OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 21, 2014, 12:51:07 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthodoxy and Abortion  (Read 54390 times) Average Rating: 1
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
calligraphqueen
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GOA
Posts: 341


« Reply #270 on: February 16, 2008, 05:40:52 PM »

Relevance?

I'm not opposed to people having children, but I do believe we should limit family sizes to one or two children, I see no reason to deny this to people.

Why Greek? explain please
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #271 on: February 16, 2008, 06:15:39 PM »

What in secularism causes such a martyr complex?

I defend the right to religious freedom and you say I have a martyr complex because you want to impose your religious values on all of society by force. 
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,359



« Reply #272 on: February 16, 2008, 06:32:31 PM »

I defend the right to religious freedom and you say I have a martyr complex because you want to impose your religious values on all of society by force. 

No, I say you have a martyr's complex because I didn't say a single thing you "quoted" from me.

Is a morally informed vote too violent for you?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #273 on: February 16, 2008, 06:40:03 PM »

Nice words.

Glad I could help. Wink

Quote
I was a Marine for 5 and half years to protect our liberties.

That's nice, but that hardly implies that your ideas are consonant with the ideals of liberty. We have another thread going on here right now about officers abusing their rank and authority proselytize, they, at least, see more concerned about their religion than the freedom of religion and the principles of this republic they have sworn to uphold. (Not saying anything about you pesonally, but about the implication that somehow military service amounts to concern for the values of the republic.)

Quote
I'm not sure any of our founding fathers would have said Liberty is a license to do what you want.  None that I know of advocated for no laws.  But it does mean a lot of different things to different people.  To me it meant a responsibility to protect human freedom and dignity.  I fought for them.

Of course, I never said it required 'no laws', only that it required 'no laws that are not directly and immediately necessary to preserve our social contract.' And the ideal I put forward would have been viewed quite favourably by the founding fathers.

Quote
How quickly you stereotype people with little to no knowledge of them.  So you know that I'm against abortion.  Not for religious reasons, not for political reasons.  I just happen to think it's a heinous, selfish act.  Just as heinous and selfish as child abuse or murder.  And just as worthy of having restrictions on it.  I would allow it in the case of the health of the mother allowing her to make that moral choice.

Oh, as a reformed former pro-life advocate I'm probably a little harsh on this issue, but as a student of the enlightenment and a person who recognizes the importance of the pro-choice movement to women's rights I do understand that the issue is important. Even IF you were a staunch advocate of liberty in all other aspects, this one insonsistancy in your beliefs would be most troubling...the reason I finally stopped being anti-abortion was because I could no longer deal with the hypocracy of my opposition to oppression, of my believing that life is secondary to liberty, and then supporting oppression and survival at the expense of that which, in all of heaven and on all of the earth, is most valuable and most dear, freedom.

Quote
Then because of that one position, I'm all of sudden a religious zealot and anti-freedom?  I can't imagine someone being more judgemental, more narrow-minded, more of a zealot than judging a person based on one position they take.  It makes me wonder what you know about freedom.  Oh, and I forgot, from other threads.  The fact I don't think people should be allowed to steal music, software, games, etc. and I think hard drugs like heroin and cocaine should be illegal must make me anti-freedom in your mind also.

That's right, you have more than once expressed your displeasure of liberty and love of religion at the expense of liberty.

Quote
My use of the words, Live Free or Die?  Offensive?  I'm self employed.  We home school our kids.  I served our country and I suffered a broken back defending it.  I spend every week in prisons and with poor people.

These all sound like 'liberties' that were even granted by Nazi Germany and Maoist China. Nothing to be too excited over.

Quote
Every day I get up and do what I want and what I love. By your definition, my actions, my life, is as free as anyone you probably know. General Stark wouldn't find me offensive.  I would fit right in. We'd be on his farm after the war telling war stories. The person he would find offensive is the one who uses his words to justify vice as opposed to true human liberty, along with anyone who is more into talking than action.  Yes, I'm sure the general and I would find much agreement in the words, "talk is cheap."

