the only thing up to debate.

The Roman Church allows an abortion if the life of the mother is in danger and nothing extra is done to specifically to end the life of the fetus.
I assume we follow the same idea.``

They do? ...?

More important...we do?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shlomlokh on December 01, 2012, 10:30:53 AM
The law is a very imperfect (and sometimes amoral) application of morality. Abortion is murder in moral terms. Its legal standing is irrelevent.

But, as presented it has the opposite effect of ending or curtailing abortions.

This is especially true if people find out that many in the Pro-Life side, like Papist, desire to fill the Prisons with Women who have abortions because they are "Murderers". People then rightly conclude that this is an immature political formulation, untethered from reality and dismiss the entirety of the Pro-Life argument as crackpot.

So you can win the right to use extreme rhetorical language or you can find an effective way to persuade people. You cant do both.

Well, they all laughed at Jesus when he did it.

For that reason and others, I don't buy the idiotic "they're all going to laugh at us" argument. They're going to do that anyway. Why play the game? The Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but for us it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.

I think there are actual real World Consequences for exteme rhetoric past laughing. For example, most Women voted the other way and now the Supreme Court will be packed with Pro Choice Justices making the overturn of Roe v. Wade impossible for a generation or two... ya know..for one thing :)
Do you honestly think most of those women have had their child ripped out their womb and want the "right" to do it again?

In Christ,
Andrew
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Ashman618 on December 01, 2012, 12:11:02 PM
The law is a very imperfect (and sometimes amoral) application of morality. Abortion is murder in moral terms. Its legal standing is irrelevent.

But, as presented it has the opposite effect of ending or curtailing abortions.

This is especially true if people find out that many in the Pro-Life side, like Papist, desire to fill the Prisons with Women who have abortions because they are "Murderers". People then rightly conclude that this is an immature political formulation, untethered from reality and dismiss the entirety of the Pro-Life argument as crackpot.

So you can win the right to use extreme rhetorical language or you can find an effective way to persuade people. You cant do both.

Well, they all laughed at Jesus when he did it.

For that reason and others, I don't buy the idiotic "they're all going to laugh at us" argument. They're going to do that anyway. Why play the game? The Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but for us it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.

I think there are actual real World Consequences for exteme rhetoric past laughing. For example, most Women voted the other way and now the Supreme Court will be packed with Pro Choice Justices making the overturn of Roe v. Wade impossible for a generation or two... ya know..for one thing :)
Do you honestly think most of those women have had their child ripped out their womb and want the "right" to do it again?

In Christ,
Andrew

I don't believe that most women and men don't think abortion is right however they opt to keep it legal "just in case" the answer to the question "is abortion murder" is obvious, but not much help. The answer to the question "what's the underlying cause of a person wanting the option of having an abortion" is not so obvious, but would be wonderfully helpful.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 01, 2012, 12:48:12 PM

Nope..Reasonable like every day Women in all walks of life who may have a different idea about when the soul enters a fetus or even if there is such a thing as a soul.

Marc--IMHO there a difference between "reasonable" as an adjective that describes a good logic argument and "reasonable" as a conclusion that is reasonable not only because of the logic argument but also because the premises are true. Also, isn't there a difference between secular and religious arguments, where the latter will have additional faith-based premises?

In the case of argumentation by folks who are not Christian, it is true that the argument ultimately rests on the premise of whether and when a human being becomes a person.

In the case of argumentation by folks who are Christians, I would submit that it would be extremely difficult for a Christian to come up with a premise that would justify supporting abortion. In the case of an Orthodox Christian, that would be impossible.

But the reality is that there are millions and millions of Christians who disagree with you not even to mention Americans who are not Christians. Their standards may be different than yours. So a wholesale broad brush condemnation of otherwise perfectly normal, reasonable people as "Murders", and..under threat of Prison should Papist and the like come to power ends the conversation about abortion.

So you can decide to have a conversation that otherwise fine people will listen to or you can be self righteous and continue to talk to yourself.

 

At issue are the self-definition of oneself as a Christian and the cafeteria approach that some folks take. If everything is subjective, I would agree with you. If that is not so, then I must disagree. A Christian is supposed to heed the Word, at the very least. A Christian cannot create his own foundational beliefs and objectively call himself a Christian. An Orthodox Christian has an additional problem with having to at least defer to the Church's interpretation of the Word.

I will tell you this: prove to me that abortion is not a sin (a) using the Bible and (b) using the Orthodox Holy Tradition. Then, we will talk some more. Right now, the only thing that you are doing is to appeal to my emotions.

I dont understand your line of argument at all. This is America. There is no State religion. We are talking about persuading people not to have abortions and if strident language does any good.

So unless you plan on forcing your religious beliefs on your fellow Americans I fail to see what you are suggesting or what you need to know.

Please advise  :)

Since we are in the Faith Issues, I thought we were addressing OP's question as a faith issue, that is from an Orthodox Christian perspective. Once we agree on an Orthodox Christian answer to that question, then we could pursue it further in Politics to discuss how we can affect public discourse.

As an aside to this, are there any Orthodox Christians out there who do not believe, as a matter of religion, that abortion is the ending of a human life at any point after conception?  Looking at this from an entirely religious perspective, I thought this should be clear cut.  Is there any acceptable reason to the Church to end a pregnancy?  I think this should really be the only thing up to debate.

The Roman Church allows an abortion if the life of the mother is in danger and nothing extra is done to specifically to end the life of the fetus.
I assume we follow the same idea.``

They do? ...?

The name of obstetrical abortion is given by physicians to such as is performed to save the life of the mother. Whether this practice is ever morally lawful we shall consider below.

...However, if medical treatment or surgical operation, necessary to save a mother's life, is applied to her organism (though the child's death would, or at least might, follow as a regretted but unavoidable consequence), it should not be maintained that the fetal life is thereby directly attacked. Moralists agree that we are not always prohibited from doing what is lawful in itself, though evil consequences may follow which we do not desire. The good effects of our acts are then directly intended, and the regretted evil consequences are reluctantly permitted to follow because we cannot avoid them. The evil thus permitted is said to be indirectly intended. It is not imputed to us provided four conditions are verified, namely:

    That we do not wish the evil effects, but make all reasonable efforts to avoid them;
    That the immediate effect be good in itself;
    That the evil is not made a means to obtain the good effect; for this would be to do evil that good might come of it — a procedure never allowed;
    That the good effect be as important at least as the evil effect.

All four conditions may be verified in treating or operating on a woman with child. The death of the child is not intended, and every reasonable precaution is taken to save its life; the immediate effect intended, the mother's life, is good — no harm is done to the child in order to save the mother — the saving of the mother's life is in itself as good as the saving of the child's life. Of course provision must be made for the child's spiritual as well as for its physical life, and if by the treatment or operation in question the child were to be deprived of Baptism, which it could receive if the operation were not performed, then the evil would be greater than the good consequences of the operation.


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on December 01, 2012, 11:33:59 PM
I wonder...does shooting someone simply for breaking into our house fall into the category of murder or does that person need to purpose a serious threat for killing him to be justified?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Jonathan Gress on December 02, 2012, 12:59:53 AM
I find it interesting that, according to Mosaic Law (Exodus 22), abortion was only murder if the fetus was "formed". St Basil's assertion that the "formedness" of the embryo was irrelevant seems to mark a break with that line of thinking. My impression of what most people in the West today believe about abortion is that it is something along the lines of the Exodus prohibition: if an embryo is not obviously human in form (generally, if it's in the first trimester), people don't feel like aborting it is killing a person. After it starts to look like a human being around the second trimester, people generally object to an abortion. The general idea seems to be that personhood flows from consciousness, and it's not plausible to think that an embryo in its early stages is conscious. The traditional Christian view is that an unformed embryo is a person since it has the potential for consciousness.

I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on December 02, 2012, 03:49:24 AM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 02, 2012, 04:02:36 AM
I find it interesting that, according to Mosaic Law (Exodus 22), abortion was only murder if the fetus was "formed". St Basil's assertion that the "formedness" of the embryo was irrelevant seems to mark a break with that line of thinking. My impression of what most people in the West today believe about abortion is that it is something along the lines of the Exodus prohibition: if an embryo is not obviously human in form (generally, if it's in the first trimester), people don't feel like aborting it is killing a person. After it starts to look like a human being around the second trimester, people generally object to an abortion. The general idea seems to be that personhood flows from consciousness, and it's not plausible to think that an embryo in its early stages is conscious. The traditional Christian view is that an unformed embryo is a person since it has the potential for consciousness.

I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
No, the traditional Christian view of an unformed embryo is a person since the person of Christ is celebrated at the Annunciation, and those of the Holy Theotokos and St. John the Forerunner on the feasts of their conceptions.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Jonathan Gress on December 02, 2012, 04:32:04 AM
I find it interesting that, according to Mosaic Law (Exodus 22), abortion was only murder if the fetus was "formed". St Basil's assertion that the "formedness" of the embryo was irrelevant seems to mark a break with that line of thinking. My impression of what most people in the West today believe about abortion is that it is something along the lines of the Exodus prohibition: if an embryo is not obviously human in form (generally, if it's in the first trimester), people don't feel like aborting it is killing a person. After it starts to look like a human being around the second trimester, people generally object to an abortion. The general idea seems to be that personhood flows from consciousness, and it's not plausible to think that an embryo in its early stages is conscious. The traditional Christian view is that an unformed embryo is a person since it has the potential for consciousness.

I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
No, the traditional Christian view of an unformed embryo is a person since the person of Christ is celebrated at the Annunciation, and those of the Holy Theotokos and St. John the Forerunner on the feasts of their conceptions.

I think you missed a few words in your answer. Are you saying the traditional Christian view is that an unformed embryo is a person because we celebrate the Theotokos' conception? I suppose that works according to Church reasoning, since we typically argue for our positions on the grounds of precedent rather than principle, but a skeptic might ask why we celebrate the Theotokos' conception in the first place.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Jonathan Gress on December 02, 2012, 04:33:09 AM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)

What does "genetically viable" mean?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on December 02, 2012, 04:45:29 AM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)
It hardle matters if an embryo is viable.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on December 02, 2012, 08:49:59 AM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)
It hardle matters if an embryo is viable.

Not to you, I guess (whatever hardle means).
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on December 02, 2012, 09:34:34 AM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)

What does "genetically viable" mean?

Simply put, a fertilized ovum (which by definition contains a fully complete DNA stand).
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on December 02, 2012, 09:45:20 AM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)
It hardle matters if an embryo is viable.
Not to you, I guess (whatever hardle means).

It hardly matters when an embyro is "viable" or living, because it is an arbitrary determinant. Viability should be factored before it.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Ashman618 on December 02, 2012, 11:48:39 AM
Does a single cell organism such as a paramecium have a desire to live? And if yes can this then be applied to a single cell just concieved human, that at every stage of life an organism has a true desire to live?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on December 02, 2012, 12:30:49 PM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)
It hardle matters if an embryo is viable.
Not to you, I guess (whatever hardle means).

It hardly matters when an embyro is "viable" or living, because it is an arbitrary determinant. Viability should be factored before it.

Rhetorical nonsense.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on December 02, 2012, 12:31:29 PM
Does a single cell organism such as a paramecium have a desire to live? And if yes can this then be applied to a single cell just concieved human, that at every stage of life an organism has a true desire to live?

First you must define "desire".
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 02, 2012, 06:06:48 PM
10-15% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) before the 8 week period.

http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/937267/how-common-are-miscarriages-and-why-do-they-happen

Nearly 22% of all pregnancies in America end in purposeful abortion.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Percent_of_babies_aborted_in_a_year_in_the_US

So 32-37% of pregnancies will be aborted spontaneously or purposefully. Sobering figures, no?


What is sobering is more people kill their babies on purpose than nature does by accident, according to these figures.

Almost 1 in 4 people will abort.  That is horrifying.

What is even more sobering is that countless people would rather spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to try and conceive a child, when there is some medical issue or another, rather than adopt the baby of an unwed teen mother.
And?

And to put more meat on that bone, you make it sound like you just show up at said teen mother's door step and are given a baby.  Not so, and it often involves thousands upon thousands of dollars.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Shiny on December 02, 2012, 06:21:44 PM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)
It hardle matters if an embryo is viable.
Not to you, I guess (whatever hardle means).

It hardly matters when an embyro is "viable" or living, because it is an arbitrary determinant. Viability should be factored before it.

Rhetorical nonsense.

Nope. Viability is even before conception. So we agree except I go back even further.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 03, 2012, 11:49:42 AM
I wonder...does shooting someone simply for breaking into our house fall into the category of murder or does that person need to purpose a serious threat for killing him to be justified?

As I udnerstand it the law various from place to place. For example if you set a lethal trap in you home, just in case, that may not be legal.
There also has to be some reasonable fear for your own safety before you can use deadly force. If a burglar enters your home and you startle him and he runs off, you cant chase him down and kill him. But if he enters your bedroom in the middle of the night, you may fire at will.   
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 04, 2012, 11:00:19 AM
Btw, on the OP, if the blastocyst was not a human person, they wouldn't be so eager for it for stem cells and other forms of experimentation.

All life begins at its conception. You might have a problem with deciding on paramecia, when a new one starts at the cell splitting, but murder only involves human life, we can leave that one to the Scholastics.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on December 04, 2012, 11:30:00 AM
I've come across arguments that the embryo is a person because it is genetically unique, but according to that reasoning, identical twins would participate in the same single person, which obviously can't be right.
I've not read the genetically unique argument before, but considering the embryo to be genetically viable seems a better point to assert. It also fits into the potential argument, or rather completes it.

Don't we sound a bit scholastic here?  ;)
It hardle matters if an embryo is viable.
Not to you, I guess (whatever hardle means).

It hardly matters when an embyro is "viable" or living, because it is an arbitrary determinant. Viability should be factored before it.

Rhetorical nonsense.

Nope. Viability is even before conception. So we agree except I go back even further.

So you agree with the RCs about condoms, birth control, masturbation, butt secks, and the like, then?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 04, 2012, 05:02:46 PM
Btw, on the OP, if the blastocyst was not a human person, they wouldn't be so eager for it for stem cells and other forms of experimentation.

All life begins at its conception. You might have a problem with deciding on paramecia, when a new one starts at the cell splitting, but murder only involves human life, we can leave that one to the Scholastics.

Define murder. Is it like hiring a hit man to kill someone deseriving  life in prison or the death penalty or is it not like that but rather something different?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 04, 2012, 05:24:48 PM
Btw, on the OP, if the blastocyst was not a human person, they wouldn't be so eager for it for stem cells and other forms of experimentation.

All life begins at its conception. You might have a problem with deciding on paramecia, when a new one starts at the cell splitting, but murder only involves human life, we can leave that one to the Scholastics.

Define murder. Is it like hiring a hit man to kill someone deseriving  life in prison or the death penalty or is it not like that but rather something different?
Real definition: causing the soul and spirit to part from the body.

Legal definition: causing the body to permanently lose its consciousness and its vital signs to begin to shut down, unable to retain said signs without artificial means.

Hiring is deserving enough for life in prison or the death penalty, even if not successful, IMHO.  Whether such should be applied or other disposition of the case depends on circumstances.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 04, 2012, 06:07:31 PM
Btw, on the OP, if the blastocyst was not a human person, they wouldn't be so eager for it for stem cells and other forms of experimentation.

All life begins at its conception. You might have a problem with deciding on paramecia, when a new one starts at the cell splitting, but murder only involves human life, we can leave that one to the Scholastics.

Define murder. Is it like hiring a hit man to kill someone deseriving  life in prison or the death penalty or is it not like that but rather something different?
Real definition: causing the soul and spirit to part from the body.

Legal definition: causing the body to permanently lose its consciousness and its vital signs to begin to shut down, unable to retain said signs without artificial means.

Hiring is deserving enough for life in prison or the death penalty, even if not successful, IMHO.  Whether such should be applied or other disposition of the case depends on circumstances.

That was not not very clear. Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of? Having a family that needs her perhaps?

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSVdZ8EBSTNwyp96ZDcKV20wFViL69FTce5ZAtpYXMx9bjKJ_axLg)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTLdCdYUsR1LEwzkBCSguMKSoXMJ_6N-vwpSuA0qJgnjNNMR28n)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on December 04, 2012, 06:27:44 PM
That prison chick is kinda hot!
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 04, 2012, 06:45:51 PM
Btw, on the OP, if the blastocyst was not a human person, they wouldn't be so eager for it for stem cells and other forms of experimentation.

All life begins at its conception. You might have a problem with deciding on paramecia, when a new one starts at the cell splitting, but murder only involves human life, we can leave that one to the Scholastics.

Define murder. Is it like hiring a hit man to kill someone deseriving  life in prison or the death penalty or is it not like that but rather something different?
Real definition: causing the soul and spirit to part from the body.

Legal definition: causing the body to permanently lose its consciousness and its vital signs to begin to shut down, unable to retain said signs without artificial means.

Hiring is deserving enough for life in prison or the death penalty, even if not successful, IMHO.  Whether such should be applied or other disposition of the case depends on circumstances.

That was not not very clear. Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of? Having a family that needs her perhaps?

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSVdZ8EBSTNwyp96ZDcKV20wFViL69FTce5ZAtpYXMx9bjKJ_axLg)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTLdCdYUsR1LEwzkBCSguMKSoXMJ_6N-vwpSuA0qJgnjNNMR28n)
(http://www.enoughof.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Child-murderer-Susan-Smith-photo-Time.jpg)
don't know who you put up.  Sorry.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 04, 2012, 10:26:31 PM
Btw, on the OP, if the blastocyst was not a human person, they wouldn't be so eager for it for stem cells and other forms of experimentation.

All life begins at its conception. You might have a problem with deciding on paramecia, when a new one starts at the cell splitting, but murder only involves human life, we can leave that one to the Scholastics.

Define murder. Is it like hiring a hit man to kill someone deseriving  life in prison or the death penalty or is it not like that but rather something different?
Real definition: causing the soul and spirit to part from the body.

Legal definition: causing the body to permanently lose its consciousness and its vital signs to begin to shut down, unable to retain said signs without artificial means.

Hiring is deserving enough for life in prison or the death penalty, even if not successful, IMHO.  Whether such should be applied or other disposition of the case depends on circumstances.

That was not not very clear. Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of? Having a family that needs her perhaps?

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSVdZ8EBSTNwyp96ZDcKV20wFViL69FTce5ZAtpYXMx9bjKJ_axLg)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTLdCdYUsR1LEwzkBCSguMKSoXMJ_6N-vwpSuA0qJgnjNNMR28n)
(http://www.enoughof.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Child-murderer-Susan-Smith-photo-Time.jpg)
don't know who you put up.  Sorry.

I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on December 05, 2012, 12:23:05 AM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Opus118 on December 05, 2012, 01:01:29 AM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

I would say neither, based on your description. With more detail, prison may be warranted. Death penalty never in my opinion.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 05, 2012, 01:09:17 AM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

I would say neither, based on your description. With more detail, prison may be warranted. Death penalty never in my opinion.
In general, or just for mothers?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 05, 2012, 01:10:25 AM
Btw, on the OP, if the blastocyst was not a human person, they wouldn't be so eager for it for stem cells and other forms of experimentation.

All life begins at its conception. You might have a problem with deciding on paramecia, when a new one starts at the cell splitting, but murder only involves human life, we can leave that one to the Scholastics.

Define murder. Is it like hiring a hit man to kill someone deseriving  life in prison or the death penalty or is it not like that but rather something different?
Real definition: causing the soul and spirit to part from the body.

Legal definition: causing the body to permanently lose its consciousness and its vital signs to begin to shut down, unable to retain said signs without artificial means.

Hiring is deserving enough for life in prison or the death penalty, even if not successful, IMHO.  Whether such should be applied or other disposition of the case depends on circumstances.

That was not not very clear. Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of? Having a family that needs her perhaps?

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSVdZ8EBSTNwyp96ZDcKV20wFViL69FTce5ZAtpYXMx9bjKJ_axLg)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTLdCdYUsR1LEwzkBCSguMKSoXMJ_6N-vwpSuA0qJgnjNNMR28n)
(http://www.enoughof.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Child-murderer-Susan-Smith-photo-Time.jpg)
don't know who you put up.  Sorry.

I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?
I answered it the first time.

Who are the pictures of?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on December 05, 2012, 01:12:17 AM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

I would say neither, based on your description. With more detail, prison may be warranted. Death penalty never in my opinion.

Though a tangent, yes I agree. For someone to oppose abortion and not the death penalty in some manner.

While I'm not 100% opposed the the death penalty, thinking there may be some circumstances that make it more prudent, I generally favor life sentences of state labor. If someone has done work grievous enough to void their life (death or life sentence), then their life may as well be beneficial to society.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on December 05, 2012, 10:17:31 AM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

I would say neither, based on your description. With more detail, prison may be warranted. Death penalty never in my opinion.

Though a tangent, yes I agree. For someone to oppose abortion and not the death penalty in some manner.

While I'm not 100% opposed the the death penalty, thinking there may be some circumstances that make it more prudent, I generally favor life sentences of state labor. If someone has done work grievous enough to void their life (death or life sentence), then their life may as well be beneficial to society.

Still tangential, but that is the one argument that I consider valid against the death penalty.  The first time someone brought it up was a decade ago in conversation and I still agree with it, though generally prefer executions just because of the chance of escape.  With sufficient guards and a 'shoot-to-kill' policy in escapes I see your idea as very plausible. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 05, 2012, 12:41:38 PM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

Crime of passion or premeditate for gain? I am never for the Death Penalty btw..

Sure, premeditated murder gets life. A Women who gets an Abortion will never under any circumstances now or in the future get Life in Prison.. Why do you think there is a difference?

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on December 05, 2012, 12:44:57 PM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

Crime of passion or premeditate for gain? I am never for the Death Penalty btw..

Sure, premeditated murder gets life. A Women who gets an Abortion will never under any circumstances now or in the future get Life in Prison.. Why do you think there is a difference?


I so wish this was not in the faith issues forum.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: ialmisry on December 05, 2012, 12:50:12 PM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

Crime of passion or premeditate for gain? I am never for the Death Penalty btw..

Sure, premeditated murder gets life. A Women who gets an Abortion will never under any circumstances now or in the future get Life in Prison.. Why do you think there is a difference?


sort the same reason a woman teacher sleeping with a student gets probation where a man would get 10-15 years.  And women in any case rarely were executed.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on December 05, 2012, 02:58:04 PM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

Crime of passion or premeditate for gain? I am never for the Death Penalty btw..

Sure, premeditated murder gets life. A Women who gets an Abortion will never under any circumstances now or in the future get Life in Prison.. Why do you think there is a difference?


sort the same reason a woman teacher sleeping with a student gets probation where a man would get 10-15 years.  And women in any case rarely were executed.