Oh, you may have gotten along with the General quite well, but he, as perhaps the only true Cincinnatus of our Revolution, would probably not agree with your theory about government intrution into our private lives (nor offer praise for serving in a peace-time military, for that matter, since you brought the subject up).
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #274 on: February 16, 2008, 07:02:29 PM »

If defending unborn children, advocating against stealing intellectual property and stating that heroin and cocaine should be illegal make me an "enemy of freedom" in your world, so be it.  I stand accused by GIC! Wink

I must admit though, you are disappointing me. More personal attacks and grandiose inferences that you understand the founding fathers better than me and most people on this board.  And my favorite, you demean my life by bringing up Nazi Germany and Maoist China. I think I liked you better when you were an Agent of the Phanar. C'mon Howard, you can do better than this! Wink

Glad I could help. Wink

That's nice, but that hardly implies that your ideas are consonant with the ideals of liberty. We have another thread going on here right now about officers abusing their rank and authority proselytize, they, at least, see more concerned about their religion than the freedom of religion and the principles of this republic they have sworn to uphold. (Not saying anything about you pesonally, but about the implication that somehow military service amounts to concern for the values of the republic.)

Of course, I never said it required 'no laws', only that it required 'no laws that are not directly and immediately necessary to preserve our social contract.' And the ideal I put forward would have been viewed quite favourably by the founding fathers.

Oh, as a reformed former pro-life advocate I'm probably a little harsh on this issue, but as a student of the enlightenment and a person who recognizes the importance of the pro-choice movement to women's rights I do understand that the issue is important. Even IF you were a staunch advocate of liberty in all other aspects, this one insonsistancy in your beliefs would be most troubling...the reason I finally stopped being anti-abortion was because I could no longer deal with the hypocracy of my opposition to oppression, of my believing that life is secondary to liberty, and then supporting oppression and survival at the expense of that which, in all of heaven and on all of the earth, is most valuable and most dear, freedom.

That's right, you have more than once expressed your displeasure of liberty and love of religion at the expense of liberty.

These all sound like 'liberties' that were even granted by Nazi Germany and Maoist China. Nothing to be too excited over.

Oh, you may have gotten along with the General quite well, but he, as perhaps the only true Cincinnatus of our Revolution, would probably not agree with your theory about government intrution into our private lives (nor offer praise for serving in a peace-time military, for that matter, since you brought the subject up).
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #275 on: February 16, 2008, 07:05:57 PM »

No, I say you have a martyr's complex because I didn't say a single thing you "quoted" from me.

Apparently you forgot some of the recent threads in the politics forum.

Quote
Is a morally informed vote too violent for you?

If you are using the state apparatus to impose your views on those who don't hold them, then yes.  If you are going to use a single political issue as a litmus test, I also think that is incredibly simplistic.  There are a broad range of political issues dealing with Christianity today, creating a litmus test on a single issue  eliminates any ability to compromise whatsoever.  And of course, nobody has yet demonstrated that my position is at all at odds with any part of the New Testament.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2008, 07:08:17 PM by Νεκτάριος » Logged
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #276 on: February 16, 2008, 07:14:51 PM »

Oh, forgot this too, diminishing my service because it was a "peace-time military"? That's just classic.

I volunteered during the first Iraq war when all you heard about was how bloody it was going to be and people were going to come home in body bags.  When we started rolling into Kuwait I was in training and we were visited by the Great General Gray who talked about preparing ourselves for the war ahead.  Sorry the war ended before I could get in the mix and gain credibility from you.  I guess going down in a burning jet, breaking my back and watching my co-pilot die isn't worthy of much.

All a statement like your's proves is that in spite of all your reading and rhetoric, you probably know very little about what motivates someone like General Stark.  Every soldier I've ever met from WW1 to the present went into War for pretty simple reasons, honor and a sense of duty usually.  I doubt General Stark was much different.  He was a farmer, felt a duty to fight, fought, and went back to the farm.