Beautifully well put.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 06, 2012, 12:23:53 PM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

Crime of passion or premeditate for gain? I am never for the Death Penalty btw..

Sure, premeditated murder gets life. A Women who gets an Abortion will never under any circumstances now or in the future get Life in Prison.. Why do you think there is a difference?


I so wish this was not in the faith issues forum.

do us a favor and start a new thread there.

thanks.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 06, 2012, 12:31:12 PM
I thought it was a fair question.

Here it is again:

Are you saying that getting an abortion ( "Hiring") should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty? What are the mitigating circumstances you are thinking of?

Do you think that a woman killing one of her three living children should or should not get the woman life in prison or the death penalty?

Crime of passion or premeditate for gain? I am never for the Death Penalty btw..

Sure, premeditated murder gets life. A Women who gets an Abortion will never under any circumstances now or in the future get Life in Prison.. Why do you think there is a difference?


sort the same reason a woman teacher sleeping with a student gets probation where a man would get 10-15 years.  And women in any case rarely were executed.

I am not sure it is accurate to compare sexual dalliances with pre-meditated murder.

When we do compare abortion to something similar like when Women commit murder, we find that they do get the death penalty. It wasnt always  that way but now Women get The Chair frequently.

So if it is really murder, then Women would get Life or the Death Penalty because there is no longer any cultural stigma against Women getting that sort of sentence . Correct?

Therefore, the real problem may be in calling Abortion "Murder" not in some stigma against harsh sentences for Women murderers which factually no longer exists in our society. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on December 06, 2012, 03:53:50 PM
sort the same reason a woman teacher sleeping with a student gets probation where a man would get 10-15 years.  And women in any case rarely were executed.

I am not sure it is accurate to compare sexual dalliances with pre-meditated murder.


He's not, he's showing bias in law.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 06, 2012, 06:51:53 PM
sort the same reason a woman teacher sleeping with a student gets probation where a man would get 10-15 years.  And women in any case rarely were executed.

I am not sure it is accurate to compare sexual dalliances with pre-meditated murder.


He's not, he's showing bias in law.

I got that part.  Then  I mentioned that there does not seem to be any bias in favor of Women who commit murder anymore. They get Life or the Death Penalty.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on December 06, 2012, 07:54:36 PM
sort the same reason a woman teacher sleeping with a student gets probation where a man would get 10-15 years.  And women in any case rarely were executed.

I am not sure it is accurate to compare sexual dalliances with pre-meditated murder.


He's not, he's showing bias in law.

I got that part.  Then  I mentioned that there does not seem to be any bias in favor of Women who commit murder anymore. They get Life or the Death Penalty.

And here we are arguing that abortion is murder even though THE GOVERNMENT doesn't recognize it as such. Who makes the laws?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 06, 2012, 09:45:23 PM
sort the same reason a woman teacher sleeping with a student gets probation where a man would get 10-15 years.  And women in any case rarely were executed.

I am not sure it is accurate to compare sexual dalliances with pre-meditated murder.


My central point is that you can be strident and use extreme language if you want. But the logic behind calling abortion murder


I got that part.  Then  I mentioned that there does not seem to be any bias in favor of Women who commit murder anymore. They get Life or the Death Penalty.

And here we are arguing that abortion is murder even though THE GOVERNMENT doesn't recognize it as such. Who makes the laws?

My central point is that you can be strident and use extreme language if you want. But the logic behind calling abortion murder breaks down at certain points. Because of that, it's more difficult to persuade Women not to have an abortion.

I sort of agree with you. We should primarily discuss abortion within a religious context. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: serb1389 on December 18, 2012, 01:34:40 AM
So a thought...

I'd everything that Christ did, is an act of salvation, a la his birth, death, resurrection, etc, then how is the Incarnation overlooked? 

We celebrate the conception of St. John the Baptist & of the Theotokos.  So, why not of every concieved child?

Just thinking
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: NicholasMyra on December 18, 2012, 02:13:09 AM
We celebrate the conception of St. John the Baptist & of the Theotokos.  So, why not of every concieved child?
Fr.,

Is that not what we do at each baptism, each churching, each wedding, each funeral, each commemoration?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Alveus Lacuna on December 18, 2012, 02:16:39 AM
Beautifully well put.

Grammatically hideous.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on December 18, 2012, 02:36:30 AM
So a thought...

I'd everything that Christ did, is an act of salvation, a la his birth, death, resurrection, etc, then how is the Incarnation overlooked? 

We celebrate the conception of St. John the Baptist & of the Theotokos.  So, why not of every concieved child?

Just thinking
Inconvenience would be my guess.  These are sad times.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: serb1389 on December 18, 2012, 02:42:38 AM
We celebrate the conception of St. John the Baptist & of the Theotokos.  So, why not of every concieved child?
Fr.,

Is that not what we do at each baptism, each churching, each wedding, each funeral, each commemoration?

That's the stuff that comes later.  I'm trying to look at it from "beginnings" POV
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on December 18, 2012, 03:06:49 AM
Jesus on abortions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kAgCYbcMYk)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on December 18, 2012, 12:04:38 PM
Jesus on abortions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kAgCYbcMYk)

Really good . There were also other clips from Scrubs that followed that cant be shown on an Orthodox forum.



Thanks
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on December 18, 2012, 11:48:30 PM
Jesus on abortions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kAgCYbcMYk)

Really good . There were also other clips from Scrubs that followed that cant be shown on an Orthodox forum.



Thanks

I only linked the one video. It ain't in a playlist or anything.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Eldo55 on February 21, 2013, 07:41:43 AM
http://andreaskoutsoudis3.com/the-beliefs-of-orthodox-christians/an-orthodox-view-of-abortion/

yes, it is murder, indeed!

please use the link above to read an excellent article on this topic?!
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 11:23:51 AM
http://andreaskoutsoudis3.com/the-beliefs-of-orthodox-christians/an-orthodox-view-of-abortion/

yes, it is murder, indeed!

please use the link above to read an excellent article on this topic?!

I think there is a  major semantical problem. Is abortion "Murder" as meaning it is abhorrent and the taking of a fetal life should always be avoided? Or is it "Murder" like killing a bank teller during a robbery or shooting someone on the street?

Because if it is the latter than we must impose the Death Penalty or at least life in Prison on Women who have had an abortion. If that doesn't make perfect sense, then perhaps the word "Murder" is not precise enough to use in relation to Abortion.

Then there is also a problem with imposing a religious belief upon people who don't agree with you. This is very problematic with abortions especially when they are done in very early stages or even the "Morning After"..

 The objection is that the "soul" enters the "person"  the moment the sperm and egg unite. That may well be and personally I would err on the side of caution if in doubt about that. However, many other people do not beleive there is such a thing as a "soul" or they have radically different concepts of what a soul is from Orthodox Christians. Therefore, to try and legislate away abortion is a dead end which at this late date, should be obvious. It comes across as forcing a religious belief upon people.

The only sure road, in my opinion, to lessening and eventually ending the practice of abortion is to convince people not to do it, not to try and force concepts on them that they dont share with us. Ultimately, converting people to our religious beliefs is the surest road and probably the only road to success.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Eldo55 on February 21, 2013, 11:36:24 AM
"The only sure road, in my opinion, to lessening and eventually ending the practice of abortion is to convince people not to do it, not to try and force concepts on them that they dont share with us. Ultimately, converting people to our religious beliefs is the surest road and probably the only road to success."

I wasn't forcing anyone to agree with me or us, I merely think that killing a baby (i do not call a child a foetus, they are a person from conception) is wrong and I agree that people must learn not to do it.  Yes, there are many different opinions in the Orthodox Faith too, on this subject, but the right one is that life is sacred, no matter what age or size a person is, no matter if they are not yet visible with the naked eye.  And all people of all faiths and background must understand this, not by force, but by understanding and conversion so that millions of lives are not needlessly cut short, before birth, as we are all from God and The Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 21, 2013, 11:37:38 AM
According to the logic of trying to prevent death, it seems not.  I'm not saying it's good or preferred, just that it wouldn't be murder according to the other examples.

I have yet to come across a concrete example where aborting the baby is the only way to save the mother.  It is always hypothetical, and some doctors have already come out and said that no such scenario exists.

An ectopic pregnancy is a different thing.  The fetus is implanted in the Fallopian tube where it has zero chance of survival.  It is dying if not already dead.

In both cases, it is the grey area between 'healthy' and 'dead' that has caused preventable grief.

The case of Savita Halappanavar (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-11-15/india/35133994_1_dead-fetus-praveen-irish-deputy) shows it: she was miscarrying, but refused a D&C while there was still a fetal heartbeat. By the time the fetus was pronounced dead, septicemia had set in. Did the doctors really have to wait?

In the case of an ectopic pregnancy, the zygote can be technically alive and well for several days, until the complications of restricted space set in. Someone who rigorously believes there's already a soul in that minuscule mass of cells could very well insist that the condition should come to its end before surgical intervention, ignoring the excruciating pain it causes and hoping to stop the internal bleeding caused by the rupture before the woman dies of it.

As a woman who has been through pregnancy and childbirth, both scenarios give me the screaming heebiejeebies.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Eldo55 on February 21, 2013, 11:58:29 AM
http://andreaskoutsoudis3.com/the-beliefs-of-orthodox-christians/the-orthodox-view-on-abortion/

another very useful link on the topic of abortion!

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 21, 2013, 12:00:41 PM
http://andreaskoutsoudis3.com/the-beliefs-of-orthodox-christians/the-orthodox-view-on-abortion/

another very useful link on the topic of abortion!

Could you please bother to discuss with the rest of us like real people, instead of just throwing links at us?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Eldo55 on February 21, 2013, 12:07:53 PM
that's not very nice... the links are relevant to the topics and i have discussed my opinion somewhat in my above reply
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 21, 2013, 12:10:22 PM
that's not very nice... the links are relevant to the topics and i have discussed my opinion somewhat in my above reply

I don't doubt the relevance, but this is a discussion board, and there's precious little discussion happening if we just exchange links. Plus, I'm sure that, if it is a topic you feel strongly about, you haven't run out of words on it after writing your piece. :)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Eldo55 on February 21, 2013, 12:28:21 PM
you've just ignored my opinion above, like it wasn't there as if it wasn't part of the discussion... im not on hear to try to be clever or argue, im a genuine person.  plus, ive noticed many links on this site that other people have posted, so either way whether i add a link or not doesn't really make the discussion worse
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 12:35:20 PM
The only sure road, in my opinion, to lessening and eventually ending the practice of abortion is to convince people not to do it, not to try and force concepts on them that they dont share with us. Ultimately, converting people to our religious beliefs is the surest road and probably the only road to success.


This is the same argument that "moderates" used against the abolitionists. They claimed that they disapproved of slavery, but that the institution would only be dissolved by changing people's hearts over the course of time. A nice idea, but ultimately naive and cowardly.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 12:57:31 PM
"The only sure road, in my opinion, to lessening and eventually ending the practice of abortion is to convince people not to do it, not to try and force concepts on them that they dont share with us. Ultimately, converting people to our religious beliefs is the surest road and probably the only road to success."

I wasn't forcing anyone to agree with me or us, I merely think that killing a baby (i do not call a child a foetus, they are a person from conception) is wrong and I agree that people must learn not to do it.  Yes, there are many different opinions in the Orthodox Faith too, on this subject, but the right one is that life is sacred, no matter what age or size a person is, no matter if they are not yet visible with the naked eye.  And all people of all faiths and background must understand this, not by force, but by understanding and conversion so that millions of lives are not needlessly cut short, before birth, as we are all from God and The Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Thank you for restating your religious beliefs. I share them. Lets try not come off as forcing them upon people but rather find ways of persuading them. Not calling them Murderers is a good start IMHO
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Eldo55 on February 21, 2013, 01:09:26 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 02:15:39 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam


Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 03:55:11 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty? Because that would be the result today if this is really murder. If abortion is really just like shooting your neighbor in the head then we must dole out a similar penalty. If it is unconscionable to do that then we need to revisit the words we are using . If we dont the self rightous can go about puffing themselves up with their pride and abortions will continue apace.   
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 03:56:58 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




Only if youre a black and white thinker.. I think this issue is much more complicated then you will admit to.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Anastasia1 on February 21, 2013, 04:17:59 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.
Where did the apostles call it murder?  I don't recall abortion ever coming up in anything they wrote.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 04:40:55 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




Only if youre a black and white thinker.. I think this issue is much more complicated then you will admit to.


Some things are black and white my friend. When it comes to abortion, I will allow the teachings of the apostles to shape my views.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 04:44:03 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.
Where did the apostles call it murder?  I don't recall abortion ever coming up in anything they wrote.


"You shall not murder a child, whether it be born or unborn." [Didache 2:2]

"Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion, nor again shalt thou kill it when it is born."  [St. Barnabas, Letter of St. Barnabas AD 80]


Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on February 21, 2013, 04:44:58 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty? Because that would be the result today if this is really murder. If abortion is really just like shooting your neighbor in the head then we must dole out a similar penalty. If it is unconscionable to do that then we need to revisit the words we are using . If we dont the self rightous can go about puffing themselves up with their pride and abortions will continue apace.   
The difference is that many woman who have had abortions don't know that's its murder. Should they receive they penalty for murder if they don't know they are actually killing a human being?
The doctors who perform the abortions on the other hand, they know better.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on February 21, 2013, 04:45:32 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.
Where did the apostles call it murder?  I don't recall abortion ever coming up in anything they wrote.


"You shall not murder a child, whether it be born or unborn." [Didache 2:2]

"Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion, nor again shalt thou kill it when it is born."  [St. Barnabas, Letter of St. Barnabas AD 80]


Selam
Thank you for sharing this quote and for standing up for the clear truth of the matter.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 04:52:08 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty? Because that would be the result today if this is really murder. If abortion is really just like shooting your neighbor in the head then we must dole out a similar penalty. If it is unconscionable to do that then we need to revisit the words we are using . If we dont the self rightous can go about puffing themselves up with their pride and abortions will continue apace.   
The difference is that many woman who have had abortions don't know that's its murder. Should they receive they penalty for murder if they don't know they are actually killing a human being?
The doctors who perform the abortions on the other hand, they know better.

I tend to agree with you, although with all the biological and technological evidence available today I think most women know full well that they are destroying a life. If the apostles implicated them for murder 2,000 years ago when women knew less than they do now, then today they are surely all the more culpable. But I absolutely agree that the abortionists and clinic employees who see and handle the "tissue" are without any excuse. If abortion is ever outlawed, I think those involved in illegal abortions should be tried like any other homicide. Was the woman coerced against her will? Was she a multiple offender? Was she ignorant about what she was doing? Did she refuse the help of those who tried to deter her? Such questions should be addressed in a court of law and those involved should face the appropriate sentence.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on February 21, 2013, 04:55:02 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty? Because that would be the result today if this is really murder. If abortion is really just like shooting your neighbor in the head then we must dole out a similar penalty. If it is unconscionable to do that then we need to revisit the words we are using . If we dont the self rightous can go about puffing themselves up with their pride and abortions will continue apace.   
The difference is that many woman who have had abortions don't know that's its murder. Should they receive they penalty for murder if they don't know they are actually killing a human being?
The doctors who perform the abortions on the other hand, they know better.

I tend to agree with you, although with all the biological and technological evidence available today I think most women know full well that they are destroying a life. If the apostles implicated them for murder 2,000 years ago when women knew less than they do now, then today they are surely all the more culpable. But I absolutely agree that the abortionists and clinic employees who see and handle the "tissue" are without any excuse. If abortion is ever outlawed, I think those involved in illegal abortions should be tried like any other homicide. Was the woman coerced against her will? Was she a multiple offender? Was she ignorant about what she was doing? Did she refuse the help of those who tried to deter her? Such questions should be addressed in a court of law and those involved should face the appropriate sentence.



Selam
I would add that I oppose the death penalty, so I don't think that we should put any of those guilty of abortion to death. However, I do think that the abortionist "doctors" should be put in prison for life.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 05:17:08 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty? Because that would be the result today if this is really murder. If abortion is really just like shooting your neighbor in the head then we must dole out a similar penalty. If it is unconscionable to do that then we need to revisit the words we are using . If we dont the self rightous can go about puffing themselves up with their pride and abortions will continue apace.   
The difference is that many woman who have had abortions don't know that's its murder. Should they receive they penalty for murder if they don't know they are actually killing a human being?
The doctors who perform the abortions on the other hand, they know better.

I tend to agree with you, although with all the biological and technological evidence available today I think most women know full well that they are destroying a life. If the apostles implicated them for murder 2,000 years ago when women knew less than they do now, then today they are surely all the more culpable. But I absolutely agree that the abortionists and clinic employees who see and handle the "tissue" are without any excuse. If abortion is ever outlawed, I think those involved in illegal abortions should be tried like any other homicide. Was the woman coerced against her will? Was she a multiple offender? Was she ignorant about what she was doing? Did she refuse the help of those who tried to deter her? Such questions should be addressed in a court of law and those involved should face the appropriate sentence.



Selam
I would add that I oppose the death penalty, so I don't think that we should put any of those guilty of abortion to death. However, I do think that the abortionist "doctors" should be put in prison for life.

Yes, I absolutely oppose the death penalty too.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 05:52:03 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




Only if youre a black and white thinker.. I think this issue is much more complicated then you will admit to.


Some things are black and white my friend. When it comes to abortion, I will allow the teachings of the apostles to shape my views.



Selam

Then do you beleive the Apostles would be for rounding up millions of Women and sending them to Prison for life or executing them?

I think you may have miss understood some things  :)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on February 21, 2013, 05:53:11 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 05:56:41 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Jonathan Gress on February 21, 2013, 05:56:59 PM
Trying to equate abortion with slavery is a bit disingenuous. My understanding is that the Church never had the same absolute opposition to slavery that it has to abortion.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Jonathan Gress on February 21, 2013, 06:00:09 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I don't think the Apostles ever advocated that. Some of the posters here do seem to be using this debate to indulge their obsession with violence, but the point is surely to minimize the numbers of lives being lost, not getting revenge on those who do commit abortion.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on February 21, 2013, 06:09:09 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on February 21, 2013, 06:10:47 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.

If abortion was so widespread, do you really think they considered it murder?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 06:12:46 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




Only if youre a black and white thinker.. I think this issue is much more complicated then you will admit to.


Some things are black and white my friend. When it comes to abortion, I will allow the teachings of the apostles to shape my views.



Selam

Then do you beleive the Apostles would be for rounding up millions of Women and sending them to Prison for life or executing them?

I think you may have miss understood some things  :)


You should know me well enough by now to know that I have always opposed the death penalty in no uncertain terms. Abortion should be outlawed, and illegal abortions should be investigatged, tried, and prosecuted like any other homicides.


Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on February 21, 2013, 06:13:01 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.

If abortion was so widespread, do you really think they considered it murder?

Who is "they"?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 21, 2013, 06:14:19 PM
I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.

Infanticide, at least in the Greco-Roman world, was quite widespread. It was also a prerogative of the infant's father, if he decided the newborn was undesirable in any way (from sickly to simply another pesky girl).
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on February 21, 2013, 06:24:47 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.

If abortion was so widespread, do you really think they considered it murder?

Who is "they"?

People in general, in the ancient world. You're the one who said abortion was widespread.

Also, they had pre-pregnancy contraceptives in ancient times. Everything from poultices, to simple devices, to herbal drugs, and so forth. They've even had condoms for at least a few hundred years. All of these things, if used as designed, keep there from being a pregnancy. No conception, no abortion. Simple as that.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on February 21, 2013, 06:26:38 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.

If abortion was so widespread, do you really think they considered it murder?

Who is "they"?

People in general, in the ancient world. You're the one who said abortion was widespread.

Also, they had pre-pregnancy contraceptives in ancient times. Everything from poultices, to simple devices, to herbal drugs, and so forth. They've even had condoms for at least a few hundred years. All of these things, if used as designed, keep there from being a pregnancy. No conception, no abortion. Simple as that.

No, I imagine that most of the Greco-Roman world did not consider abortions to be immoral or murder.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 07:17:09 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.

And your point is?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 07:20:34 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




Only if youre a black and white thinker.. I think this issue is much more complicated then you will admit to.


Some things are black and white my friend. When it comes to abortion, I will allow the teachings of the apostles to shape my views.



Selam

Then do you beleive the Apostles would be for rounding up millions of Women and sending them to Prison for life or executing them?

I think you may have miss understood some things  :)


You should know me well enough by now to know that I have always opposed the death penalty in no uncertain terms. Abortion should be outlawed, and illegal abortions should be investigatged, tried, and prosecuted like any other homicides.


Selam

Since youre not likely to be in charge we will need to use the term Murder as it is. If you hire someone to kill a person you either go to jail for life or get the death penalty. Therefore, since neither of those options are connected to Abortion, it is something other than murder as understood and penalized in our soicety.

Question 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 21, 2013, 07:23:00 PM
If you hire someone to kill a person you either go to jail for life or get the death penalty.

Unless you are an attractive female, in which case--judging from what I see on ID Discovery--you can always plead insanity or say you were "depressed" and get a lesser sentence of only like a decade or two, whereas the male parties involved get life without parole.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on February 21, 2013, 07:25:04 PM
If you hire someone to kill a person you either go to jail for life or get the death penalty.

Unless you are an attractive female, in which case--judging from what I see on ID Discovery--you can always plead insanity or say you were "depressed" and get a lesser sentence of only like a decade or two, whereas the male parties involved get life without parole.

TV is a poor place from which to take your guesses.

Women tend to get longer sentences.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 21, 2013, 07:28:22 PM
If you hire someone to kill a person you either go to jail for life or get the death penalty.

Unless you are an attractive female, in which case--judging from what I see on ID Discovery--you can always plead insanity or say you were "depressed" and get a lesser sentence of only like a decade or two, whereas the male parties involved get life without parole.

TV is a poor place from which to take your guesses.

Women tend to get longer sentences.

Judge Judy School of Law
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 21, 2013, 07:38:36 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




Only if youre a black and white thinker.. I think this issue is much more complicated then you will admit to.


Some things are black and white my friend. When it comes to abortion, I will allow the teachings of the apostles to shape my views.



Selam

Then do you beleive the Apostles would be for rounding up millions of Women and sending them to Prison for life or executing them?

I think you may have miss understood some things  :)


You should know me well enough by now to know that I have always opposed the death penalty in no uncertain terms. Abortion should be outlawed, and illegal abortions should be investigatged, tried, and prosecuted like any other homicides.


Selam

Since youre not likely to be in charge we will need to use the term Murder as it is. If you hire someone to kill a person you either go to jail for life or get the death penalty. Therefore, since neither of those options are connected to Abortion, it is something other than murder as understood and penalized in our soicety.

Question 


I'll let the apostles define murder, not you, me, or society.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on February 21, 2013, 07:41:21 PM
maybe the right word is not "murderer", but maybe a better expression is selfish, ignorant killers... after all killing is killing. many people have more love for finding life on other planets than they have for an unborn child alive right here and right now...


If the apostles called it "murder" then I don't think we should revise their terminology. Equivocation about evil never leads to justice and redemption.

"We call things by their right names, in plain language, and no man's power shall awe us into submission."
-William Lloyd Garrison- (Abolitionist)


Selam




What were the societal implications when this was written? Would literally millions of Women have been rounded up and jailed and given the death penalty?

You might want to try learning a bit of history.

Sooo. Are you saying we should stone these Women to death or throw them into a dungeon? Maybe you guys can bring back burning at the stake.

Very wholesome.. Really a great way to convince people Christians are correct about abortion.

I'm just pointing out that you don't seem to be informed about how widespread abortion and other forms of infanticide were in the ancient world.

And your point is?

Just because sin is deeply ingrained in a society does not mean it cannot be opposed.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 22, 2013, 06:06:37 PM
This is the type of discussion I am seeing in this thread, which is not productive:

"I think I'm going to cut down a tree in my front yard.  After the last storm I'm afraid it's going to fall and hit the house."

"Cutting down a tree, huh.  Because its inconvenient to you, eh.  I guess you support the destruction of all of our planets rain forests.  Way to love the Earth.  Why not just nuke the whole thing and be done with it."

Some responses don't seem to be thought through or at the very least, posts are just being looked over rather than read.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 22, 2013, 06:24:46 PM
Should women who had abortions be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby after it has been made illegal will be dealt with in the same manner as all premeditated murderers.

Should abortion doctors be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby for someone else will be treated as all assassins.

No need to punish them now.  If they obey the law they are no longer a threat to society.  God will deal with punishing them at his leisure.

Should the politicians who allowed this atrocity be rounded up an shot hung?  Yes.  They set up a system where millions upon millions of babies have been murdered in cold blood.   
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 22, 2013, 06:40:18 PM
Should women who had abortions be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby after it has been made illegal will be dealt with in the same manner as all premeditated murderers.

Should abortion doctors be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby for someone else will be treated as all assassins.

No need to punish them now.  If they obey the law they are no longer a threat to society.  God will deal with punishing them at his leisure.

Yes. Yes. Yes. One has to wonder why this concept is so hard for Marc. I think I tried to explain it a few pages back...
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Karaleighmum on February 22, 2013, 09:38:18 PM
"Or is it possible that many pro-Life advocates in fact see a fetus as a 'potential' person, rather than an actual person?

This is the multi-billion dollar question.  When does life actually begin?  Ask 10 people and you will get 10 different answers.  Until we know for certain, I say be cautious and start at conception, to make sure we do not kill anyone.

Since we are talking about this, I was convinced by the abovementioned Catholic friend the abortion pill is also wrong.  Took some time, but he won me over.  I mention this because this is how you will change a person’s mind.  "

Well, I figure if life and death are secular opposites, and death is determined at the lack of pulse or heart beat, then life would begin at the heartbeat which is six weeks. You can be on all sorts of machines for being brain dead, a breathing machine, etc. But pretty much when your heart stops pulsing, you are determined dead. But, from a nonlegal and more spiritual perspective I believe if God allows the sperm to implant the egg and the blastocyst to implant in the uterine lining, then abortion is out of the question, for God has deemed it to be (so it appears)

I am a midwife student working with so many pro-choice women I just feel so bad for all the babies lost to whatever reason someone would give a baby away so drastically.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 22, 2013, 10:29:00 PM
Should women who had abortions be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby after it has been made illegal will be dealt with in the same manner as all premeditated murderers.

Should abortion doctors be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby for someone else will be treated as all assassins.

No need to punish them now.  If they obey the law they are no longer a threat to society.  God will deal with punishing them at his leisure.

Should the politicians who allowed this atrocity be rounded up an shot hung?  Yes.  They set up a system where millions upon millions of babies have been murdered in cold blood.   

Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Then after you make it illegal again will the mass round ups  begin?

 Executions Too ? Because that is the penalty for cold blooded murder you know.

Is this really the Christian image of the future?

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQfQDdD9n4XQzxohPlb_tSFFuLTpjFduE2DI2DY4cxz4RurTjh9MA)

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR3Po6SFOWfG6it0Jg8iZrzw5tj3UkUo7uI1NFzsQ79BAcZb_-H)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ4MGuVb9KLYuA1tjNeboR4Xcy-gZga4PRrgpg7y-ANLlvMr3fXiA)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 22, 2013, 10:51:24 PM
Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Way to have no freaking clue what a statute of limitations is.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 23, 2013, 12:46:34 AM
Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Way to have no freaking clue what a statute of limitations is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations

A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated. In civil law systems, similar provisions are typically part of the civil code or criminal code and are often known collectively as periods of prescription.


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_statute_of_limitation_on_murder_in_the_US_and_other_countries


In the United States, there are many crime categories which hold no statute including:

    murder
    kidnapping
    treason
    fraud
    forgery
    embezzlement
    crimes against humanity (war crimes)

There is no statute of limitations for murder in any US state.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 23, 2013, 01:01:50 AM
Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Way to have no freaking clue what a statute of limitations is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations

A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated. In civil law systems, similar provisions are typically part of the civil code or criminal code and are often known collectively as periods of prescription.


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_statute_of_limitation_on_murder_in_the_US_and_other_countries


In the United States, there are many crime categories which hold no statute including:

    murder
    kidnapping
    treason
    fraud
    forgery
    embezzlement
    crimes against humanity (war crimes)

There is no statute of limitations for murder in any US state.

I understand all that. But clearly you don't.

If we have a statute of limitations of ten years for crime X, that means that if you find out that I committed crime X more than ten years ago, you can't prosecute. It doesn't mean that when you pass the law making X a crime, you can prosecute anyone who performed the act in the ten years before you passed the law.

Statutes of limitations have to do with the time elapsed between commission of the crime and initiation of prosecution. They have nothing to do with time elapsed between performing a legal act and having that act criminalised.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 23, 2013, 01:41:09 AM
Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Way to have no freaking clue what a statute of limitations is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations

A statute of limitations is an enactment in a common law legal system that sets the maximum time after an event that legal proceedings based on that event may be initiated. In civil law systems, similar provisions are typically part of the civil code or criminal code and are often known collectively as periods of prescription.


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_statute_of_limitation_on_murder_in_the_US_and_other_countries


In the United States, there are many crime categories which hold no statute including:

    murder
    kidnapping
    treason
    fraud
    forgery
    embezzlement
    crimes against humanity (war crimes)

There is no statute of limitations for murder in any US state.

I understand all that. But clearly you don't.

If we have a statute of limitations of ten years for crime X, that means that if you find out that I committed crime X more than ten years ago, you can't prosecute. It doesn't mean that when you pass the law making X a crime, you can prosecute anyone who performed the act in the ten years before you passed the law.

Statutes of limitations have to do with the time elapsed between commission of the crime and initiation of prosecution. They have nothing to do with time elapsed between performing a legal act and having that act criminalised.

You missed the point.. I'll go slower


If you read back you will discover that the topic of this thread is the question "Is Abortion Murder?"

I realize that you cant prosecute if something is legal when you did the deed.

That is why I asked when it becomes illegal again, would there be round ups of Women?


Make illegal again --- Round ups begin



 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 23, 2013, 03:16:59 AM
You missed the point.. I'll go slower

I can't miss what you don't make.

If you read back you will discover that the topic of this thread is the question "Is Abortion Murder?"

Indeed it is, as I am fully aware.

I realize that you cant prosecute if something is legal when you did the deed.

Excellent. And abortion is legal now, correct?

That is why I asked when it becomes illegal again, would there be round ups of Women?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised, as you yourself pointed out in the previously quoted section. No need for round-ups.

Make illegal again --- Round ups begin

No, they don't.

Abortion was illegal in the past. Presumably at the time it was prosecuted. Then it became legal. Now, suppose hypothetically that becomes illegal again. It would work like this:

I L L E G A L ----------------------------> L E G A L ----------------------------------------> I L L E G A L
prosecuted if it happens in this time     never prosecuted if it happens in this time        prosecuted if it happens in this time

That clear enough for you?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 23, 2013, 12:44:08 PM
You missed the point.. I'll go slower

I can't miss what you don't make.

If you read back you will discover that the topic of this thread is the question "Is Abortion Murder?"

Indeed it is, as I am fully aware.

I realize that you cant prosecute if something is legal when you did the deed.

Excellent. And abortion is legal now, correct?

That is why I asked when it becomes illegal again, would there be round ups of Women?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised, as you yourself pointed out in the previously quoted section. No need for round-ups.

Make illegal again --- Round ups begin

No, they don't.

Abortion was illegal in the past. Presumably at the time it was prosecuted. Then it became legal. Now, suppose hypothetically that becomes illegal again. It would work like this:

I L L E G A L ----------------------------> L E G A L ----------------------------------------> I L L E G A L
prosecuted if it happens in this time     never prosecuted if it happens in this time        prosecuted if it happens in this time

That clear enough for you?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised,

Let try again.. Women will be prosecuted if they get an abortion ( and I presume that includes taking something like a Morning After Pill).

That will be committing murder.. Yes/No

The penalty for Pre meditated Murder is life in Prison or a very very long sentence or even execution.

Do you anticipate round ups of Women, after it is re criminalized? Will there be large holding camps? Do you foresee executions of Women?

I can see how my mention of the statute of limitations confused the issue. However, since there is no limitation on murder prosecution, do you foresee prosecutions of Women who had abortions back when it was not legal since they had committed a murder?

 thanks

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQFCGBqfQlWJm8gKHXHwByCtNlvM2zrG6L83LG9mHQIHdYOtH4i)

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Papist on February 23, 2013, 12:46:06 PM
You missed the point.. I'll go slower

I can't miss what you don't make.

If you read back you will discover that the topic of this thread is the question "Is Abortion Murder?"

Indeed it is, as I am fully aware.

I realize that you cant prosecute if something is legal when you did the deed.

Excellent. And abortion is legal now, correct?

That is why I asked when it becomes illegal again, would there be round ups of Women?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised, as you yourself pointed out in the previously quoted section. No need for round-ups.

Make illegal again --- Round ups begin

No, they don't.

Abortion was illegal in the past. Presumably at the time it was prosecuted. Then it became legal. Now, suppose hypothetically that becomes illegal again. It would work like this:

I L L E G A L ----------------------------> L E G A L ----------------------------------------> I L L E G A L
prosecuted if it happens in this time     never prosecuted if it happens in this time        prosecuted if it happens in this time

That clear enough for you?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised,

Let try again.. Women will be prosecuted if they get an abortion ( and I presume that includes taking something like a Morning After Pill).

That will be committing murder.. Yes/No

The penalty for Pre meditated Murder is life in Prison or a very very long sentence or even execution.

Do you anticipate round ups of Women, after it is re criminalized? Will there be large holding camps? Do you foresee executions of Women?

I can see how my mention of the statute of limitations confused the issue. However, since there is no limitation on murder prosecution, do you foresee prosecutions of Women who had abortions back when it was not legal since they had committed a murder?

 thanks

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQFCGBqfQlWJm8gKHXHwByCtNlvM2zrG6L83LG9mHQIHdYOtH4i)


I want to know if you are smoking something. You are the one arguing that killing some people isn't murder.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 23, 2013, 12:58:49 PM
You missed the point.. I'll go slower

I can't miss what you don't make.

If you read back you will discover that the topic of this thread is the question "Is Abortion Murder?"

Indeed it is, as I am fully aware.

I realize that you cant prosecute if something is legal when you did the deed.

Excellent. And abortion is legal now, correct?

That is why I asked when it becomes illegal again, would there be round ups of Women?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised, as you yourself pointed out in the previously quoted section. No need for round-ups.

Make illegal again --- Round ups begin

No, they don't.

Abortion was illegal in the past. Presumably at the time it was prosecuted. Then it became legal. Now, suppose hypothetically that becomes illegal again. It would work like this:

I L L E G A L ----------------------------> L E G A L ----------------------------------------> I L L E G A L
prosecuted if it happens in this time     never prosecuted if it happens in this time        prosecuted if it happens in this time

That clear enough for you?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised,

Let try again.. Women will be prosecuted if they get an abortion ( and I presume that includes taking something like a Morning After Pill).

That will be committing murder.. Yes/No

The penalty for Pre meditated Murder is life in Prison or a very very long sentence or even execution.

Do you anticipate round ups of Women, after it is re criminalized? Will there be large holding camps? Do you foresee executions of Women?

I can see how my mention of the statute of limitations confused the issue. However, since there is no limitation on murder prosecution, do you foresee prosecutions of Women who had abortions back when it was not legal since they had committed a murder?

 thanks

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQFCGBqfQlWJm8gKHXHwByCtNlvM2zrG6L83LG9mHQIHdYOtH4i)


I want to know if you are smoking something. You are the one arguing that killing some people isn't murder.

Using the term Murder to denounce Abortion is a very poor choice of words. I fully understand how you can logically work your way to being comfortable using it. I get it.  However, it fails some key logical tests such as when you ask if the penalty for Abortion will be the same as the penalty for Murder.

Therefore, Pro Life people need to be less self righteous and find ways to  actually persuade people not to have abortions rather than come off like the Gestapo.

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHiEyVLOwvFgx8irePCB6l6LQ6M1yHEAa7OSSqDO7bnChdred5)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 23, 2013, 01:57:06 PM
You missed the point.. I'll go slower

I can't miss what you don't make.

If you read back you will discover that the topic of this thread is the question "Is Abortion Murder?"

Indeed it is, as I am fully aware.

I realize that you cant prosecute if something is legal when you did the deed.

Excellent. And abortion is legal now, correct?

That is why I asked when it becomes illegal again, would there be round ups of Women?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised, as you yourself pointed out in the previously quoted section. No need for round-ups.

Make illegal again --- Round ups begin

No, they don't.

Abortion was illegal in the past. Presumably at the time it was prosecuted. Then it became legal. Now, suppose hypothetically that becomes illegal again. It would work like this:

I L L E G A L ----------------------------> L E G A L ----------------------------------------> I L L E G A L
prosecuted if it happens in this time     never prosecuted if it happens in this time        prosecuted if it happens in this time

That clear enough for you?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised,

Let try again.. Women will be prosecuted if they get an abortion ( and I presume that includes taking something like a Morning After Pill).

That will be committing murder.. Yes/No

The penalty for Pre meditated Murder is life in Prison or a very very long sentence or even execution.

Do you anticipate round ups of Women, after it is re criminalized? Will there be large holding camps? Do you foresee executions of Women?

I can see how my mention of the statute of limitations confused the issue. However, since there is no limitation on murder prosecution, do you foresee prosecutions of Women who had abortions back when it was not legal since they had committed a murder?

 thanks

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQFCGBqfQlWJm8gKHXHwByCtNlvM2zrG6L83LG9mHQIHdYOtH4i)



OK. So is what you are asking 'Will women who have abortions, and whose abortions take place subsequent to the recriminalisation that Orthonoob proposes, be rounded up and imprisoned/executed?'

If so, the answer is yes, though the phrase 'rounded up' implies some kind of mass action, which I don't think will be necessary. I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act. Such women can then be arrested, prosecuted, and punished, just as women who kill their already-born children now are.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 23, 2013, 01:58:29 PM
Using the term Murder to denounce Abortion is a very poor choice of words. I fully understand how you can logically work your way to being comfortable using it. I get it.  However, it fails some key logical tests such as when you ask if the penalty for Abortion will be the same as the penalty for Murder.

No, it doesn't, because if I were in charge it would be, and moreover, canonically, it is.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Xenia on February 23, 2013, 02:47:32 PM
If I knew that five-year olds were being systematically murdered in the house across the street,  I would do everything in my power, including giving up my own life, to rescue these children and put an end to the slaughter. I think most people would do the same.  There is a Planned Parenthood in town, and I can barely bring myself to stand out front with a sign. This says to me that I value five-year olds more than I value five-week old unborn children.  This is manifest by my relative lack of action on their behalf. So I conclude that in my heart of hearts I don't really see it as murder.   I think  I am guilty of having a hard heart in this area and I think I should see it as murder.  :(
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 23, 2013, 02:50:49 PM
If I knew that five-year olds were being systematically murdered in the house across the street,  I would do everything in my power, including giving up my own life, to rescue these children and put an end to the slaughter. I think most people would do the same.  There is a Planned Parenthood in town, and I can barely bring myself to stand out front with a sign. This says to me that I value five-year olds more than I value five-week old unborn children.  This is manifest by my relative lack of action on their behalf. So I conclude that in my heart of hearts I don't really see it as murder.   I think possibly I am guilty of having a hard heart in this area and I think I should see it as murder.  :(

Eh...I don't know. Our empathic reactions don't always correspond to some absolute universalist value scale.

Is your child inherently better than all the other children in the world? Probably not. Do you value him a lot more? Certainly.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on February 23, 2013, 02:52:25 PM
If I knew that five-year olds were being systematically murdered in the house across the street,  I would do everything in my power, including giving up my own life, to rescue these children and put an end to the slaughter. I think most people would do the same.  There is a Planned Parenthood in town, and I can barely bring myself to stand out front with a sign. This says to me that I value five-year olds more than I value five-week old unborn children.  This is manifest by my relative lack of action on their behalf. So I conclude that in my heart of hearts I don't really see it as murder.   I think possibly I am guilty of having a hard heart in this area and I think I should see it as murder.  :(

^------Someone who understands sincerely the most weak of arguments of why no one around here (ostensibly) think abortion is murder.

I've made this argument a number of times and yet the folks around here can't seem to understand that ethics is something which is embodied within the totality of being, not some self reflective cognitive assent to a proposition.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 23, 2013, 03:17:30 PM
If I knew that five-year olds were being systematically murdered in the house across the street,  I would do everything in my power, including giving up my own life, to rescue these children and put an end to the slaughter. I think most people would do the same.  There is a Planned Parenthood in town, and I can barely bring myself to stand out front with a sign. This says to me that I value five-year olds more than I value five-week old unborn children.  This is manifest by my relative lack of action on their behalf. So I conclude that in my heart of hearts I don't really see it as murder.   I think  I am guilty of having a hard heart in this area and I think I should see it as murder.  :(


With respect, I think this argument is specious and self-righteous. Throughout history, people have always attempted to exculpate themselves from responsibility for the present evil by claiming it's not as evil as some theoretical evil they manufacture in an attempt to make the present evil look tame in comparison. If murdering 5 year olds became legal by the same political and judicial process that sancitified abortion, then I doubt if there would be much of a different response to it. But we attempt to assuage our consciences in this way. "Abortion can't really be the same as murder, otherwise people surely would not tolerate it." Well, they were systematically murdering 5 year olds across the street in Nazi Germany, and people didn't raise a fuss (except for an exceptional few like Dietrich Bonhoeffer.) So why do we presume to be so righteous as to think that we would not tolerate it here? It is happening right here, next door, down the street, with our full knowledge and complicity. It's not that abortion isn't as awful as murdering 5 year olds, it's that we as Christians are as awful as the German citizens who went about their daily business as the ashes fell upon their heads. (And the "Godwin's Law" parrots can put those ashes in their pipes and smoke them.)


Selam  
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Romaios on February 23, 2013, 03:21:17 PM
I've made this argument a number of times and yet the folks around here can't seem to understand that ethics is something which is embodied within the totality of being, not some self reflective cognitive assent to a proposition.

Isn't ethics "otherwise than being (http://books.google.ro/books/about/Otherwise_Than_Being_Or_Beyond_Essence.html?id=18tg1ZHkmTsC&redir_esc=y)"?

I agree with you that it's not about assenting to propositions - rather about one's responsibility for and relation with "the other".    
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Xenia on February 23, 2013, 03:28:50 PM
Quote
With respect, I think this argument is specious and self-righteous.

It wasn't an argument as much as it was an observation on my own hard-heartedness.  When I wrote my post, I was actually thinking about Hadamar, which I think you were referencing as well.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 23, 2013, 03:34:31 PM
Quote
With respect, I think this argument is specious and self-righteous.

It wasn't an argument as much as it was an observation on my own hard-heartedness.  When I wrote my post, I was actually thinking about Hadamar, which I think you were referencing as well.



My apologies if I came across like I was condemning you personally. Like you, my comments were actually an indictment of my own apathy and indifference (or more accurately, as you said, my own hard heartedness.) And I am especially guilty, because I know what abortion does. I know what it is. I am very outspoken about it. Most people are completely ignorant about the realities of abortion, and therefore their judgment won't be as great as mine.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 23, 2013, 04:18:15 PM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child. That being said, as much as I hate to admit it, I would have to disagree with Orthonorm that ethics are related to these feelings. True ethics to me are independent of our feelings and emotions, because our feelings and emotions are subjective, change and are determined by our culture. If God is unchanging, and morality stems from God, then it seems logical to me that morality also must be objective and unchanging. And that brings me to my next thought; even if we have a harder time feeling sympathy for unborn abortion victims, it doesn't necessarily follow that abortion isn't murder, or at least bad--rather, it says that we've been raised in a flawed culture that has engrained its immorality upon our souls, masking our ability to recognize God's true morality for us. There was a time when people thought that killing a slave, a poor person or a person a different color than them wasn't murder, but just because they thought something doesn't mean that they were right. I imagine that abortion is somewhat similar. This is also why I would disagree with many Evangelicals who are in love with CS Lewis' weak moral arguments; I don't believe that morals are something we are born knowing, but rather, they need to be learned through living the life of the Church and putting wickedness aside. I don't trust our "feelings" or "intuition" at all as having authority to determine right or wrong.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 23, 2013, 11:04:25 PM
You missed the point.. I'll go slower

I can't miss what you don't make.

If you read back you will discover that the topic of this thread is the question "Is Abortion Murder?"

Indeed it is, as I am fully aware.

I realize that you cant prosecute if something is legal when you did the deed.

Excellent. And abortion is legal now, correct?

That is why I asked when it becomes illegal again, would there be round ups of Women?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised, as you yourself pointed out in the previously quoted section. No need for round-ups.

Make illegal again --- Round ups begin

No, they don't.

Abortion was illegal in the past. Presumably at the time it was prosecuted. Then it became legal. Now, suppose hypothetically that becomes illegal again. It would work like this:

I L L E G A L ----------------------------> L E G A L ----------------------------------------> I L L E G A L
prosecuted if it happens in this time     never prosecuted if it happens in this time        prosecuted if it happens in this time

That clear enough for you?

Are you smoking something? The only people who would be prosecuted would be those who did the deed after it was recriminalised,

Let try again.. Women will be prosecuted if they get an abortion ( and I presume that includes taking something like a Morning After Pill).