Oh, you may have gotten along with the General quite well, but he, as perhaps the only true Cincinnatus of our Revolution, would probably not agree with your theory about government intrution into our private lives (nor offer praise for serving in a peace-time military, for that matter, since you brought the subject up).
« Last Edit: February 16, 2008, 07:26:14 PM by livefreeordie » Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #277 on: February 16, 2008, 07:33:12 PM »

Abortion would be out of the question for me, George. But not everyone is bound by my beliefs, so I wouldn't judge anyone who made a choice different to mine.

But why these beliefs, do they have any rational substance? One might just say, hmmm, 128 or 256 or 512 or 1024 dividing cells. When you wash your hands, you peel off some ten million cells of your epidermis from your palms.

In many cultures, even a newborn baby was not really considered a being. Babies were not shown to people outside of the family until they were one month old or so.

In the former USSR, abortion was illegal as long as Stalin lived. One of the first changes after his death on March 5, 1953 was legalization of abortion till the begining of the fourth month of pregnancy. If a woman was pregnant, but less than 4 months, she could abort her baby without giving any reason, and a doctor had no right to say no. If she was past the 4th month, she still could have her baby aborted if there were "medical reasons." Needless to say... doctors were terribly underpaid, so, in a village or in a small town, "medical reasons" could be a chicken, or a ten-rouble bill stuffed into a doctor's pocket.

Millions over millions over millions of abortions were performed. Abortion is still legal in post-Soviet republics, and the vast majority of women do not think of their fetuses as true human beings at least at the beginning of pregnancy.

Is it all conditioned by some set of beliefs, this view on what is really life and what is yet not?
Logged

Love never fails.
Myrrh23
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,639



« Reply #278 on: February 16, 2008, 08:00:13 PM »

In my Sociology 101 class, we learned that many pro-lifers are also anti-welfare. I wonder which is more selfish: aborting a child or being anti-welfare? Also, I'd like to know how much of Michael Moore's Sicko was truth in relation to how new mothers are treated in other developed countries. Anyone know? I think this is relevant because women often abort their unborn babies because they do not have access to the resources to care for them. From watching the movie, it seemed that women are more supported in other countries where raising kids is concerned. If a woman feels she is not, and will not, be supported, more often than not she will probably abort her babies.
To illustrate this latter point, most babies aborted are Latino or black...

I especially think it's hypocritical to be anti-contraception if you're also anti-abortion. We all know people are going to "do-it", especially those high-schoolers. I'd rather have people be safe than sorry.

Quote
Is it all conditioned by some set of beliefs, this view on what is really life and what is yet not?

Heorhij, I think it has to do with what we've been trained to believe and what we feel is true. A very religious person, though not feeling anything for their baby except that it's their baby, might refuse to abort because they've been taught at Jesus Camp that it's wrong. However, I've heard numerous women say they didn't feel it was a baby until they felt it kick or move. I think your question might deserve another thread entirely...

Myrrh23
« Last Edit: February 16, 2008, 08:01:47 PM by Myrrh23 » Logged

*I am no longer posting on OC.net*

We all have a Black Dog and a White Dog inside of us. The One you feed the most eventually eats the Other.

All are tempted, but it is the courageous person who clings to God during the storm. For the Ego is a prison, but Christ is the Liberator
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #279 on: February 16, 2008, 08:56:43 PM »

But why these beliefs, do they have any rational substance? One might just say, hmmm, 128 or 256 or 512 or 1024 dividing cells. When you wash your hands, you peel off some ten million cells of your epidermis from your palms.

In many cultures, even a newborn baby was not really considered a being. Babies were not shown to people outside of the family until they were one month old or so.

In the former USSR, abortion was illegal as long as Stalin lived. One of the first changes after his death on March 5, 1953 was legalization of abortion till the begining of the fourth month of pregnancy. If a woman was pregnant, but less than 4 months, she could abort her baby without giving any reason, and a doctor had no right to say no. If she was past the 4th month, she still could have her baby aborted if there were "medical reasons." Needless to say... doctors were terribly underpaid, so, in a village or in a small town, "medical reasons" could be a chicken, or a ten-rouble bill stuffed into a doctor's pocket.