That will be committing murder.. Yes/No

The penalty for Pre meditated Murder is life in Prison or a very very long sentence or even execution.

Do you anticipate round ups of Women, after it is re criminalized? Will there be large holding camps? Do you foresee executions of Women?

I can see how my mention of the statute of limitations confused the issue. However, since there is no limitation on murder prosecution, do you foresee prosecutions of Women who had abortions back when it was not legal since they had committed a murder?

 thanks

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQFCGBqfQlWJm8gKHXHwByCtNlvM2zrG6L83LG9mHQIHdYOtH4i)



OK. So is what you are asking 'Will women who have abortions, and whose abortions take place subsequent to the recriminalisation that Orthonoob proposes, be rounded up and imprisoned/executed?'

If so, the answer is yes, though the phrase 'rounded up' implies some kind of mass action, which I don't think will be necessary. I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act. Such women can then be arrested, prosecuted, and punished, just as women who kill their already-born children now are.

Thank you for your honest answer.. You sir are quite delusional..  :)

More after the weekend
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on February 23, 2013, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: Gebre Menfes Kidus
Most people are completely ignorant about the realities of abortion, and therefore their judgment won't be as great as mine.



Selam

Hold it hold it hold it.

Now we see what he's getting at! Nice one, thought you'd hide it didn't you?  ::)

The second creepiest statement since that thing he said about doctors. Don't make me do a site search for that.   
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 23, 2013, 11:38:08 PM

Thank you for your honest answer..

I do my best.

You sir are quite delusional..  :)

I've heard that before. It's still not true. I don't think this is going to happen until after Western civilisation collapses and the reactionaries take power. But that's how I'd do it if I were in charge.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 24, 2013, 12:30:30 AM
...I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act...

LOL! Okay. And the war on drugs has been really successful in keeping drugs out of impoverished communities.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 24, 2013, 12:50:10 AM
...I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act...

LOL! Okay. And the war on drugs has been really successful in keeping drugs out of impoverished communities.

I don't see that your equivalence between abortion and drugs is justified.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 24, 2013, 12:54:51 AM
...I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act...

LOL! Okay. And the war on drugs has been really successful in keeping drugs out of impoverished communities.

I don't see that your equivalence between abortion and drugs is justified.

I can tell; you don't seem to see many things.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 24, 2013, 02:11:24 AM
...I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act...

LOL! Okay. And the war on drugs has been really successful in keeping drugs out of impoverished communities.

I don't see that your equivalence between abortion and drugs is justified.

I can tell; you don't seem to see many things.

I try not to make a habit of seeing what doesn't exist.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 24, 2013, 03:00:26 AM
Abortion is at the very least a monstrous sin.  At the worst, murder.  You can debate the murder aspect all you want, even though you will fail to show it is not murder.  It is sin, in the same way homosexual acts is a sin, in the same way drunkenness is a sin and by default the abuse of any drug especially for recreational purposes just to get high, and a long laundry list of other thing which have ALWAYS been sin and ALWAYS will be sin.  This pathetic recent attempt to find justification for our sins is asinine at best and evil in nature at worst.  Why is there even any debate on these issues?  The Church has spoken, clearly, on these issues.  They are not new; the end result will not change.  Sin will always be sin.  Keep your selfishness and personal wants/desires to yourself and stop this disingenuous and foolhardy quest to alter what they Church teachers and to distort what has always been taught as truth.

Abortion = sin
Getting high = sin
Getting drunk = sin
Adultery = sin
Homosexual relations = sin
Fornication = sin
Having more than one spouse = sin
Divorcing outside biblically accepted reasons = sin

And a lot of other things.  It’s sin people.  Deal with it and get over yourselves.  You will never be bigger than God and us pointing these things out is not judgment.  So you also stop playing the victim.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 24, 2013, 04:02:33 AM
...I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act...

LOL! Okay. And the war on drugs has been really successful in keeping drugs out of impoverished communities.
I wonder how much worse it would be without fighting against it.  No, I don’t want to wonder.  The thought is terrifying.  Not that this has anything to do with abortion.  Then again, I suppose it has become second nature to justify one wrong by pointing at another.  Very sad indeed.  :(
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 24, 2013, 04:07:58 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: katherine 2001 on February 24, 2013, 07:33:57 AM
Unfortunately, the father is often the one pushing the woman to get an abortion.  After all, people must have their sexual freedom without any consequences (while ignoring the fact that there are always consequences for our actions).
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on February 24, 2013, 08:48:29 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.

And doubly tragic so when the parents are married. It DOES happen.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 24, 2013, 09:22:57 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.

And doubly tragic so when the parents are married. It DOES happen.
More than people will admit.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Romaios on February 24, 2013, 09:30:28 AM
True ethics to me are independent of our feelings and emotions, because our feelings and emotions are subjective, change and are determined by our culture. If God is unchanging, and morality stems from God, then it seems logical to me that morality also must be objective and unchanging.

(...)I don't trust our "feelings" or "intuition" at all as having authority to determine right or wrong.

"I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people." (Jeremiah 31:33)

"When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively (physei = naturally) what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves." (Romans 2:11)

If there weren't a natural law (a gut "feeling" about what's right and wrong), then people couldn't obey God's Law with all their heart because their conscience might tell them otherwise. The ideal is to internalize it, that is to educate our mind and feelings ("enlarge the heart") to fully agree with and naturally contain it.  

God expected Cain to be responsible for his brother even before any law/moral instruction was given to mankind. He didn't need to be officially appointed as his "brother's keeper".  
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 24, 2013, 04:59:24 PM
...I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act...

LOL! Okay. And the war on drugs has been really successful in keeping drugs out of impoverished communities.
I wonder how much worse it would be without fighting against it.  No, I don’t want to wonder.  The thought is terrifying.  Not that this has anything to do with abortion.  Then again, I suppose it has become second nature to justify one wrong by pointing at another.  Very sad indeed.  :(

Probably better actually. For starters, jails wouldn't be so crowded for throwing guys in jail just for smoking blunts, and violent drug dealers would go out of business because official corporations that are safer would monopolize on the industry and decrease violence. But that's beside the point. Moving on, the point is that criminalizing drugs hasn't done any good for society and hasn't stopped people from doing them, so I don't see how outlawing abortion will stop women from having abortions either. It'll only overcrowd prisons even more and women will just die or get harmed from having coat-hanger or jumping-off-the-stairs abortions. And of course, the wealthy White people will just get safe abortions illegally, whereas the impoverished and less fortunate will be stuck raising like eight kids. I'd treat both abortion and drug usage more as a medical, social issue that needs to be rehabilitated, opposed to criminalizing it right away.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 24, 2013, 05:32:19 PM

Thank you for your honest answer..

I do my best.

You sir are quite delusional..  :)

I've heard that before. It's still not true. I don't think this is going to happen until after Western civilisation collapses and the reactionaries take power. But that's how I'd do it if I were in charge.

Oh okay.. I"m glad I waited to reply...

My position is this. Before Obama was re elected the chances of Abortion being re criminalized was one in a million. It has been established as legal far too long to undo. Never the less, now that he has been re-elected the chances have dropped to absolute zero, in my personal opinion

Therefore, no one really needs to take their time speculating on how much jail time should be doled out for anyone. The task at hand, in this context, should be how to persuade Women not to have an abortion. I think it is ultimately a religious argument which is why it has not and will not play out well as a secular /legal issue.

My suggestion is not to call people murders of baby killers or threaten them with jail but to rather find ways to convince them.

That's all I have to say.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 25, 2013, 12:21:31 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.


I once watched a young man sobbing uncontrollably after he had been forcibly removed from an abortion clinic for simply trying to talk his girlfriend out of killing his unborn child. He was rolling on the ground weeping in tremendous grief. He couldn't understand why he wasn't even allowed to try to talk to his own girlfriend who was carrying his own child. It was heartbreaking to see. He felt so helpless. No freedom of choice for him. All he could do was sit by and weep as the girl he loved murdered the baby they had conceived together. I sat down and wept with him. That's all I could do. This is another aspect of abortion that is lost in all the naive theory about "choice" and such.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 25, 2013, 01:20:31 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it. If a man is going to have to pay child support depending on whether or not she has the baby, then I would say his decision should mean something. Ideally though, there should be no abortion. I just don't like the criminalizing solution to it--mostly because I don't see it working, just as the war on drugs hasn't worked either.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 05:57:47 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side. Way it is.

If a man is going to have to pay child support depending on whether or not she has the baby, then I would say his decision should mean something.

If it all boils down to money issues for you, then you can be sure that paying child support is getting off lightly. There is not enough money in the known world to properly counter the time, effort and health cost that a mother puts into raising a child.

Ideally though, there should be no abortion. I just don't like the criminalizing solution to it--mostly because I don't see it working, just as the war on drugs hasn't worked either.

Agreed. Plus, from a been-there-done-that angle, pregnancy is a huge physical and mental ordeal, culminating in massive, potentially lethal trauma. It should never be forced on anyone against their will, especially not by people who by definition cannot go through the same.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: sprtslvr1973 on February 25, 2013, 06:41:06 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap.

I have heard that early Feminists were staunchly Pro-Life, partly because abortions and other forms of infanticide were highly targeted at girl babies.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: sprtslvr1973 on February 25, 2013, 06:45:03 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side. Way it is.

If a man is going to have to pay child support depending on whether or not she has the baby, then I would say his decision should mean something.

If it all boils down to money issues for you, then you can be sure that paying child support is getting off lightly. There is not enough money in the known world to properly counter the time, effort and health cost that a mother puts into raising a child.

Ideally though, there should be no abortion. I just don't like the criminalizing solution to it--mostly because I don't see it working, just as the war on drugs hasn't worked either.

Agreed. Plus, from a been-there-done-that angle, pregnancy is a huge physical and mental ordeal, culminating in massive, potentially lethal trauma. It should never be forced on anyone against their will, especially not by people who by definition cannot go through the same.

For the last generation single fathers have increasingly been the custodial parent; so to assume the emotional drain of child rearing is only carried by the mother is not correct.

While Pregnancy is no doubt a physical, emotional, and medical trial that only women will know, that is no excuse for murdering your baby.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 06:58:02 AM
For the last generation single fathers have increasingly been the custodial parent; so to assume the emotional drain of child rearing is only carried by the mother is not correct.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that, for the non-custodial parent, childrearing can be just another bill, while the custodial parent knows very well it's much more, that can never be properly remunerated.

While Pregnancy is no doubt a physical, emotional, and medical trial that only women will know, that is no excuse for murdering your baby.

I'm not looking for excuses. I just don't believe that outlawing abortion will have any effect beyond raising the numbers of dead women and unwanted children.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 11:49:55 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.


I once watched a young man sobbing uncontrollably after he had been forcibly removed from an abortion clinic for simply trying to talk his girlfriend out of killing his unborn child. He was rolling on the ground weeping in tremendous grief. He couldn't understand why he wasn't even allowed to try to talk to his own girlfriend who was carrying his own child. It was heartbreaking to see. He felt so helpless. No freedom of choice for him. All he could do was sit by and weep as the girl he loved murdered the baby they had conceived together. I sat down and wept with him. That's all I could do. This is another aspect of abortion that is lost in all the naive theory about "choice" and such.



Selam

Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone.

Reality check: Women do in fact have a choice. Therefore, you may want to work on you communication skills
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 12:03:56 PM
Should women who had abortions be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby after it has been made illegal will be dealt with in the same manner as all premeditated murderers.

Should abortion doctors be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby for someone else will be treated as all assassins.

No need to punish them now.  If they obey the law they are no longer a threat to society.  God will deal with punishing them at his leisure.

Should the politicians who allowed this atrocity be rounded up an shot hung?  Yes.  They set up a system where millions upon millions of babies have been murdered in cold blood.   

Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Then after you make it illegal again will the mass round ups  begin?

 Executions Too ? Because that is the penalty for cold blooded murder you know.

Is this really the Christian image of the future?


Seriously, the picture spam doesn't add to your argument.

To me it is murder, but it is LEGAL under the law.  I don't believe in murdering babies, but I also don't believe in punishing someone by legal means for something they did legally.  I do believe that the politicians who made abortion legal should be hung for crimes against humanity.  They broke a very basic moral code by allowing such a thing to happen.

As for when the round ups of those swine would take place, as soon as God allows it!  Otherwise, He'll just have to deal with them in His own time.  He got Herod pretty good.  I'll bet he can whip up something spectacular for them, if He so wills.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 25, 2013, 12:06:00 PM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.


I once watched a young man sobbing uncontrollably after he had been forcibly removed from an abortion clinic for simply trying to talk his girlfriend out of killing his unborn child. He was rolling on the ground weeping in tremendous grief. He couldn't understand why he wasn't even allowed to try to talk to his own girlfriend who was carrying his own child. It was heartbreaking to see. He felt so helpless. No freedom of choice for him. All he could do was sit by and weep as the girl he loved murdered the baby they had conceived together. I sat down and wept with him. That's all I could do. This is another aspect of abortion that is lost in all the naive theory about "choice" and such.



Selam

Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone.

Reality check: Women do in fact have a choice. Therefore, you may want to work on you communication skills

Mosagony?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 12:55:25 PM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.


I once watched a young man sobbing uncontrollably after he had been forcibly removed from an abortion clinic for simply trying to talk his girlfriend out of killing his unborn child. He was rolling on the ground weeping in tremendous grief. He couldn't understand why he wasn't even allowed to try to talk to his own girlfriend who was carrying his own child. It was heartbreaking to see. He felt so helpless. No freedom of choice for him. All he could do was sit by and weep as the girl he loved murdered the baby they had conceived together. I sat down and wept with him. That's all I could do. This is another aspect of abortion that is lost in all the naive theory about "choice" and such.



Selam

Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone.

Reality check: Women do in fact have a choice. Therefore, you may want to work on you communication skills

Mosagony?

I think it's a type of wood.




EDIT -  God in Heaven!  I just read what Gebre wrote in the quoted bit.  God have mercy on that poor man.  At least the poor baby died in innocence and is with Him now in paradise instead of this rotten world.  And may God have mercy on me that I care not for how He deals with that demonic entity in human flesh that subjected them both to such a fate.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: primuspilus on February 25, 2013, 01:04:48 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on February 25, 2013, 01:18:59 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.

You might to rethink how you are understanding the use of own here as well.

You both are wrong, but there is a little truth to what Mark is saying.

The use of own after a possessive pronoun certainly emphasizes the quality or degree of possession. To make a long story short, it emphasizes possession / appropriation (related to property). So yes, you must ask why you use own after any possessive pronoun.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Jonathan Gress on February 25, 2013, 01:24:23 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.

You might to rethink how you are understanding the use of own here as well.

You both are wrong, but there is a little truth to what Mark is saying.

The use of own after a possessive pronoun certainly emphasizes the quality or degree of possession. To make a long story short, it emphasizes possession / appropriation (related to property). So yes, you must ask why you use own after any possessive pronoun.


That's absurd. When I talk about "my own parents" that doesn't have any connotations of property. Possession covers a range of meanings, some of which have nothing to do with property but rather other relations like kinship.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 02:09:37 PM
Should women who had abortions be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby after it has been made illegal will be dealt with in the same manner as all premeditated murderers.

Should abortion doctors be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby for someone else will be treated as all assassins.

No need to punish them now.  If they obey the law they are no longer a threat to society.  God will deal with punishing them at his leisure.

Should the politicians who allowed this atrocity be rounded up an shot hung?  Yes.  They set up a system where millions upon millions of babies have been murdered in cold blood.   

Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Then after you make it illegal again will the mass round ups  begin?

 Executions Too ? Because that is the penalty for cold blooded murder you know.

Is this really the Christian image of the future?


Seriously, the picture spam doesn't add to your argument.

To me it is murder, but it is LEGAL under the law.  I don't believe in murdering babies, but I also don't believe in punishing someone by legal means for something they did legally.  I do believe that the politicians who made abortion legal should be hung for crimes against humanity.  They broke a very basic moral code by allowing such a thing to happen.

As for when the round ups of those swine would take place, as soon as God allows it!  Otherwise, He'll just have to deal with them in His own time.  He got Herod pretty good.  I'll bet he can whip up something spectacular for them, if He so wills.

As for when the round ups of those swine would take place, as soon as God allows it! <<

And this is why so many people decide that the Pro Life cause is not something they could ever relate to. Good work..

In any event you may want to check around and see that there is no chance that Abortion will ever be re criminalized so you can drop all the speculation about how and when you will jail people.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 02:16:03 PM
Should women who had abortions be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby after it has been made illegal will be dealt with in the same manner as all premeditated murderers.

Should abortion doctors be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby for someone else will be treated as all assassins.

No need to punish them now.  If they obey the law they are no longer a threat to society.  God will deal with punishing them at his leisure.

Should the politicians who allowed this atrocity be rounded up an shot hung?  Yes.  They set up a system where millions upon millions of babies have been murdered in cold blood.   

Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Then after you make it illegal again will the mass round ups  begin?

 Executions Too ? Because that is the penalty for cold blooded murder you know.

Is this really the Christian image of the future?


Seriously, the picture spam doesn't add to your argument.

To me it is murder, but it is LEGAL under the law.  I don't believe in murdering babies, but I also don't believe in punishing someone by legal means for something they did legally.  I do believe that the politicians who made abortion legal should be hung for crimes against humanity.  They broke a very basic moral code by allowing such a thing to happen.

As for when the round ups of those swine would take place, as soon as God allows it!  Otherwise, He'll just have to deal with them in His own time.  He got Herod pretty good.  I'll bet he can whip up something spectacular for them, if He so wills.

As for when the round ups of those swine would take place, as soon as God allows it! <<

And this is why so many people decide that the Pro Life cause is not something they could ever relate to. Good work..

In any event you may want to check around and see that there is no chance that Abortion will ever be re criminalized so you can drop all the speculation about how and when you will jail people.

Vamrat did nothing to make that a reality. That is from the cause pushed by the pro-aborts. You can see their propaganda as effectual precisely because you don't relate a fetus and a baby. Because of that, any harm done to a baby prior to birth is not connected to a murder. Since you don't connect the death of a fetus to the death of a human, to prescribe equal punishment under the law would seem unbalanced.

If you fully understand a baby from 'cell formation one' (I'll call this CF1) to be human, then you would recognize any intentional harm done to said baby to align with crushing a 2 month old's head with a rock.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 02:17:07 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men dint own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.

You might to rethink how you are understanding the use of own here as well.

You both are wrong, but there is a little truth to what Mark is saying.

The use of own after a possessive pronoun certainly emphasizes the quality or degree of possession. To make a long story short, it emphasizes possession / appropriation (related to property). So yes, you must ask why you use own after any possessive pronoun.


That's absurd. When I talk about "my own parents" that doesn't have any connotations of property. Possession covers a range of meanings, some of which have nothing to do with property but rather other relations like kinship.

The implication was that the boyfriend ( not even husband) had a "right" to access to "His" Girlfriend.

He does not and should not.

There are two  rights at work here: The right of a Woman to have control over her own body and to seek or deny any and all advice as she deems fit and the right of an unborn child to life.

The boyfriend has some say so only in how far the Women allows it. Period. She can not and should not be compelled to give access to anyone. She doesn't have to listen to a boyfriend and she doesnt have to undergo an ultra sound forced on her by the State...etc.

Therefore, it's better to have persuaded her of the sinfullness of abortion long before that point.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 02:20:40 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.

The implication was that he has a "Right" to access. There was a further implication that since she was "His own" girlfriend, that this denotes some sort of status allowing that right.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: primuspilus on February 25, 2013, 02:21:47 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.

You might to rethink how you are understanding the use of own here as well.

You both are wrong, but there is a little truth to what Mark is saying.

The use of own after a possessive pronoun certainly emphasizes the quality or degree of possession. To make a long story short, it emphasizes possession / appropriation (related to property). So yes, you must ask why you use own after any possessive pronoun.

Its pretty common knowledge that the use of "my own parents <girlfriend, etc>" is not speaking of possession and you know that. You also know that is not at all what was referenced when the "his own girlfriend" was spoken. The boyfriend was not shocked because he owns his girlfriend. He was shocked that he could not see her.

Quote
The implication was that the boyfriend ( not even husband) had a "right" to access to "His" Girlfriend
Because she is carrying THEIR child, yes he does have that right.

Quote
e does not and should not
Im glad freedom of choice is only for the woman.

Quote
The boyfriend has some say so only in how far the Women allows it. Period
Even though she is carrying THEIR child? Ghastly.

Quote
She doesn't have to listen to a boyfriend
I didnt say she had to listen, but he has as much right to that kid as she does.

Quote
she doesnt have to undergo an ultra sound forced on her by the State
You and I are in agreeance. I dont think the state has a right to force that.

Quote
The implication was that he has a "Right" to access. There was a further implication that since she was "His own" girlfriend, that this denotes some sort of status allowing that right
As I said before, she is carrying THEIR child, so yes he does have that right.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 02:25:02 PM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.


I once watched a young man sobbing uncontrollably after he had been forcibly removed from an abortion clinic for simply trying to talk his girlfriend out of killing his unborn child. He was rolling on the ground weeping in tremendous grief. He couldn't understand why he wasn't even allowed to try to talk to his own girlfriend who was carrying his own child. It was heartbreaking to see. He felt so helpless. No freedom of choice for him. All he could do was sit by and weep as the girl he loved murdered the baby they had conceived together. I sat down and wept with him. That's all I could do. This is another aspect of abortion that is lost in all the naive theory about "choice" and such.



Selam

Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone.

Reality check: Women do in fact have a choice. Therefore, you may want to work on you communication skills

Mosagony?

Yeah Miss spell ..Word check didnt correct it.. Here you go:

World English Dictionary
misogyny  (mɪˈsɒdʒɪnɪ, maɪ-) 
 
— n   
 hatred of women 
 
[C17: from Greek, from miso-  + gunē  woman] 
 
mi'sogynist 
 
— n , — adj   
 
misogy'nistic 
 
— adj   
 
mi'sogynous 
 
— adj   

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 02:29:11 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men don't own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.

You might to rethink how you are understanding the use of own here as well.

You both are wrong, but there is a little truth to what Mark is saying.

The use of own after a possessive pronoun certainly emphasizes the quality or degree of possession. To make a long story short, it emphasizes possession / appropriation (related to property). So yes, you must ask why you use own after any possessive pronoun.

Its pretty common knowledge that the use of "my own parents <girlfriend, etc>" is not speaking of possession and you know that. You also know that is not at all what was referenced when the "his own girlfriend" was spoken. The boyfriend was not shocked because he owns his girlfriend. He was shocked that he could not see her.

Quote
The implication was that the boyfriend ( not even husband) had a "right" to access to "His" Girlfriend
Because she is carrying THEIR child, yes he does have that right.

Quote
e does not and should not
Im glad freedom of choice is only for the woman.

Quote
The boyfriend has some say so only in how far the Women allows it. Period
Even though she is carrying THEIR child? Ghastly.

Quote
She doesn't have to listen to a boyfriend
I didnt say she had to listen, but he has as much right to that kid as she does.

Quote
she doesnt have to undergo an ultra sound forced on her by the State
You and I are in agreeance. I dont think the state has a right to force that.

Quote
The implication was that he has a "Right" to access. There was a further implication that since she was "His own" girlfriend, that this denotes some sort of status allowing that right
As I said before, she is carrying THEIR child, so yes he does have that right.

Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body . For example, we reel in horror when the opposite is done in China and Women are forced to have an abortion..

You cant find a solution to Abortion by forcing people.. Out of fairness he should have some say so but that cant be elevated to a "Right"..Welcome to America.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: primuspilus on February 25, 2013, 02:30:36 PM
Quote
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body
So let me make sure I have this right. Before the child is born, the man has no rights to the child. Is that what you are saying?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 02:32:02 PM
Should women who had abortions be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby after it has been made illegal will be dealt with in the same manner as all premeditated murderers.

Should abortion doctors be rounded up and shot?  No.  They acted legally at the time.  You cannot punish someone for breaking a law that was not on the books at the time they committed the crime.  Anyone found murdering a baby for someone else will be treated as all assassins.

No need to punish them now.  If they obey the law they are no longer a threat to society.  God will deal with punishing them at his leisure.

Should the politicians who allowed this atrocity be rounded up an shot hung?  Yes.  They set up a system where millions upon millions of babies have been murdered in cold blood.   

Actually murder is a crime with no statute of limitations.. Are you admitting then that Abortion really isnt like that?

Then after you make it illegal again will the mass round ups  begin?

 Executions Too ? Because that is the penalty for cold blooded murder you know.

Is this really the Christian image of the future?


Seriously, the picture spam doesn't add to your argument.

To me it is murder, but it is LEGAL under the law.  I don't believe in murdering babies, but I also don't believe in punishing someone by legal means for something they did legally.  I do believe that the politicians who made abortion legal should be hung for crimes against humanity.  They broke a very basic moral code by allowing such a thing to happen.

As for when the round ups of those swine would take place, as soon as God allows it!  Otherwise, He'll just have to deal with them in His own time.  He got Herod pretty good.  I'll bet he can whip up something spectacular for them, if He so wills.

As for when the round ups of those swine would take place, as soon as God allows it! <<

And this is why so many people decide that the Pro Life cause is not something they could ever relate to. Good work..

In any event you may want to check around and see that there is no chance that Abortion will ever be re criminalized so you can drop all the speculation about how and when you will jail people.

Vamrat did nothing to make that a reality. That is from the cause pushed by the pro-aborts. You can see their propaganda as effectual precisely because you don't relate a fetus and a baby. Because of that, any harm done to a baby prior to birth is not connected to a murder. Since you don't connect the death of a fetus to the death of a human, to prescribe equal punishment under the law would seem unbalanced.

If you fully understand a baby from 'cell formation one' (I'll call this CF1) to be human, then you would recognize any intentional harm done to said baby to align with crushing a 2 month old's head with a rock.

Thank you.

Once you can get people to believe absurdities, you can get them to commit atrocities. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 02:34:16 PM
Quote
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body
So let me make sure I have this right. Before the child is born, the man has no rights to the child. Is that what you are saying?

One might ask why then that men have an obligation to provide child support?  It's not his responsibility in the womb but is afterwards? 

I call BS.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 02:55:24 PM
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body . For example, we reel in horror when the opposite is done in China and Women are forced to have an abortion..

You cant find a solution to Abortion by forcing people.. Out of fairness he should have some say so but that cant be elevated to a "Right"..Welcome to America.

Women have a unique condition from men, however, that is intended to be ignored to protect this argument. That is, women have the unique ability to establish new life within themselves and nurture it until it can exist outside the womb.

Men can't do this. Some women refuse to recognize this gift, and/or attempt to repress this gift in order to sustain their selfish desires. (Selfish desires... sounds like 'passions'....)

When a woman contains a new life within them, their health no longer centers solely on themselves. They may not like it, if it conflicts with their desires, but that is the price of motherhood.

To attempt to usurp this responsibility and ignore the health of the new life, is to reject reality in support of an immoral position. Therefore, it NOT and can NEVER BE only about 'woman's health'. The reality is a responsibility that cannot be ignored.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: orthonorm on February 25, 2013, 03:12:27 PM
Quote
Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone
Ah, so the man should not get a say in whether or not the woman can abort a child? Got it. By the way, the "his own" portion of your comment is pretty absurd. He was not saying he owned his girlfriend, he was saying that he wanted to speak to his girlfriend. Its kind of like saying, "My own parents did such a thing...I cant believe it!"

Check your poor understanding of English at the door.

You might to rethink how you are understanding the use of own here as well.

You both are wrong, but there is a little truth to what Mark is saying.

The use of own after a possessive pronoun certainly emphasizes the quality or degree of possession. To make a long story short, it emphasizes possession / appropriation (related to property). So yes, you must ask why you use own after any possessive pronoun.


That's absurd. When I talk about "my own parents" that doesn't have any connotations of property. Possession covers a range of meanings, some of which have nothing to do with property but rather other relations like kinship.

Then how is what I am saying absurd?

And guess what? Kinship is A property which can be greater or lesser in degree.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: primuspilus on February 25, 2013, 03:30:30 PM
Quote
One might ask why then that men have an obligation to provide child support?  It's not his responsibility in the womb but is afterwards? 

I call BS
Of course its BS. But the only way they can have a legitimate argument is to use the banner of the abortionists and relegate the man's relation to the unborn child to that of a non-parent. Otherwise, their argument is shown to be what it is; a complete fraud.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 04:12:50 PM
Quote
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body
So let me make sure I have this right. Before the child is born, the man has no rights to the child. Is that what you are saying?

The "boyfriend" showed up at the abortion clinic.. How would you picture accommodating him exactly?

"Your boyfriend is here"

"Who?"

"He says his name is Tommy"

"Tell him to go away"

"He says he is the father"

"Can he prove it because I slept with several guys?"

"He cant prove it"

"Then send him on his way and thank him for the flowers"
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 04:17:12 PM
Quote
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body
So let me make sure I have this right. Before the child is born, the man has no rights to the child. Is that what you are saying?

The "boyfriend" showed up at the abortion clinic.. How would you picture accommodating him exactly?

"Your boyfriend is here"

"Who?"

"He says his name is Tommy"

"Tell him to go away"

"He says he is the father"

"Can he prove it because I slept with several guys?"

"He cant prove it"

"Then send him on his way and thank him for the flowers"

You created a strawman with the story of the whore at the abortion clinic. However, even here it is not 'impossible' to prove fatherhood whilst a child is still in the womb.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 04:18:36 PM
Quote
One might ask why then that men have an obligation to provide child support?  It's not his responsibility in the womb but is afterwards?  

I call BS
Of course its BS. But the only way they can have a legitimate argument is to use the banner of the abortionists and relegate the man's relation to the unborn child to that of a non-parent. Otherwise, their argument is shown to be what it is; a complete fraud.

The "Boyfriend's" main responsibility was to not have unprotected sex and knock her up. He failed his primary responsibility and now has to live with not being in control of the situation any longer. He not only cant tell her what to do if she doesn't want to listen to him but he must also support the child if she chooses to have it...  

Tis a cautionary tale.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 04:21:26 PM
Quote
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body
So let me make sure I have this right. Before the child is born, the man has no rights to the child. Is that what you are saying?

The "boyfriend" showed up at the abortion clinic.. How would you picture accommodating him exactly?

"Your boyfriend is here"

"Who?"

"He says his name is Tommy"

"Tell him to go away"

"He says he is the father"

"Can he prove it because I slept with several guys?"

"He cant prove it"

"Then send him on his way and thank him for the flowers"

You created a strawman with the story of the whore at the abortion clinic. However, even here it is not 'impossible' to prove fatherhood whilst a child is still in the womb.

Whew..It's pretty normal for an unmarried woman to have sex these day. She may have more than one partner. In normal society, that does not make her a "Whore"..

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 04:26:07 PM
The "Boyfriend's" main responsibility was to not have unprotected sex and knock her up.

Newsflash: Birth control can fail. Now that's a cautionary tale.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 04:27:31 PM
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body . For example, we reel in horror when the opposite is done in China and Women are forced to have an abortion..

You cant find a solution to Abortion by forcing people.. Out of fairness he should have some say so but that cant be elevated to a "Right"..Welcome to America.

Women have a unique condition from men, however, that is intended to be ignored to protect this argument. That is, women have the unique ability to establish new life within themselves and nurture it until it can exist outside the womb.

Men can't do this. Some women refuse to recognize this gift, and/or attempt to repress this gift in order to sustain their selfish desires. (Selfish desires... sounds like 'passions'....)

When a woman contains a new life within them, their health no longer centers solely on themselves. They may not like it, if it conflicts with their desires, but that is the price of motherhood.

To attempt to usurp this responsibility and ignore the health of the new life, is to reject reality in support of an immoral position. Therefore, it NOT and can NEVER BE only about 'woman's health'. The reality is a responsibility that cannot be ignored.

Nice theory.. But in reality you would have to force people to live by it..
It's better to persude people then to impose your will upon them IMHO
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 04:29:59 PM
The "Boyfriend's" main responsibility was to not have unprotected sex and knock her up.

Newsflash: Birth control can fail. Now that's a cautionary tale.

Occasionally..Then he got a raw deal..Never the less there in no legal or practical remedy for this.

He got her pregnant. He did the deed. He lost control of the situation and there is not reasonable way to return it to him...

Keeping it zipped up works too.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 04:34:43 PM
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body . For example, we reel in horror when the opposite is done in China and Women are forced to have an abortion..

You cant find a solution to Abortion by forcing people.. Out of fairness he should have some say so but that cant be elevated to a "Right"..Welcome to America.

Women have a unique condition from men, however, that is intended to be ignored to protect this argument. That is, women have the unique ability to establish new life within themselves and nurture it until it can exist outside the womb.

Men can't do this. Some women refuse to recognize this gift, and/or attempt to repress this gift in order to sustain their selfish desires. (Selfish desires... sounds like 'passions'....)

When a woman contains a new life within them, their health no longer centers solely on themselves. They may not like it, if it conflicts with their desires, but that is the price of motherhood.

To attempt to usurp this responsibility and ignore the health of the new life, is to reject reality in support of an immoral position. Therefore, it NOT and can NEVER BE only about 'woman's health'. The reality is a responsibility that cannot be ignored.

Nice theory.. But in reality you would have to force people to live by it..
It's better to persude people then to impose your will upon them IMHO

Not either/or but both/and

Just as people have been convinced that children are not people in the womb, we must reteach/unblind these people.

We must also not accept immorality as the behest of emotion and misunderstanding. To allow evil is to accept evil.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 04:35:07 PM
Quote
One might ask why then that men have an obligation to provide child support?  It's not his responsibility in the womb but is afterwards?  

I call BS
Of course its BS. But the only way they can have a legitimate argument is to use the banner of the abortionists and relegate the man's relation to the unborn child to that of a non-parent. Otherwise, their argument is shown to be what it is; a complete fraud.

The "Boyfriend's" main responsibility was to not have unprotected sex and knock her up. He failed his primary responsibility and now has to live with not being in control of the situation any longer. He not only cant tell her what to do if she doesn't want to listen to him but he must also support the child if she chooses to have it...  

Tis a cautionary tale.

Tis a load of malarkey is what it is.

If you can make people believe in absurdities, they will be willing to commit atrocities.  Liberalism at it's greatest.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 04:35:29 PM
Quote
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body
So let me make sure I have this right. Before the child is born, the man has no rights to the child. Is that what you are saying?

The "boyfriend" showed up at the abortion clinic.. How would you picture accommodating him exactly?

"Your boyfriend is here"

"Who?"

"He says his name is Tommy"

"Tell him to go away"

"He says he is the father"

"Can he prove it because I slept with several guys?"

"He cant prove it"

"Then send him on his way and thank him for the flowers"

You created a strawman with the story of the whore at the abortion clinic. However, even here it is not 'impossible' to prove fatherhood whilst a child is still in the womb.

Whew..It's pretty normal for an unmarried woman to have sex these day. She may have more than one partner. In normal society, that does not make her a "Whore"..



Wide practice doesn't negate reality.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 04:36:35 PM
The "Boyfriend's" main responsibility was to not have unprotected sex and knock her up.

Newsflash: Birth control can fail. Now that's a cautionary tale.

Occasionally..Then he got a raw deal..Never the less there in no legal or practical remedy for this.

He got her pregnant. He did the deed. He lost control of the situation and there is not reasonable way to return it to him...

Keeping it zipped up works too.

Did she file rape charges?  If not, she's every bit as responsible.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 25, 2013, 05:07:05 PM
The implication was that he has a "Right" to access...

Umm, he kinda should have that right. It is both of their child. While he may not have to endure child labour and pregnancy, he still would have to pay child-support depending on whether or not the woman decides to abort. I think that fact alone sort of refutes the notion that the decision should solely rely on the woman. I admit, I've never been pregnant or given birth, but I think that paying 18 years of child support is at the very least an equal burden to 9 months of pregnancy and then birth.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 05:17:49 PM
Umm, he kinda should have that right. It is both of their child. While he may not have to endure child labour and pregnancy, he still would have to pay child-support depending on whether or not the woman decides to abort. I think that fact alone sort of refutes the notion that the decision should solely rely on the woman. I admit, I've never been pregnant or given birth, but I think that paying 18 years of child support is at the very least an equal burden to 9 months of pregnancy and then birth.

And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Do everyone a favour, James, and don't spout stuff about things you don't have the foggiest idea about. Please. We know you're a teenager and you still know everything, but... it's embarrassing.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 25, 2013, 05:22:21 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

Quote
Do everyone a favour, James, and don't spout stuff about things you don't have the foggiest idea about. Please. We know you're a teenager and you still know everything, but... it's embarrassing.

My mom accidentally got pregnant with me at fifteen; I think I'd at least know SOMETHING about this.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: choy on February 25, 2013, 05:30:12 PM
Umm, he kinda should have that right. It is both of their child. While he may not have to endure child labour and pregnancy, he still would have to pay child-support depending on whether or not the woman decides to abort. I think that fact alone sort of refutes the notion that the decision should solely rely on the woman. I admit, I've never been pregnant or given birth, but I think that paying 18 years of child support is at the very least an equal burden to 9 months of pregnancy and then birth.

And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Do everyone a favour, James, and don't spout stuff about things you don't have the foggiest idea about. Please. We know you're a teenager and you still know everything, but... it's embarrassing.

I think his point about child support is valid.  I haven't read the entire conversation but I like his point that the child is the responsibility of both parents regardless if they stay together or not.  Not that I want to advocate abortion here in any way, but the father isn't merely a sperm donor.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 05:34:47 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.

Do everyone a favour, James, and don't spout stuff about things you don't have the foggiest idea about. Please. We know you're a teenager and you still know everything, but... it's embarrassing.

My mom accidentally got pregnant with me at fifteen; I think I'd at least know SOMETHING about this.

How does that let you know diddly squat about goes into creating and maintaining a dependant?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 05:40:48 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.


Should the father be required by law to pay child support?  Should the father be required by common morality to help raise the child?

If so, then do you think it stands to reason that he should have an equal say in whether the child is killed or not?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 05:43:11 PM
I think his point about child support is valid.  I haven't read the entire conversation but I like his point that the child is the responsibility of both parents regardless if they stay together or not.  Not that I want to advocate abortion here in any way, but the father isn't merely a sperm donor.

A father who wants to really be a father doesn't get fixated on how much a child costs him, and certainly doesn't believe that a mother's job is done once she's popped out the baby. I'm sure you know that well. ;)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 05:47:36 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.


Should the father be required by law to pay child support?  Should the father be required by common morality to help raise the child?

If so, then do you think it stands to reason that he should have an equal say in whether the child is killed or not?

The say can never be equal, because there can be two conflicting views and only one decision to be made. And that decision must be made by the mother, because she is putting in so much more than the father would ever be able to.

It's a hard decision, whichever way you cut it, and an ugly business all around.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 05:56:43 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.


Should the father be required by law to pay child support?  Should the father be required by common morality to help raise the child?

If so, then do you think it stands to reason that he should have an equal say in whether the child is killed or not?

The say can never be equal, because there can be two conflicting views and only one decision to be made. And that decision must be made by the mother, because she is putting in so much more than the father would ever be able to.

It's a hard decision, whichever way you cut it, and an ugly business all around.

Does not negate fatherhood. Unless you want to argue for the irrelevance of the father, your position is untenable.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 05:59:07 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.


Should the father be required by law to pay child support?  Should the father be required by common morality to help raise the child?

If so, then do you think it stands to reason that he should have an equal say in whether the child is killed or not?

The say can never be equal, because there can be two conflicting views and only one decision to be made. And that decision must be made by the mother, because she is putting in so much more than the father would ever be able to.

It's a hard decision, whichever way you cut it, and an ugly business all around.

Does not negate fatherhood. Unless you want to argue for the irrelevance of the father, your position is untenable.

Where exactly did I negate fatherhood?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 06:03:23 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.


Should the father be required by law to pay child support?  Should the father be required by common morality to help raise the child?

If so, then do you think it stands to reason that he should have an equal say in whether the child is killed or not?

The say can never be equal, because there can be two conflicting views and only one decision to be made. And that decision must be made by the mother, because she is putting in so much more than the father would ever be able to.

It's a hard decision, whichever way you cut it, and an ugly business all around.

Does not negate fatherhood. Unless you want to argue for the irrelevance of the father, your position is untenable.

Where exactly did I negate fatherhood?

By insisting the father has no voice in the life of his child.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Android_Rewster on February 25, 2013, 06:03:49 PM
 I know that I'm kind of popping in on this thread in the middle of a debate, so, sorry about that.


 I've had conflicting thoughts on abortion in the past. At one point, I was 100% pro-life, then I moved on to pro-choice, no I'm pro-choice progressive.

 I don't believe Abortion is right for a Christian, because of our emphasis on the value of human life. But, I don't make the connection between wrong and murder. Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.
 Anyways, I'm a pro-choice progressive because, according to some legitimate statistics(I could cite them later, but not now) show that making abortion illegal in places where abortion is already a mainstream form of birth control will not make the abortion rate go down. In some places, in fact, it's risen. So, we vote for legalizing abortion, but advocating contraception as a better alternative, making it free in as many places as we can.
 Of course that raises the problem with people having sex more often, but to choose that as a more terrible alternative than (what pro-lifers call) murder is absolutely ridiculous.

 This is just where I'm at, and have been at on this topic, for a while now. If any of you can offer some other good perspectives on this, I'd love to hear them.

 Anyhow.
Respects,
 Andrew
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 06:03:57 PM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.


Should the father be required by law to pay child support?  Should the father be required by common morality to help raise the child?

If so, then do you think it stands to reason that he should have an equal say in whether the child is killed or not?

The say can never be equal, because there can be two conflicting views and only one decision to be made. And that decision must be made by the mother, because she is putting in so much more than the father would ever be able to.

It's a hard decision, whichever way you cut it, and an ugly business all around.

If it's a unilateral decision it should be a unilateral responsibility.  
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 06:07:32 PM
I know that I'm kind of popping in on this thread in the middle of a debate, so, sorry about that.


 I've had conflicting thoughts on abortion in the past. At one point, I was 100% pro-life, then I moved on to pro-choice, no I'm pro-choice progressive.

 I don't believe Abortion is right for a Christian, because of our emphasis on the value of human life. But, I don't make the connection between wrong and murder. Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.
 Anyways, I'm a pro-choice progressive because, according to some legitimate statistics(I could cite them later, but not now) show that making abortion illegal in places where abortion is already a mainstream form of birth control will not make the abortion rate go down. In some places, in fact, it's risen. So, we vote for legalizing abortion, but advocating contraception as a better alternative, making it free in as many places as we can.
 Of course that raises the problem with people having sex more often, but to choose that as a more terrible alternative than (what pro-lifers call) murder is absolutely ridiculous.

 This is just where I'm at, and have been at on this topic, for a while now. If any of you can offer some other good perspectives on this, I'd love to hear them.

 Anyhow.
Respects,
 Andrew

Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 06:09:17 PM
Where exactly did I negate fatherhood?

By insisting the father has no voice in the life of his child.

I didn't as much as say that, let alone insist. I said that if he wants A and she wants B, he'll have to defer to her decision, because she's invested in it in a way he can never be.

If it's a unilateral decision it should be a unilateral responsibility.

See above. That's not a unilateral decision. It can be, as lurid examples further up have shown, but doesn't have to.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 06:13:04 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 06:14:23 PM
Where exactly did I negate fatherhood?

By insisting the father has no voice in the life of his child.

I didn't as much as say that, let alone insist. I said that if he wants A and she wants B, he'll have to defer to her decision, because she's invested in it in a way he can never be.

Semantics. You are rejecting the importance of the father, and deem the father's opinion to be inferior.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 06:17:24 PM
Where exactly did I negate fatherhood?

By insisting the father has no voice in the life of his child.

I didn't as much as say that, let alone insist. I said that if he wants A and she wants B, he'll have to defer to her decision, because she's invested in it in a way he can never be.

Semantics. You are rejecting the importance of the father, and deem the father's opinion to be inferior.

Hardly semantics. I'm not rejecting the importance of the father, only stating the obvious: that if only one of the two can be accommodated, that needs to be the mother.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want but their women don't, then both opinions will carry the same importance and there will be jubilation all around.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 25, 2013, 06:40:12 PM
Where exactly did I negate fatherhood?

By insisting the father has no voice in the life of his child.

I didn't as much as say that, let alone insist. I said that if he wants A and she wants B, he'll have to defer to her decision, because she's invested in it in a way he can never be.

Semantics. You are rejecting the importance of the father, and deem the father's opinion to be inferior.

Hardly semantics. I'm not rejecting the importance of the father, only stating the obvious: that if only one of the two can be accommodated, that needs to be the mother.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want but their women don't, then both opinions will carry the same importance and there will be jubilation all around.

So why doesn't the man get to unilaterally decide where his money goes?  He's the one who had to work for it.  He's the one who had to put in is time and effort, he should be the only one who gets to decide how it's spent.  His body.  His choice.

Please note that I am not supporting deadbeatism.  But when it gets down to it, both of them made the mutual decision to screw (if not then why weren't rape charges filed?).  She now has a moral obligation to be a mother to that child and he has a moral obligation to be a father to it.  The fact that legal obligations and moral obligations in this instance don't match up only shows that our laws are no longer legitimate except as they are enforced by firearms.  The ONLY one who had no choice in the beginning is the child, thus his or her right to life trumps both the mother's right to liberty and the gather's to property. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 25, 2013, 06:42:22 PM
Marc: Why do you always capitalise 'Women'?

Is it in honor of the great contribution they make to our society by holding up half the sky?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: choy on February 25, 2013, 06:54:04 PM
I think his point about child support is valid.  I haven't read the entire conversation but I like his point that the child is the responsibility of both parents regardless if they stay together or not.  Not that I want to advocate abortion here in any way, but the father isn't merely a sperm donor.

A father who wants to really be a father doesn't get fixated on how much a child costs him, and certainly doesn't believe that a mother's job is done once she's popped out the baby. I'm sure you know that well. ;)

Of course.  But at what point do we release the father from his responsibility, and what point do we bound him to it?  It seems there is a double standard here.  The father is not part of this decision (though I'd rather this decision not exist at all) but later on he can be slapped with a paternity suit and then pay for child support.  All males and females must be made aware of the consequences of irresponsible sex (that is, outside of marriage) and that if they still continue to engage in it then they both should brunt all the responsibility and consequences of their action.  The woman didn't get pregnant on her own, so why take the man out of any decision at any point of the pregnancy?

Look, even for married couples this could be an issue.  A woman may unilaterally decide to terminate a pregnancy without the knowledge or consent of the husband.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 07:04:07 PM
So why doesn't the man get to unilaterally decide where his money goes?  He's the one who had to work for it.  He's the one who had to put in is time and effort, he should be the only one who gets to decide how it's spent.  His body.  His choice.

Please note that I am not supporting deadbeatism.  But when it gets down to it, both of them made the mutual decision to screw (if not then why weren't rape charges filed?).  She now has a moral obligation to be a mother to that child and he has a moral obligation to be a father to it.  The fact that legal obligations and moral obligations in this instance don't match up only shows that our laws are no longer legitimate except as they are enforced by firearms.  The ONLY one who had no choice in the beginning is the child, thus his or her right to life trumps both the mother's right to liberty and the gather's to property.

I'm biased (obviously, being a mother and all), but I don't believe there is enough money in the known universe to match the bulk of work a single parent puts into childrearing.

Now, a woman deciding to have her child despite her man's pressure to have an abortion - that's an entirely unilateral decision, and based on your 'unilateral decision, unilateral responsibility' quote further up, the father owes nothing to nobody. Which is, frankly, a despicable thing even to suggest.

I'd want nothing more than have every child conceived in this world welcomed into the world by two parents who want and love it, but that's not going to happen any time soon. And I'm convinced that, unless everyone in a state is on the same page on the moral status of abortion, criminalising it is going to bring on much greater evil than it will prevent.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 07:07:39 PM
single parent = single mother?

How exactly is any of this an argument for killing children? Because it's difficult?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 07:09:54 PM
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body . For example, we reel in horror when the opposite is done in China and Women are forced to have an abortion..

You cant find a solution to Abortion by forcing people.. Out of fairness he should have some say so but that cant be elevated to a "Right"..Welcome to America.

Women have a unique condition from men, however, that is intended to be ignored to protect this argument. That is, women have the unique ability to establish new life within themselves and nurture it until it can exist outside the womb.

Men can't do this. Some women refuse to recognize this gift, and/or attempt to repress this gift in order to sustain their selfish desires. (Selfish desires... sounds like 'passions'....)

When a woman contains a new life within them, their health no longer centers solely on themselves. They may not like it, if it conflicts with their desires, but that is the price of motherhood.

To attempt to usurp this responsibility and ignore the health of the new life, is to reject reality in support of an immoral position. Therefore, it NOT and can NEVER BE only about 'woman's health'. The reality is a responsibility that cannot be ignored.

Nice theory.. But in reality you would have to force people to live by it..
It's better to persude people then to impose your will upon them IMHO

Not either/or but both/and

Just as people have been convinced that children are not people in the womb, we must reteach/unblind these people.

We must also not accept immorality as the behest of emotion and misunderstanding. To allow evil is to accept evil.

Thank you for expressing your personal morality and religious views. Be careful not to come off as threatening to impose them unilaterally on people.. It only makes things worse.

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 07:12:43 PM
single parent = single mother?

Either will do, although the single mother type is more likely.

How exactly is any of this an argument for killing children? Because it's difficult?

Not everyone is convinced that abortion is 'killing children'.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 07:15:04 PM
single parent = single mother?

Either will do, although the single mother type is more likely.

And the other not irrelevant, making the point more moot.


How exactly is any of this an argument for killing children? Because it's difficult?

Not everyone is convinced that abortion is 'killing children'.

Irrelevant. Unless you know of an alternative method to making children.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Arachne on February 25, 2013, 07:21:10 PM
It's not irrelevant if you simply disagree with it. :)

Even on this thread, we're far from a unified front. Several among us struggle with the issue, and have expressed their doubts further up the thread. Feel free to check them while I get a good night's sleep.

I'm convinced that we will be done with abortion only when every woman can say, 'I'm against abortion, so I won't have one'. Forcing the issue will just end in tears all around.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: OrthoNoob on February 25, 2013, 07:37:59 PM
Now, a woman deciding to have her child despite her man's pressure to have an abortion - that's an entirely unilateral decision, and based on your 'unilateral decision, unilateral responsibility' quote further up, the father owes nothing to nobody. Which is, frankly, a despicable thing even to suggest.

I think it would do a great deal of good if no child support could be collected by a woman who was not married to the father at the time of conception.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 25, 2013, 07:47:32 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 25, 2013, 08:07:54 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on February 25, 2013, 08:09:07 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old.  

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

I've never heard of that. I really don't think they'll be giving free contraceptives to two-year-olds. Where do you get this stuff?

Anyway, anything other than condoms can get pretty expensive. Hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year. At least. I've worked in health care for years. I know what stuff costs. If you're going to tell people not to have sex, number one that doesn't work, and number two, there are plenty of poor married people. Are you going to tell all of them not to have sex? How much strain is that going to put on the marriage?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on February 25, 2013, 08:10:18 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

They are not more about abortion. They make far more money selling birth control. They do that a lot more than they do abortions. Also, I have never heard of Planned Parenthood clinics in high schools. Do you believe everything you read off Free Republic or Operation Rescue or wherever you get this nonsense?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 25, 2013, 08:17:46 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

They are not more about abortion. They make far more money selling birth control. They do that a lot more than they do abortions. Also, I have never heard of Planned Parenthood clinics in high schools. Do you believe everything you read off Free Republic or Operation Rescue or wherever you get this nonsense?

Odd when an EO Christian defends Planned Parenthood.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/06/05/planned-parenthood-sets-up-shop-at-roosevelt-high-to-reduce-teen-pregnancies/ (http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/06/05/planned-parenthood-sets-up-shop-at-roosevelt-high-to-reduce-teen-pregnancies/)

There ya go, cbs news, not free republic.

They are America's largest abortion provider.
They get 45% of their funding from our taxpayer dollars.

Their own given stats on abortion are very biased where they say 10% of clients have abortions (murders telling the truth?).  The revenue from abortions is much higher and the government funding goes towards contraceptives.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: podkarpatska on February 25, 2013, 09:12:47 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

Just wondering, within God's creation are a seemingly infinite multitude of his creatures including ones harmful to humans like certain bacteria. Many people have died as a consequence of nature's normal cycles by means of bacterial infection. With the development of antibiotics in the 20th century many diseases formerly deadly to mankind were no longer a threat to humans. Do you take antibiotics when ill?  How do you reconcile modern medicine with God's will?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on February 25, 2013, 09:25:39 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

Just wondering, within God's creation are a seemingly infinite multitude of his creatures including ones harmful to humans like certain bacteria. Many people have died as a consequence of nature's normal cycles by means of bacterial infection. With the development of antibiotics in the 20th century many diseases formerly deadly to mankind were no longer a threat to humans. Do you take antibiotics when ill?  How do you reconcile modern medicine with God's will?

My friend--If I may...

Modern medicine has made it possible for capital punishment to be administered by lethal injection, arguably a more humane way to end a life. Just as modern medicine has made abortion much safer and thus a more humane way (for the mother that is) to end a life. I do not think that we have to reconcile either with God's will. Both are Caesar's doing, not God's. Now, the use of antibiotics is an interesting case; we have growing evidence that bacteria have fought back and may be winning the battle, as indicated by a recent story about completely drug-resistant and thus incurable TB in some developing country. I am willing to give credit to natural law on this development. However, I cannot see how killing bacteria is the same as, or similar to, killing a human baby.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 25, 2013, 09:57:08 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

Just wondering, within God's creation are a seemingly infinite multitude of his creatures including ones harmful to humans like certain bacteria. Many people have died as a consequence of nature's normal cycles by means of bacterial infection. With the development of antibiotics in the 20th century many diseases formerly deadly to mankind were no longer a threat to humans. Do you take antibiotics when ill?  How do you reconcile modern medicine with God's will?

Hi, glad you asked.  Before I answer I must warn, that my answer will not coincide with modern Science, modern medicine, or common thought.    Also, for the CRITICS of almost everything I say, I can't cover every ailment, sickness, or example...

I do not believe in modern medicine.  I believe surgery, but the the pharmacy side of it.   God forbade pharmacia (witchcraft) in the scriptures.  I believe our modern pharmacy is the "user of potions".

With that said I believe that most often diseases are caused by people being lazy, nasty, and unhealthy.  Bathing in dung infested waters for example.  I believe things like high blood pressure are related to obesity, eating salt that is "not real", being lazy, eating a poor unnatural diet...

I  believe bacterial diseases and viral diseases are very curable, if we embrace (untouched) what God has provided.  (look these up because there is no way I can give all of them here)

1) Propolis - what bees use to "glue their hives together"... This is extremely anti-bacterial and anti-viral.  It contains tons of amino acids.   You can even brush your teeth with it (an excellent toothpaste).  Look it up, it's awesome.   Given to us by God in a pure form.

2) Goji Berries - these contain almost all of the amino acids and all the essential amino acids.  Tons of vitamins.  Contains the highest level of carotenoids on the planet (perfect for eyes and reverses age related macular degeration).   Has an abundance of B vitamins, perfect for those with type 2 diabetes & hypoglycemics.  Also contains the most antioxidants of anything on Earth (by far).  Look it up!  Given to us by God in a pure form.

3) Willow Bark - will cure head aches. Given to us by God in a pure form.

4) Bee Pollen - Will cure many air born allergies.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

5) Echinachea - Is a catalyst for the immune system.  Take as you feel yourself getting sick.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

6) Spirulina - This stuff is insanely good for you, packed with vitamins.  Want a healthy temple?  this stuff is awesome.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

7) Royal Jelly - Full of anti oxidants, amino acids, and vitamins.  This is what worker bees feed to the queen.  Pure, and given to us by God.

Okay, fingers are tired of examples.  There are tons of these, but I covered some of the best.  I believe that it was not Science that offered us solutions to ailments.  I believe that God created things in nature that will help us.

Even for his animals.  For my goats, if they get worms, we feed them Cedar or Honeysuckle.   Cures it.   For humans with worms - heavy use of Garlic.

I believe vaccines are toxic and that the "supposed things" they cure, were being eradicated by more sterile conditions of living.  My opinion is that when Polio was being "vaccinated", people were also leaving life where they were drinking unsanitary water.  Many infected drank from wells too close to out houses.  Suburbs were springing up (pun intended) that were connected to more sanitary sources of water at that time.  Vaccines took all the credit.   Today, rather than the 4 vaccines that were "given" when I was a child, there is 62.  

Again these are my opinions.  I refuse to believe that in God's wondrous creation for us that there are not cures.   I know in his creation is the perfect things to give us perfect health.  Youtube has a video called "the raw food trucker", a man who cured his colon cancer (1 month to live) by consuming an all raw / mostly vegan diet.   lost a ton of weight too.
 
I know there are critics.  None of my 5 children are vaccinated.   We have no problems yet.  In fact, we have been to the doctor (heh knocking on wood) less than 5 times with any of them COMBINED.   This is because most ailments were treated with God's creation.

The times we went were for more of "surgical" reasons.  My son got his finger smashed in a portable cement mixer.  Thank God he didn't need surgery.  My daughter swallowed a bunch of little magnets faster than we could get to her - we freaked.  Food poisoning, but they couldn't do anything.  Once my son got his elbow popped out on monkey bars.  

All sicknesses, bacterial infections, colds, flu, etc., all treated with what God made for us.

Anyway, its almost a philosophy.  A philosophy of health, respecting the creation, and using what God gave us to help us.  I'm nearly 40 years old, I rarely get sick, and I can still hold my own against 5 children wrestling on a trampoline (kind of LOL).  My wife rarely gets sick - as well as our children.

I believe that when we embrace what God has made for us, we are much more healthy.

Anyway, this is what works for us for many years now.  This info is often met with scorn and ridicule.  This is not conclusive, but only a trickle in an ocean of what is out there.

I believe that modern contraceptives are pharmacia (witchcraft) and its people's attempts at altering the will of God.




Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 09:58:41 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

  Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.

Actually abortion is a very small percentage of what Planned Parenthood does. Most of what they do is sex education, distributing contraception and preventative medicine for women
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Romaios on February 25, 2013, 10:03:57 PM
Just wondering, within God's creation are a seemingly infinite multitude of his creatures including ones harmful to humans like certain bacteria. Many people have died as a consequence of nature's normal cycles by means of bacterial infection. With the development of antibiotics in the 20th century many diseases formerly deadly to mankind were no longer a threat to humans. Do you take antibiotics when ill?  How do you reconcile modern medicine with God's will?

Have you read this (http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/twainlfe.htm#7) by any chance?

God is not a terrorist who uses biological weapons to carry out his wicked plans. Otherwise Mr. Twain's portrayal in "Letters from the Earth" would be, well, spot-on.

"Theodicy is ineffective most of the times because one tries to justify God at a level at which he is seen like a man and stripped of all the majesty of his divinity." (Met. Anthony Bloom)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on February 25, 2013, 10:13:48 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

  Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.

Actually abortion is a very small percentage of what Planned Parenthood does. Most of what they do is sex education, distributing contraception and preventative medicine for women

Here we go again...Figures, please. Define "small percentage".
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Android_Rewster on February 25, 2013, 10:36:18 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Android_Rewster on February 25, 2013, 10:39:39 PM
 Also, in regards to the price of contraceptives, it depends on the state. In Idaho, they're not free, and you have to be 18(I think) to purchase them. And that's only condoms, an albeit ineffective contraceptive. The contraception advocating I speak of is birth control pills.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Karaleighmum on February 25, 2013, 10:45:03 PM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.

And doubly tragic so when the parents are married. It DOES happen.
More than people will admit.


We really need to pray for all people in these situations. ANyone feeling pressured to abort, anyone losing a child unwilling to an abortion, and aborted child...everyone. It is really so sad how delusional our culture is claiming it is a women's rights situation whn it is a human being. It just breaks my heart. I was 19 when I got pregnant, granted I was not living in accordance with Christ and was committing sins myself, and my son's father told me to abort the baby because I would never be a good mother on my own and my child would have a terrible life. Well, he is turning one on St. Patricks day, and he is the "happiest baby I've ever seen" (so he gets a lot) any way I guess that was just my story on how it is possible and how we really need to support people in finding the way. God bless.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Aindriú on February 25, 2013, 10:52:40 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance? The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat. Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?

Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria? What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.

To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?


(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: podkarpatska on February 25, 2013, 10:57:53 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

Just wondering, within God's creation are a seemingly infinite multitude of his creatures including ones harmful to humans like certain bacteria. Many people have died as a consequence of nature's normal cycles by means of bacterial infection. With the development of antibiotics in the 20th century many diseases formerly deadly to mankind were no longer a threat to humans. Do you take antibiotics when ill?  How do you reconcile modern medicine with God's will?

My friend--If I may...

Modern medicine has made it possible for capital punishment to be administered by lethal injection, arguably a more humane way to end a life. Just as modern medicine has made abortion much safer and thus a more humane way (for the mother that is) to end a life. I do not think that we have to reconcile either with God's will. Both are Caesar's doing, not God's. Now, the use of antibiotics is an interesting case; we have growing evidence that bacteria have fought back and may be winning the battle, as indicated by a recent story about completely drug-resistant and thus incurable TB in some developing country. I am willing to give credit to natural law on this development. However, I cannot see how killing bacteria is the same as, or similar to, killing a human baby.

Not my point..I should have made that clear... of course I don't believe that.

I was speaking to the issue of contraception and the implied argument which flows from the natural law rejection of contraception that engaging in marital relations for purposes other than procreation goes against God's will. Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) addressed that argument quite well ,in this brief essay: "Orthodox Marriage & Its Misunderstanding"  It is worth the time to read.

http://theinnerkingdom.wordpress.com/2008/11/21/orthodox-marriage-its-misunderstanding-by-bishop-hilarion-alfeyev/
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 25, 2013, 11:21:38 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

  Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.

Actually abortion is a very small percentage of what Planned Parenthood does. Most of what they do is sex education, distributing contraception and preventative medicine for women

Here we go again...Figures, please. Define "small percentage".

3%

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/planned-parenthood-glance-5552.htm


One in five women in the U.S. has visited a Planned Parenthood health center at least once in her life.
Our Work

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 71 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood services help prevent more than 684,000 unintended pregnancies each year.

Planned Parenthood provides 585,000 Pap tests and nearly 640,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.

Three percent of all Planned Parenthood health services are abortion services.

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 25, 2013, 11:24:19 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

  Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.

Actually abortion is a very small percentage of what Planned Parenthood does. Most of what they do is sex education, distributing contraception and preventative medicine for women

Here we go again...Figures, please. Define "small percentage".

3%

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/planned-parenthood-glance-5552.htm


One in five women in the U.S. has visited a Planned Parenthood health center at least once in her life.
Our Work

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 71 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood services help prevent more than 684,000 unintended pregnancies each year.

Planned Parenthood provides 585,000 Pap tests and nearly 640,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.

Three percent of all Planned Parenthood health services are abortion services.



Those figures are VERY misleading.

Search around for more information on the figures.  (This is coming from somebody who has actively protested Planned Parenthood).

These are figures given to you by a murderous organization.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: SolEX01 on February 25, 2013, 11:54:39 PM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

  Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.

Actually abortion is a very small percentage of what Planned Parenthood does. Most of what they do is sex education, distributing contraception and preventative medicine for women

Here we go again...Figures, please. Define "small percentage".

3%

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/planned-parenthood-glance-5552.htm


One in five women in the U.S. has visited a Planned Parenthood health center at least once in her life.
Our Work

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 71 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood services help prevent more than 684,000 unintended pregnancies each year.

Planned Parenthood provides 585,000 Pap tests and nearly 640,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.

Three percent of all Planned Parenthood health services are abortion services.



Those figures are VERY misleading.

Search around for more information on the figures.  (This is coming from somebody who has actively protested Planned Parenthood).

These are figures given to you by a murderous organization.

Where are your figures and have you already posted them here?   ???
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 26, 2013, 12:07:37 AM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

  Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.

Actually abortion is a very small percentage of what Planned Parenthood does. Most of what they do is sex education, distributing contraception and preventative medicine for women

Here we go again...Figures, please. Define "small percentage".

3%

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/planned-parenthood-glance-5552.htm


One in five women in the U.S. has visited a Planned Parenthood health center at least once in her life.
Our Work

Planned Parenthood health centers focus on prevention: 71 percent of our clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood services help prevent more than 684,000 unintended pregnancies each year.

Planned Parenthood provides 585,000 Pap tests and nearly 640,000 breast exams each year, critical services in detecting cancer.

Planned Parenthood provides nearly 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.

Three percent of all Planned Parenthood health services are abortion services.



Those figures are VERY misleading.

Search around for more information on the figures.  (This is coming from somebody who has actively protested Planned Parenthood).

These are figures given to you by a murderous organization.

You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts..
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 26, 2013, 12:45:08 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.

And doubly tragic so when the parents are married. It DOES happen.
More than people will admit.


We really need to pray for all people in these situations. ANyone feeling pressured to abort, anyone losing a child unwilling to an abortion, and aborted child...everyone. It is really so sad how delusional our culture is claiming it is a women's rights situation whn it is a human being. It just breaks my heart. I was 19 when I got pregnant, granted I was not living in accordance with Christ and was committing sins myself, and my son's father told me to abort the baby because I would never be a good mother on my own and my child would have a terrible life. Well, he is turning one on St. Patricks day, and he is the "happiest baby I've ever seen" (so he gets a lot) any way I guess that was just my story on how it is possible and how we really need to support people in finding the way. God bless.


Amen



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:25:36 AM
...I strongly suspect the number of abortions will go down to a manageable level once a serious penalty is attached to the act...

LOL! Okay. And the war on drugs has been really successful in keeping drugs out of impoverished communities.
I wonder how much worse it would be without fighting against it.  No, I don’t want to wonder.  The thought is terrifying.  Not that this has anything to do with abortion.  Then again, I suppose it has become second nature to justify one wrong by pointing at another.  Very sad indeed.  :(

Probably better actually.

Hardly.  Making drugs legal (not fighting against recreational drug use) means more people will use them, causing more problems for everyone.  Keep your eyes on the states that have made MJ legal.  You will see.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:27:43 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:31:51 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.


I once watched a young man sobbing uncontrollably after he had been forcibly removed from an abortion clinic for simply trying to talk his girlfriend out of killing his unborn child. He was rolling on the ground weeping in tremendous grief. He couldn't understand why he wasn't even allowed to try to talk to his own girlfriend who was carrying his own child. It was heartbreaking to see. He felt so helpless. No freedom of choice for him. All he could do was sit by and weep as the girl he loved murdered the baby they had conceived together. I sat down and wept with him. That's all I could do. This is another aspect of abortion that is lost in all the naive theory about "choice" and such.



Selam

Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone.

Reality check: Women do in fact have a choice. Therefore, you may want to work on you communication skills
 
The absolute witlessness of some statements astonishes me.  I have heard this sort of ignorance on several occasions and every time I hear it there is less and less strength in the words, not that there was much in the beginning.  “Women aren’t property” propaganda punch lines.  Nothing more.  Very sad.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:35:40 AM
I'll come out and say it; I think the reason most people--if they honestly admit it--don't feel as horrified at the thought of abortion as they do to say, the murder of five year olds, is because it is hard to have feelings for an unborn child that we've never met, that has no personality, that we can't really relate to, since we've all been around small children, but never an unborn child.

Tell that to the father after he learns the mother killed his child and he could do nothing to stop her.


I once watched a young man sobbing uncontrollably after he had been forcibly removed from an abortion clinic for simply trying to talk his girlfriend out of killing his unborn child. He was rolling on the ground weeping in tremendous grief. He couldn't understand why he wasn't even allowed to try to talk to his own girlfriend who was carrying his own child. It was heartbreaking to see. He felt so helpless. No freedom of choice for him. All he could do was sit by and weep as the girl he loved murdered the baby they had conceived together. I sat down and wept with him. That's all I could do. This is another aspect of abortion that is lost in all the naive theory about "choice" and such.



Selam

Here in  21st Century America men dont own Women.. She is not "His own" girlfriend. You may want to check your Mosagony at the door if you wish to ever persuade anyone.

Reality check: Women do in fact have a choice. Therefore, you may want to work on you communication skills

Mosagony?

Yeah Miss spell ..Word check didnt correct it.. Here you go:

World English Dictionary
misogyny  (mɪˈsɒdʒɪnɪ, maɪ-) 
 
— n   
 hatred of women 
 
[C17: from Greek, from miso-  + gunē  woman] 
 
mi'sogynist 
 
— n , — adj   
 
misogy'nistic 
 
— adj   
 
mi'sogynous 
 
— adj   



I see.  Pro-life, hate women.  Got it.  Nonsense and foolishness, but I understand.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:38:15 AM
Quote
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body
So let me make sure I have this right. Before the child is born, the man has no rights to the child. Is that what you are saying?

The "boyfriend" showed up at the abortion clinic.. How would you picture accommodating him exactly?

"Your boyfriend is here"

"Who?"

"He says his name is Tommy"

"Tell him to go away"

"He says he is the father"

"Can he prove it because I slept with several guys?"

"He cant prove it"

"Then send him on his way and thank him for the flowers"

You created a strawman with the story of the whore at the abortion clinic. However, even here it is not 'impossible' to prove fatherhood whilst a child is still in the womb.

Whew..It's pretty normal for an unmarried woman to have sex these day. She may have more than one partner. In normal society, that does not make her a "Whore"..



Indeed.  If it did, then she would get paid.  There is another word I would use, but not in good company.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:39:00 AM
Yes, the freedom of choice is only for the Women when it concerns her body . For example, we reel in horror when the opposite is done in China and Women are forced to have an abortion..

You cant find a solution to Abortion by forcing people.. Out of fairness he should have some say so but that cant be elevated to a "Right"..Welcome to America.

Women have a unique condition from men, however, that is intended to be ignored to protect this argument. That is, women have the unique ability to establish new life within themselves and nurture it until it can exist outside the womb.

Men can't do this. Some women refuse to recognize this gift, and/or attempt to repress this gift in order to sustain their selfish desires. (Selfish desires... sounds like 'passions'....)

When a woman contains a new life within them, their health no longer centers solely on themselves. They may not like it, if it conflicts with their desires, but that is the price of motherhood.

To attempt to usurp this responsibility and ignore the health of the new life, is to reject reality in support of an immoral position. Therefore, it NOT and can NEVER BE only about 'woman's health'. The reality is a responsibility that cannot be ignored.

Nice theory.. But in reality you would have to force people to live by it..
It's better to persude people then to impose your will upon them IMHO

You mean, like the father who wants the child, but is forced to sit on his hands while his child is being killed?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:39:35 AM
The "Boyfriend's" main responsibility was to not have unprotected sex and knock her up.

Newsflash: Birth control can fail. Now that's a cautionary tale.

Occasionally..Then he got a raw deal..Never the less there in no legal or practical remedy for this.

He got her pregnant. He did the deed. He lost control of the situation and there is not reasonable way to return it to him...

Keeping it zipped up works too.

No responsibility for the women?  What happened to equality?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: JamesR on February 26, 2013, 05:41:10 AM
Hardly.  Making drugs legal (not fighting against recreational drug use) means more people will use them, causing more problems for everyone.

Tell that to the families of the people being imprisoned; how many of those drug dealers and drug users have families just like everyone else who are dependent upon them? Minorities using drugs doesn't affect you in any way. But the government has to interfere in our lives and further screw us over by throwing our breadwinners and loved ones in prison for smoking blunts.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:41:26 AM
Umm, he kinda should have that right. It is both of their child. While he may not have to endure child labour and pregnancy, he still would have to pay child-support depending on whether or not the woman decides to abort. I think that fact alone sort of refutes the notion that the decision should solely rely on the woman. I admit, I've never been pregnant or given birth, but I think that paying 18 years of child support is at the very least an equal burden to 9 months of pregnancy and then birth.

And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Ok, make the father raise the child and the mother provide child support.  
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:42:55 AM
I think his point about child support is valid.  I haven't read the entire conversation but I like his point that the child is the responsibility of both parents regardless if they stay together or not.  Not that I want to advocate abortion here in any way, but the father isn't merely a sperm donor.

A father who wants to really be a father doesn't get fixated on how much a child costs him, and certainly doesn't believe that a mother's job is done once she's popped out the baby. I'm sure you know that well. ;)

Double standards or revolting.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:43:35 AM
And what about 18 years of childrearing? Or do you think that you stick babies in a jar, water them, and they grow all by their lonesome?

Many modern parents do precisely that; they each work all day and leave their kids home alone all the time to raise themselves.

And for each parent who does this, there's at least another who does it properly. The work doesn't end with birth. That's only the beginning, and it goes on well beyond 18.


Should the father be required by law to pay child support?  Should the father be required by common morality to help raise the child?

If so, then do you think it stands to reason that he should have an equal say in whether the child is killed or not?

The say can never be equal, because there can be two conflicting views and only one decision to be made. And that decision must be made by the mother, because she is putting in so much more than the father would ever be able to.

It's a hard decision, whichever way you cut it, and an ugly business all around.

Life is hard...so what?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:44:29 AM
I know that I'm kind of popping in on this thread in the middle of a debate, so, sorry about that.


 I've had conflicting thoughts on abortion in the past. At one point, I was 100% pro-life, then I moved on to pro-choice, no I'm pro-choice progressive.

 I don't believe Abortion is right for a Christian, because of our emphasis on the value of human life. But, I don't make the connection between wrong and murder. Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.
 Anyways, I'm a pro-choice progressive because, according to some legitimate statistics(I could cite them later, but not now) show that making abortion illegal in places where abortion is already a mainstream form of birth control will not make the abortion rate go down. In some places, in fact, it's risen. So, we vote for legalizing abortion, but advocating contraception as a better alternative, making it free in as many places as we can.
 Of course that raises the problem with people having sex more often, but to choose that as a more terrible alternative than (what pro-lifers call) murder is absolutely ridiculous.

 This is just where I'm at, and have been at on this topic, for a while now. If any of you can offer some other good perspectives on this, I'd love to hear them.

 Anyhow.
Respects,
 Andrew

Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 
Abstinence is free.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:48:07 AM
single parent = single mother?

Either will do, although the single mother type is more likely.

How exactly is any of this an argument for killing children? Because it's difficult?

Not everyone is convinced that abortion is 'killing children'.

True.  Only half of the "Pro-Choice" crowd believes this.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:49:22 AM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked.

Then, walk across the street to get high, er, um...get their medicine to smoke.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:55:47 AM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

I went to school with a fellow who had no bones in his thumbs, had a massive hump on his shoulder, could barely walk and had very little facial expression.  Since he didn’t resemble other humans, would it have been ok to shoot and kill him?  I also had a neighbor who had a child born with no arms and legs.  What about her?  Some people look more like wolves than others because of all of their body hair. 

The point is, resemblance in appearance has little to do with what they actually are.  Human...just like a fetus.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:56:38 AM
Also, in regards to the price of contraceptives, it depends on the state. In Idaho, they're not free, and you have to be 18(I think) to purchase them. And that's only condoms, an albeit ineffective contraceptive. The contraception advocating I speak of is birth control pills.

I advocate self control and for Christians to do what they are supposed to do in regards to sexuality.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 05:58:28 AM
The pro-abortion argument fails when we prosecute people for double homicide when they murder a pregnant mother.  Its either a human life or it is not.  This double standard is tiresome.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 06:01:57 AM
Hardly.  Making drugs legal (not fighting against recreational drug use) means more people will use them, causing more problems for everyone.

Tell that to the families of the people being imprisoned;

They made a choice to break the law.  It is their responsibility alone.  Choices have consequences. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 26, 2013, 06:35:06 AM
As with every human rights atrocity under the sun, the defense and rationaliztion of abortion stems either from ignorance or evil. Either one is clueless about the horrific realities of abortion - in which case they are ignorant - or else they know very well how horrible abortion is and they justify it anyway - in which case they are evil. There are no other options here, in spite of some inane nuanced rhetorical attempts to obfuscate the clarity of the issue. And as much information and education that has been forthcoming on this forum about the realities of abortion, then I hardly think people who have been here for a while can plead ignorance. There is a difference between sinful imperfection and iniquitous evil. I doubt if anyone on this forum is without sin, but I don't think most people here are evil. But for those who gaze directly at the truth of abortion and still attempt to justify, excuse, and rationalize its legality - well, I tremble for their souls almost as much as I tremble for my own.

"Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."   - Cicero -



Selam


   
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: primuspilus on February 26, 2013, 10:07:39 AM
Quote
Making drugs legal (not fighting against recreational drug use) means more people will use them, causing more problems for everyone
This was the argument used when debating whether or not to rescind abolition (which turned out to be false). The facts are, people will use drugs, whether they're legal or not, and people will NOT use drugs, whether they're legal or not.

Quote
Not everyone is convinced that abortion is 'killing children'.
Not everyone is still convinced the Earth orbits the Sun. It doesn't make their arguments valid. Ending a life is ending a life, whether its inside another person or not is immaterial.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: TheMathematician on February 26, 2013, 10:39:07 AM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

Just wondering, within God's creation are a seemingly infinite multitude of his creatures including ones harmful to humans like certain bacteria. Many people have died as a consequence of nature's normal cycles by means of bacterial infection. With the development of antibiotics in the 20th century many diseases formerly deadly to mankind were no longer a threat to humans. Do you take antibiotics when ill?  How do you reconcile modern medicine with God's will?

Hi, glad you asked.  Before I answer I must warn, that my answer will not coincide with modern Science, modern medicine, or common thought.    Also, for the CRITICS of almost everything I say, I can't cover every ailment, sickness, or example...

I do not believe in modern medicine.  I believe surgery, but the the pharmacy side of it.   God forbade pharmacia (witchcraft) in the scriptures.  I believe our modern pharmacy is the "user of potions".

With that said I believe that most often diseases are caused by people being lazy, nasty, and unhealthy.  Bathing in dung infested waters for example.  I believe things like high blood pressure are related to obesity, eating salt that is "not real", being lazy, eating a poor unnatural diet...

I  believe bacterial diseases and viral diseases are very curable, if we embrace (untouched) what God has provided.  (look these up because there is no way I can give all of them here)

1) Propolis - what bees use to "glue their hives together"... This is extremely anti-bacterial and anti-viral.  It contains tons of amino acids.   You can even brush your teeth with it (an excellent toothpaste).  Look it up, it's awesome.   Given to us by God in a pure form.

2) Goji Berries - these contain almost all of the amino acids and all the essential amino acids.  Tons of vitamins.  Contains the highest level of carotenoids on the planet (perfect for eyes and reverses age related macular degeration).   Has an abundance of B vitamins, perfect for those with type 2 diabetes & hypoglycemics.  Also contains the most antioxidants of anything on Earth (by far).  Look it up!  Given to us by God in a pure form.

3) Willow Bark - will cure head aches. Given to us by God in a pure form.

4) Bee Pollen - Will cure many air born allergies.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

5) Echinachea - Is a catalyst for the immune system.  Take as you feel yourself getting sick.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

6) Spirulina - This stuff is insanely good for you, packed with vitamins.  Want a healthy temple?  this stuff is awesome.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

7) Royal Jelly - Full of anti oxidants, amino acids, and vitamins.  This is what worker bees feed to the queen.  Pure, and given to us by God.

Okay, fingers are tired of examples.  There are tons of these, but I covered some of the best.  I believe that it was not Science that offered us solutions to ailments.  I believe that God created things in nature that will help us.

Even for his animals.  For my goats, if they get worms, we feed them Cedar or Honeysuckle.   Cures it.   For humans with worms - heavy use of Garlic.

I believe vaccines are toxic and that the "supposed things" they cure, were being eradicated by more sterile conditions of living.  My opinion is that when Polio was being "vaccinated", people were also leaving life where they were drinking unsanitary water.  Many infected drank from wells too close to out houses.  Suburbs were springing up (pun intended) that were connected to more sanitary sources of water at that time.  Vaccines took all the credit.   Today, rather than the 4 vaccines that were "given" when I was a child, there is 62.  

Again these are my opinions.  I refuse to believe that in God's wondrous creation for us that there are not cures.   I know in his creation is the perfect things to give us perfect health.  Youtube has a video called "the raw food trucker", a man who cured his colon cancer (1 month to live) by consuming an all raw / mostly vegan diet.   lost a ton of weight too.
 
I know there are critics.  None of my 5 children are vaccinated.   We have no problems yet.  In fact, we have been to the doctor (heh knocking on wood) less than 5 times with any of them COMBINED.   This is because most ailments were treated with God's creation.

The times we went were for more of "surgical" reasons.  My son got his finger smashed in a portable cement mixer.  Thank God he didn't need surgery.  My daughter swallowed a bunch of little magnets faster than we could get to her - we freaked.  Food poisoning, but they couldn't do anything.  Once my son got his elbow popped out on monkey bars.  

All sicknesses, bacterial infections, colds, flu, etc., all treated with what God made for us.

Anyway, its almost a philosophy.  A philosophy of health, respecting the creation, and using what God gave us to help us.  I'm nearly 40 years old, I rarely get sick, and I can still hold my own against 5 children wrestling on a trampoline (kind of LOL).  My wife rarely gets sick - as well as our children.

I believe that when we embrace what God has made for us, we are much more healthy.

Anyway, this is what works for us for many years now.  This info is often met with scorn and ridicule.  This is not conclusive, but only a trickle in an ocean of what is out there.

I believe that modern contraceptives are pharmacia (witchcraft) and its people's attempts at altering the will of God.






I believe what ive highlighted in brown is utter crap. If we can do nothing without God, then God is in the medicines that we create and are His creations, just like everything else you mention.

However, even with me disagreeing with that part, you still make a lot of good points, especially with a lot of our health problems being our own fault. The rest I'm not convinced of, but at the same time, if it works, then, it works and is good, and shall be looked in to. (but, all of this is of course, a topic for a different thread)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 26, 2013, 11:31:31 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.

Uh oh..didnt your parents ever have "The Talk" with you?  :)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 26, 2013, 11:36:39 AM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old. 

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

Planned Parenthood distributes contraceptives in just about every medium sized town.... Plus they have locations in high schools.   Of course, they are more about abortion than contraceptive.  They are even embedded in the Girl Scouts!

I am against abortion.  I am against contraceptives.  I already have 5 children, and if God wills it, we'll have more.  Yes, even if we end up like the Duggars.  His will be done.

Just wondering, within God's creation are a seemingly infinite multitude of his creatures including ones harmful to humans like certain bacteria. Many people have died as a consequence of nature's normal cycles by means of bacterial infection. With the development of antibiotics in the 20th century many diseases formerly deadly to mankind were no longer a threat to humans. Do you take antibiotics when ill?  How do you reconcile modern medicine with God's will?

Hi, glad you asked.  Before I answer I must warn, that my answer will not coincide with modern Science, modern medicine, or common thought.    Also, for the CRITICS of almost everything I say, I can't cover every ailment, sickness, or example...

I do not believe in modern medicine.  I believe surgery, but the the pharmacy side of it.   God forbade pharmacia (witchcraft) in the scriptures.  I believe our modern pharmacy is the "user of potions".

With that said I believe that most often diseases are caused by people being lazy, nasty, and unhealthy.  Bathing in dung infested waters for example.  I believe things like high blood pressure are related to obesity, eating salt that is "not real", being lazy, eating a poor unnatural diet...

I  believe bacterial diseases and viral diseases are very curable, if we embrace (untouched) what God has provided.  (look these up because there is no way I can give all of them here)

1) Propolis - what bees use to "glue their hives together"... This is extremely anti-bacterial and anti-viral.  It contains tons of amino acids.   You can even brush your teeth with it (an excellent toothpaste).  Look it up, it's awesome.   Given to us by God in a pure form.

2) Goji Berries - these contain almost all of the amino acids and all the essential amino acids.  Tons of vitamins.  Contains the highest level of carotenoids on the planet (perfect for eyes and reverses age related macular degeration).   Has an abundance of B vitamins, perfect for those with type 2 diabetes & hypoglycemics.  Also contains the most antioxidants of anything on Earth (by far).  Look it up!  Given to us by God in a pure form.

3) Willow Bark - will cure head aches. Given to us by God in a pure form.

4) Bee Pollen - Will cure many air born allergies.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

5) Echinachea - Is a catalyst for the immune system.  Take as you feel yourself getting sick.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

6) Spirulina - This stuff is insanely good for you, packed with vitamins.  Want a healthy temple?  this stuff is awesome.  Given to us by God in a pure form.

7) Royal Jelly - Full of anti oxidants, amino acids, and vitamins.  This is what worker bees feed to the queen.  Pure, and given to us by God.

Okay, fingers are tired of examples.  There are tons of these, but I covered some of the best.  I believe that it was not Science that offered us solutions to ailments.  I believe that God created things in nature that will help us.

Even for his animals.  For my goats, if they get worms, we feed them Cedar or Honeysuckle.   Cures it.   For humans with worms - heavy use of Garlic.

I believe vaccines are toxic and that the "supposed things" they cure, were being eradicated by more sterile conditions of living.  My opinion is that when Polio was being "vaccinated", people were also leaving life where they were drinking unsanitary water.  Many infected drank from wells too close to out houses.  Suburbs were springing up (pun intended) that were connected to more sanitary sources of water at that time.  Vaccines took all the credit.   Today, rather than the 4 vaccines that were "given" when I was a child, there is 62.  

Again these are my opinions.  I refuse to believe that in God's wondrous creation for us that there are not cures.   I know in his creation is the perfect things to give us perfect health.  Youtube has a video called "the raw food trucker", a man who cured his colon cancer (1 month to live) by consuming an all raw / mostly vegan diet.   lost a ton of weight too.
 
I know there are critics.  None of my 5 children are vaccinated.   We have no problems yet.  In fact, we have been to the doctor (heh knocking on wood) less than 5 times with any of them COMBINED.   This is because most ailments were treated with God's creation.

The times we went were for more of "surgical" reasons.  My son got his finger smashed in a portable cement mixer.  Thank God he didn't need surgery.  My daughter swallowed a bunch of little magnets faster than we could get to her - we freaked.  Food poisoning, but they couldn't do anything.  Once my son got his elbow popped out on monkey bars.  

All sicknesses, bacterial infections, colds, flu, etc., all treated with what God made for us.

Anyway, its almost a philosophy.  A philosophy of health, respecting the creation, and using what God gave us to help us.  I'm nearly 40 years old, I rarely get sick, and I can still hold my own against 5 children wrestling on a trampoline (kind of LOL).  My wife rarely gets sick - as well as our children.

I believe that when we embrace what God has made for us, we are much more healthy.

Anyway, this is what works for us for many years now.  This info is often met with scorn and ridicule.  This is not conclusive, but only a trickle in an ocean of what is out there.

I believe that modern contraceptives are pharmacia (witchcraft) and its people's attempts at altering the will of God.






I believe what ive highlighted in brown is utter crap. If we can do nothing without God, then God is in the medicines that we create and are His creations, just like everything else you mention.

However, even with me disagreeing with that part, you still make a lot of good points, especially with a lot of our health problems being our own fault. The rest I'm not convinced of, but at the same time, if it works, then, it works and is good, and shall be looked in to. (but, all of this is of course, a topic for a different thread)

Could you take this over to the Nutrition and Diet thread? We talk  a lot there about what is "Our Fault" and what things have perhaps been falsely presented to us.

Here is a good starting point: Why we get fat, by Gary Taubes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KH9079LV4tY
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 26, 2013, 11:39:49 AM
So why doesn't the man get to unilaterally decide where his money goes?  He's the one who had to work for it.  He's the one who had to put in is time and effort, he should be the only one who gets to decide how it's spent.  His body.  His choice.

Please note that I am not supporting deadbeatism.  But when it gets down to it, both of them made the mutual decision to screw (if not then why weren't rape charges filed?).  She now has a moral obligation to be a mother to that child and he has a moral obligation to be a father to it.  The fact that legal obligations and moral obligations in this instance don't match up only shows that our laws are no longer legitimate except as they are enforced by firearms.  The ONLY one who had no choice in the beginning is the child, thus his or her right to life trumps both the mother's right to liberty and the gather's to property.

I'm biased (obviously, being a mother and all), but I don't believe there is enough money in the known universe to match the bulk of work a single parent puts into childrearing.

I have known a number of single parents.  They run the gambit from one woman who despite language difficulties and having her husband deported still works at Walmart to give her three children the best life possible, to another who divorced her husband, as well as the last SEVEN, and once spanked her kid with a cheese grater, claims disabilities, and her eldest son pretty much ran the family from 18 on (claims her and his siblings on his taxes, even).

So I don't have this bias because I don't put single mothers on a pedestal.  I have seen the extreme effort that one has put out with everything stacked against her and others who have had everything pretty much handed to them and still need their sons to raise them!

Quote
Now, a woman deciding to have her child despite her man's pressure to have an abortion - that's an entirely unilateral decision, and based on your 'unilateral decision, unilateral responsibility' quote further up, the father owes nothing to nobody. Which is, frankly, a despicable thing even to suggest.

Is it any more despicable than her murdering his child without him even having the opportunity to have him raise it on his own with no support from her?  

Quote
I'd want nothing more than have every child conceived in this world welcomed into the world by two parents who want and love it, but that's not going to happen any time soon. And I'm convinced that, unless everyone in a state is on the same page on the moral status of abortion, criminalising it is going to bring on much greater evil than it will prevent.

That's your opinion.  Frankly, I can't see any greater evil arising from criminalizing than what is already legal.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: vamrat on February 26, 2013, 11:47:17 AM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old.  

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

I've never heard of that. I really don't think they'll be giving free contraceptives to two-year-olds. Where do you get this stuff?

Anyway, anything other than condoms can get pretty expensive. Hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year. At least. I've worked in health care for years. I know what stuff costs. If you're going to tell people not to have sex, number one that doesn't work, and number two, there are plenty of poor married people. Are you going to tell all of them not to have sex? How much strain is that going to put on the marriage?

"I really don't think they'll be giving free contraceptives to two-year-olds."  Not really that big of a problem.  Seeing as they can't really do anything that requires birth control...

With proper and consistent use they are pretty effective.  And they are cheap, even free.  But ultimately, screwing is the number one cause of pregnancy.  Sometimes people have to accept responsibility for their actions.  Killing another person because of their own mistake is not the way civilized human beings go about things.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: J Michael on February 26, 2013, 11:53:53 AM
Seriously, how expansive are contraceptives?  This BS about people who cannot afford contraceptives is getting kinda old.  

Very true; quite frankly, it is a bunch of bullpoop. In California where I live, anyone of any age could walk into any clinic, hospital, pharmacy or medical facility and ask for contraceptives, and be given them entirely free of charge no questions asked. To be fair though, I don't know if states in the Bible-Belt are like this though...

I've never heard of that. I really don't think they'll be giving free contraceptives to two-year-olds. Where do you get this stuff?

Anyway, anything other than condoms can get pretty expensive. Hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year. At least. I've worked in health care for years. I know what stuff costs. If you're going to tell people not to have sex, number one that doesn't work, and number two, there are plenty of poor married people. Are you going to tell all of them not to have sex? How much strain is that going to put on the marriage?

"I really don't think they'll be giving free contraceptives to two-year-olds."  Not really that big of a problem.  Seeing as they can't really do anything that requires birth control...

With proper and consistent use they are pretty effective.  And they are cheap, even free.  But ultimately, screwing is the number one cause of pregnancy.  Sometimes people have to accept responsibility for their actions.  Killing another person because of their own mistake is not the way civilized human beings go about things.

I think "civilized human beings" are in extremely short supply.  Maybe all those non-baby, not-yet-human fetuses who get not-murdered in the womb would have gone some way to decrease that shortage.  I guess we'll never know in this life.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 26, 2013, 09:05:14 PM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.

Uh oh..didnt your parents ever have "The Talk" with you?  :)
Which has nothing at all to do with the utter uselessness of the above pseudo argument.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 26, 2013, 09:39:22 PM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.

Uh oh..didnt your parents ever have "The Talk" with you?  :)
Which has nothing at all to do with the utter uselessness of the above pseudo argument.

Well..Men cant be impregnated.. Therefore, the decision making are the Woman's. She is the one carrying the baby. 

Kinda basic
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Android_Rewster on February 27, 2013, 12:02:08 AM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance?
Actually substance. Appearance is a pretty silly reason.

Quote
The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat.
Do you shed a tear every time you kill the human biological tissue on your nose that you scratch off?

Quote
Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?
My assertion is not based on appearances. I kinda said that.

Quote
Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria?
Pretty much every human.

Quote
What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.
There's an incredibly significant difference between having a temporal lobe/neocortex/prefrontal cortex that you cannot use, and not having one at all.

Quote
To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?
No, you'd be shooting a living, breathing, thinking human being. That is wrong.

Quote
(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
I explained in the above answers to your questions. :)

Quote
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
I think he'd still be considered human. If his brain was kept alive. He would still be thinking, although he would be completely deprived of his senses. He would just sit there and think. That's actually pretty sad. >_> But that's irrelevant. Anyhow.

Quote
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
I explained. If you have a developed temporal lobe at all, in the way that you are a human being, you should in theory be capable of abstract thought. As you are a human, you have a well-enough developed temporal lobe to be considered human.

 I'd also like to remind you of the fact that I was not the creator of these parameters. I pretty much copied and pasted Wikipedia.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 27, 2013, 03:54:50 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.

Uh oh..didnt your parents ever have "The Talk" with you?  :)
Which has nothing at all to do with the utter uselessness of the above pseudo argument.

Well..Men cant be impregnated.. Therefore, the decision making are the Woman's. She is the one carrying the baby. 

Kinda basic
Kinda basically wrong
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 27, 2013, 07:55:12 AM
The pro-abortion argument fails when we prosecute people for double homicide when they murder a pregnant mother.  Its either a human life or it is not.  This double standard is tiresome.
Reiterated for contemplation. 
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: J Michael on February 27, 2013, 10:32:49 AM
The pro-abortion argument fails when we prosecute people for double homicide when they murder a pregnant mother.  Its either a human life or it is not.  This double standard is tiresome.
Reiterated for contemplation. 

I recall seeing a bumper sticker once that said, "If it's not a baby, you're not pregnant."

(http://macsmind.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/obama-punishment.jpg)
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 27, 2013, 03:01:36 PM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.

Uh oh..didnt your parents ever have "The Talk" with you?  :)
Which has nothing at all to do with the utter uselessness of the above pseudo argument.

Well..Men cant be impregnated.. Therefore, the decision making are the Woman's. She is the one carrying the baby. 

Kinda basic
Kinda basically wrong

You may not like it but that's the situation. Impregnation is within the Woman's body.. That means she has more say so.. And should.. Live with it.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 27, 2013, 03:09:56 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance?
Actually substance. Appearance is a pretty silly reason.

Quote
The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat.
Do you shed a tear every time you kill the human biological tissue on your nose that you scratch off?

Quote
Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?
My assertion is not based on appearances. I kinda said that.

Quote
Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria?
Pretty much every human.

Quote
What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.
There's an incredibly significant difference between having a temporal lobe/neocortex/prefrontal cortex that you cannot use, and not having one at all.

Quote
To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?
No, you'd be shooting a living, breathing, thinking human being. That is wrong.

Quote
(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
I explained in the above answers to your questions. :)

Quote
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
I think he'd still be considered human. If his brain was kept alive. He would still be thinking, although he would be completely deprived of his senses. He would just sit there and think. That's actually pretty sad. >_> But that's irrelevant. Anyhow.

Quote
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
I explained. If you have a developed temporal lobe at all, in the way that you are a human being, you should in theory be capable of abstract thought. As you are a human, you have a well-enough developed temporal lobe to be considered human.

 I'd also like to remind you of the fact that I was not the creator of these parameters. I pretty much copied and pasted Wikipedia.

And now for the entire answer.. Neither sides knows for sure. The fetus could be just a mass of cells at least early on.. OR that primitive body could be endowed with a full human spirit, a soul.. No one knows for sure..Right/Wrong?

 I would err on the side of extreme caution and not condone abortion as you may well be snuffing out a human life and then suffer dire spiritual consequences.

But that suggestion is informed by my religion and my trust in the Tradition of The Church.

Therefore, I would try to persuade those who think abortion is inconsequential of my Religious idea's. I would also warn those with my religious idea's already to be very careful about finger pointing or name calling because here in America, we have a great aversion to having religious doctrines forced on us.

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: J Michael on February 27, 2013, 03:27:03 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance?
Actually substance. Appearance is a pretty silly reason.

Quote
The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat.
Do you shed a tear every time you kill the human biological tissue on your nose that you scratch off?

Quote
Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?
My assertion is not based on appearances. I kinda said that.

Quote
Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria?
Pretty much every human.

Quote
What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.
There's an incredibly significant difference between having a temporal lobe/neocortex/prefrontal cortex that you cannot use, and not having one at all.

Quote
To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?
No, you'd be shooting a living, breathing, thinking human being. That is wrong.

Quote
(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
I explained in the above answers to your questions. :)

Quote
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
I think he'd still be considered human. If his brain was kept alive. He would still be thinking, although he would be completely deprived of his senses. He would just sit there and think. That's actually pretty sad. >_> But that's irrelevant. Anyhow.

Quote
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
I explained. If you have a developed temporal lobe at all, in the way that you are a human being, you should in theory be capable of abstract thought. As you are a human, you have a well-enough developed temporal lobe to be considered human.

 I'd also like to remind you of the fact that I was not the creator of these parameters. I pretty much copied and pasted Wikipedia.

And now for the entire answer.. Neither sides knows for sure. The fetus could be just a mass of cells at least early on.. OR that primitive body could be endowed with a full human spirit, a soul.. No one knows for sure..Right/Wrong?

 I would err on the side of extreme caution and not condone abortion as you may well be snuffing out a human life and then suffer dire spiritual consequences.

But that suggestion is informed by my religion and my trust in the Tradition of The Church.

Therefore, I would try to persuade those who think abortion is inconsequential of my Religious idea's. I would also warn those with my religious idea's already to be very careful about finger pointing or name calling because here in America, we have a great aversion to having religious doctrines forced on us.



At what point does the Orthodox Church say that human life begins?  Or does it?

Just as a point of reference, the Catholic Church states, from the Catechism:
Quote
2319 Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.

and

2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a "criminal" practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.

and

2323 Because it should be treated as a person from conception, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed like every other human being.
http://ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=conception&xsubmit=Search&s=SS
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 27, 2013, 03:58:25 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance?
Actually substance. Appearance is a pretty silly reason.

Quote
The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat.
Do you shed a tear every time you kill the human biological tissue on your nose that you scratch off?

Quote
Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?
My assertion is not based on appearances. I kinda said that.

Quote
Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria?
Pretty much every human.

Quote
What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.
There's an incredibly significant difference between having a temporal lobe/neocortex/prefrontal cortex that you cannot use, and not having one at all.

Quote
To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?
No, you'd be shooting a living, breathing, thinking human being. That is wrong.

Quote
(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
I explained in the above answers to your questions. :)

Quote
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
I think he'd still be considered human. If his brain was kept alive. He would still be thinking, although he would be completely deprived of his senses. He would just sit there and think. That's actually pretty sad. >_> But that's irrelevant. Anyhow.

Quote
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
I explained. If you have a developed temporal lobe at all, in the way that you are a human being, you should in theory be capable of abstract thought. As you are a human, you have a well-enough developed temporal lobe to be considered human.

 I'd also like to remind you of the fact that I was not the creator of these parameters. I pretty much copied and pasted Wikipedia.

And now for the entire answer.. Neither sides knows for sure. The fetus could be just a mass of cells at least early on.. OR that primitive body could be endowed with a full human spirit, a soul.. No one knows for sure..Right/Wrong?

 I would err on the side of extreme caution and not condone abortion as you may well be snuffing out a human life and then suffer dire spiritual consequences.

But that suggestion is informed by my religion and my trust in the Tradition of The Church.

Therefore, I would try to persuade those who think abortion is inconsequential of my Religious idea's. I would also warn those with my religious idea's already to be very careful about finger pointing or name calling because here in America, we have a great aversion to having religious doctrines forced on us.



At what point does the Orthodox Church say that human life begins?  Or does it?

Just as a point of reference, the Catholic Church states, from the Catechism:
Quote
2319 Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.

and

2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a "criminal" practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.

and

2323 Because it should be treated as a person from conception, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed like every other human being.
http://ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=conception&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

I believe it is exactly the same.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: J Michael on February 27, 2013, 04:03:19 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance?
Actually substance. Appearance is a pretty silly reason.

Quote
The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat.
Do you shed a tear every time you kill the human biological tissue on your nose that you scratch off?

Quote
Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?
My assertion is not based on appearances. I kinda said that.

Quote
Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria?
Pretty much every human.

Quote
What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.
There's an incredibly significant difference between having a temporal lobe/neocortex/prefrontal cortex that you cannot use, and not having one at all.

Quote
To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?
No, you'd be shooting a living, breathing, thinking human being. That is wrong.

Quote
(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
I explained in the above answers to your questions. :)

Quote
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
I think he'd still be considered human. If his brain was kept alive. He would still be thinking, although he would be completely deprived of his senses. He would just sit there and think. That's actually pretty sad. >_> But that's irrelevant. Anyhow.

Quote
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
I explained. If you have a developed temporal lobe at all, in the way that you are a human being, you should in theory be capable of abstract thought. As you are a human, you have a well-enough developed temporal lobe to be considered human.

 I'd also like to remind you of the fact that I was not the creator of these parameters. I pretty much copied and pasted Wikipedia.

And now for the entire answer.. Neither sides knows for sure. The fetus could be just a mass of cells at least early on.. OR that primitive body could be endowed with a full human spirit, a soul.. No one knows for sure..Right/Wrong?

 I would err on the side of extreme caution and not condone abortion as you may well be snuffing out a human life and then suffer dire spiritual consequences.

But that suggestion is informed by my religion and my trust in the Tradition of The Church.

Therefore, I would try to persuade those who think abortion is inconsequential of my Religious idea's. I would also warn those with my religious idea's already to be very careful about finger pointing or name calling because here in America, we have a great aversion to having religious doctrines forced on us.



At what point does the Orthodox Church say that human life begins?  Or does it?

Just as a point of reference, the Catholic Church states, from the Catechism:
Quote
2319 Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.

and

2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a "criminal" practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.

and

2323 Because it should be treated as a person from conception, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed like every other human being.
http://ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=conception&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

I believe it is exactly the same.

Are there any official Orthodox Church documents, encyclicals, etc. that address that that you know of?
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Android_Rewster on February 27, 2013, 05:50:36 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance?
Actually substance. Appearance is a pretty silly reason.

Quote
The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat.
Do you shed a tear every time you kill the human biological tissue on your nose that you scratch off?

Quote
Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?
My assertion is not based on appearances. I kinda said that.

Quote
Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria?
Pretty much every human.

Quote
What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.
There's an incredibly significant difference between having a temporal lobe/neocortex/prefrontal cortex that you cannot use, and not having one at all.

Quote
To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?
No, you'd be shooting a living, breathing, thinking human being. That is wrong.

Quote
(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
I explained in the above answers to your questions. :)

Quote
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
I think he'd still be considered human. If his brain was kept alive. He would still be thinking, although he would be completely deprived of his senses. He would just sit there and think. That's actually pretty sad. >_> But that's irrelevant. Anyhow.

Quote
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
I explained. If you have a developed temporal lobe at all, in the way that you are a human being, you should in theory be capable of abstract thought. As you are a human, you have a well-enough developed temporal lobe to be considered human.

 I'd also like to remind you of the fact that I was not the creator of these parameters. I pretty much copied and pasted Wikipedia.

And now for the entire answer.. Neither sides knows for sure. The fetus could be just a mass of cells at least early on.. OR that primitive body could be endowed with a full human spirit, a soul.. No one knows for sure..Right/Wrong?

 I would err on the side of extreme caution and not condone abortion as you may well be snuffing out a human life and then suffer dire spiritual consequences.

But that suggestion is informed by my religion and my trust in the Tradition of The Church.

Therefore, I would try to persuade those who think abortion is inconsequential of my Religious idea's. I would also warn those with my religious idea's already to be very careful about finger pointing or name calling because here in America, we have a great aversion to having religious doctrines forced on us.


I personally believe in not having an abortion, and urging loved ones not to as well. But as for others, particularly those not of the faith, I cannot say with certainty what is right and wrong for them. To make another man live by my ideals is an incredibly frightening precedent to be setting.

 I would typically advise everyone to advocate contraception rather than to have an abortion, due to the fact that(although I don't believe it's "murder") it is the ending of a potential human life before it even began, and human life is a sacred thing. Jesus Christ died for human life.

 Once again, this is my current train of thought, and if any of you would like to give me a new perspective on this I would enjoy hearing about it.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 27, 2013, 06:10:18 PM
Anatomically speaking, the average fetus is closer to a rat than a human being around the time it is aborted. That doesn't sound like murder to me.

Anatomically speaking?

(1) What exactly do you think your professing? I am questioning your understanding of the subject.
(2) How does form exhibit nature?
     (2b) Can you think of any other cases, to not include a developing baby, where a person does not have the form of a functional human being, but is still human?
(1)The anatomy of a human fetus is more similar to a rat than a human. That's what I'm professing. Murder is defined as one Human killing another human, with spiteful intent. Abortion is more of one(emotionally confused) human removing an unwanted clump of cells from its abdomen.

 Here's a good definition for a human:
"Humans are characterized by having a large brain relative to body size, with a particularly well developed neocortex, prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes, making them capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, problem solving and culture through social learning."

 Does a developing fetus fit this criteria?

By anatomy, is the predication of this definition based solely on appearance or actual substance?
Actually substance. Appearance is a pretty silly reason.

Quote
The biological tissue of a fetus is not closer to a rat. The genetic information is not closer to a rat.
Do you shed a tear every time you kill the human biological tissue on your nose that you scratch off?

Quote
Does appearance set the standard for reality? Would you want to be held to using a measurement based on appearance for other situations/objects/creatures? Would you want to be held to that measurement?
My assertion is not based on appearances. I kinda said that.

Quote
Does anything than an average adult fit this criteria?
Pretty much every human.

Quote
What about mentally disabled, malformed adults, patients post-cerebral operation, or other alternative conditions to set one outside this adult characterisitic. What about a 6 month old? They don't have a well-developed brain and aren't capable of abstract reasoning, language, etc.
There's an incredibly significant difference between having a temporal lobe/neocortex/prefrontal cortex that you cannot use, and not having one at all.

Quote
To the clump of cells: If I shoot someone in the face, am I not only removing an unwanted clump of cells from my presence?
No, you'd be shooting a living, breathing, thinking human being. That is wrong.

Quote
(2) The point was that it's not human. I wasn't really saying "because it doesn't look like a human, it isn't". I was throwing out an example of why I don't really think it's "murder" to have an abortion. Do I personally think it's wrong to have one, and will I urge friends and family to avoid them? Of course. Christianity values life on a higher sense than Secularism. But I also think that lying is wrong, and I urge my friends and family to avoid it as well.
(2b) I think I need a better definition of what you're asking before I can answer this. My answer right now would be no, but I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Respects,
 Andrew

(2) My counter is that your definition of "human" is lacking, and is narrow enough to exclude many individuals despite their stage of development.
I explained in the above answers to your questions. :)

Quote
(2b) An example could be be a reduction of form to escape your definition. Stephen Hawking could meet your definition. What if we took his brain and put it in a jar, still alive. Is he still human, or does he forfeit that right?
I think he'd still be considered human. If his brain was kept alive. He would still be thinking, although he would be completely deprived of his senses. He would just sit there and think. That's actually pretty sad. >_> But that's irrelevant. Anyhow.

Quote
What about the mentally disabled? Are they human? Some aren't capable of the definition you propose, even at 30 years old.
I explained. If you have a developed temporal lobe at all, in the way that you are a human being, you should in theory be capable of abstract thought. As you are a human, you have a well-enough developed temporal lobe to be considered human.

 I'd also like to remind you of the fact that I was not the creator of these parameters. I pretty much copied and pasted Wikipedia.

And now for the entire answer.. Neither sides knows for sure. The fetus could be just a mass of cells at least early on.. OR that primitive body could be endowed with a full human spirit, a soul.. No one knows for sure..Right/Wrong?

 I would err on the side of extreme caution and not condone abortion as you may well be snuffing out a human life and then suffer dire spiritual consequences.

But that suggestion is informed by my religion and my trust in the Tradition of The Church.

Therefore, I would try to persuade those who think abortion is inconsequential of my Religious idea's. I would also warn those with my religious idea's already to be very careful about finger pointing or name calling because here in America, we have a great aversion to having religious doctrines forced on us.


I personally believe in not having an abortion, and urging loved ones not to as well. But as for others, particularly those not of the faith, I cannot say with certainty what is right and wrong for them. To make another man live by my ideals is an incredibly frightening precedent to be setting.

 I would typically advise everyone to advocate contraception rather than to have an abortion, due to the fact that(although I don't believe it's "murder") it is the ending of a potential human life before it even began, and human life is a sacred thing. Jesus Christ died for human life.

 Once again, this is my current train of thought, and if any of you would like to give me a new perspective on this I would enjoy hearing about it.


The problem that I have with your thinking (and you express a common opinion) is that by such a standard we should have no laws at all. There are certain "ideals" which are universal and common to the welfare of all people. We have laws against murder, rape, and theft. Of course murderers, rapists, and thieves don't like these laws, and in spite of the law they still find ways to murder, rape, and steal. But it would be silly and ineffective to abolish laws against these evils on the premise that it is unfair to make others "live by our ideals," or by the premise that the laws don't stop these evils completely and therefore we might as well relinquish the laws. Abortion is the deliberate, premeditated, calculated destruction of the most vulnerable members of the human race. Leaving religion out of it for the moment, humanity has a vested utilitarian interest in outlawing abortion, because if the weakest among us are not safe then none of us are safe. Now, as Orthodox Christians, we know that the apostles called abortion "murder," and so we dare not equivocate the language they used.

I hope that makes sense. Please continue to prayerfully wrestle through this important issue.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: biro on February 27, 2013, 06:19:35 PM
The Apostles mentioned abortion? And they said the word "abortion" itself, not something else? This happened when?

 ???

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 27, 2013, 06:31:35 PM
The Apostles mentioned abortion? And they said the word "abortion" itself, not something else? This happened when?

 ???




I think we've been over this before Biro. Perhaps it was somebody else and not you. But yes, the apostles expressly mentioned abortion and called it "murder" in no uncertain terms. See the Didache 2:2 and the Letter of St. Barnabas.



Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 27, 2013, 07:08:43 PM
The Apostles mentioned abortion? And they said the word "abortion" itself, not something else? This happened when?

 ???




I think we've been over this before Biro. Perhaps it was somebody else and not you. But yes, the apostles expressly mentioned abortion and called it "murder" in no uncertain terms. See the Didache 2:2 and the Letter of St. Barnabas.



Selam

You can certainly make a case for calling abortion Murder even though there are tremendous inconsistencies in how you would likely punish those who have had an abortion as I have pointed out.

The real question is if you should shove that in the face of people you are trying to persuade. I think not. I think being that strident is detrimental and will cause people to shut down and not listen.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on February 27, 2013, 07:11:09 PM
The real question is if you should shove that in the face of people you are trying to persuade. I think not. I think being that strident is detrimental and will cause people to shut down and not listen.

And have offered absolutely no evidence to this end.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Marc1152 on February 27, 2013, 07:34:15 PM
The real question is if you should shove that in the face of people you are trying to persuade. I think not. I think being that strident is detrimental and will cause people to shut down and not listen.

And have offered absolutely no evidence to this end.


How's the Pro Life movement doing? Roe about to be overturned?

Just my suggestion based on the utter failure of using that approach so far. You decide for yourself.

Planned Parenthood reports record number of abortions in 2012

http://www.examiner.com/article/planned-parenthood-reports-record-number-of-abortions-2012

Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: William on February 27, 2013, 08:16:01 PM
So downgrading it from a serious moral issue to some irrelevant and quaint facet of fringe morality is going to help the cause. OK.
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on February 27, 2013, 11:04:05 PM
The real question is if you should shove that in the face of people you are trying to persuade. I think not. I think being that strident is detrimental and will cause people to shut down and not listen.

And have offered absolutely no evidence to this end.


How's the Pro Life movement doing? Roe about to be overturned?

Just my suggestion based on the utter failure of using that approach so far. You decide for yourself.

Planned Parenthood reports record number of abortions in 2012

http://www.examiner.com/article/planned-parenthood-reports-record-number-of-abortions-2012




I'm shocked. I was told that president B.O.'s policies would greatly reduce the abortion rate.




Selam
Title: Re: Is Abortion actually murder?
Post by: Kerdy on February 28, 2013, 07:16:03 AM
It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my