Millions over millions over millions of abortions were performed. Abortion is still legal in post-Soviet republics, and the vast majority of women do not think of their fetuses as true human beings at least at the beginning of pregnancy.

Is it all conditioned by some set of beliefs, this view on what is really life and what is yet not?

George,

I think we are all conditioned by a set of beliefs, even if we are not completely aware of it. And I really don't argue that my beliefs are rational, and I suppose that reticence could even be part of the reason I don't believe that I can or should foist them upon anyone else. In simple terms I don't believe it is the duty of Christians to be the "moral police" of society. I don't believe that is our purpose, but that's a topic for another thread.   

Even if we allow that my reasons for not considering an abortion in the case of an incurably diseased baby are completely irrational; that biologically a fetus is just a bunch of cells; it would surely be my right as the mother/carrier to bear the child and bear the consequences. And yes, I'm aware that the consequences would be hard for the child, too, but as a fallible human being I could only hope to be making the best choice in a no-win situation.

I have to admit that I am somewhat hesitant to get too involved with hypothetical situations, because reality is always different to theory. But sitting at my desk, well-fed, reasonably well-off financially and enjoying my new life in the tropical wonderland that is Queensland, I'm quite sure I would continue with such a pregnancy. What I'm saying is that a totally different situation for someone else might dictate what they decide to do. (If I'm making any sense, at all!)

However, my point in this discussion has consistently been for the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy that would kill her, not one that would be inconvenient or not produce the perfect baby. As I have said previously, I don't know what I would do in such a situation; but I certainly wouldn't deny the right to any woman to make a choice for her own life over the life of the child. 

« Last Edit: February 16, 2008, 09:14:19 PM by Riddikulus » Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #280 on: February 16, 2008, 10:17:37 PM »

Riddikulus, we agree! I was worried based on earlier postings we'd be forever doomed to be in contention.  I must say, I'm jealous.  Queensland sure seems like a nice place to be as we look to the end of our grey Indiana winter. silouan

G
However, my point in this discussion has consistently been for the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy that would kill her, not one that would be inconvenient or not produce the perfect baby. As I have said previously, I don't know what I would do in such a situation; but I certainly wouldn't deny the right to any woman to make a choice for her own life over the life of the child. 


Logged
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #281 on: February 16, 2008, 10:27:29 PM »

Combined this is true, but 40% of abortions are to white woman, and 56% are to woman in their twenties.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR2005071801164.html

It's funny, I was reading something today and it said how Susan B. Anthony was against abortion and a lot of the early women's right's people saw abortion as something men wanted to force on them.  Now I'm not sure how accurate this is, and obviously the position of the woman't rights movement has changed.  But I wonder what someone like Susan B. Anthony would think if she could see how woman were objectified and sexualized in our society today.  I mean to go to any grocery store and look at the magazines on the rack.  We've turned the value of women into a superficial shell of a human being.  To me, that is the greatest danger of abortion.  It dehumanizes the unborn child, objectifies it, and allows us to conveniently sacrifice it in the name of freedom.  But if we can objectify unborn children when it suits our desires, we can objectify anything.  And unfortunately, all you have to do is look on the magazine rack of a grocery store and see that is what we are doing to our daughters.

("When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly wronged." Susan B. Anthony, 1869


To illustrate this latter point, most babies aborted are Latino or black...

« Last Edit: February 16, 2008, 10:31:08 PM by livefreeordie » Logged
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #282 on: February 16, 2008, 11:21:05 PM »

Was reading through the canons of the Orthodox Church and found this from 692 a.d.

CANON XCI
"Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the foetus, are subjected to the penalty of murder."

It is clarified by Canon XXL of Ancyra, and Canon II of St. Basil, "She who purposely destroys the foetus, shall suffer the punishment of murder.  And we pay no attention to the subtile distinction as to whether the foetus was formed or unformed.  And by this not only is justice satisfied for the child that should have been born, but also for her who prepared for herself the snares, since the women very often die who make such experiments."

If this has been posted before, I apologize.
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #283 on: February 16, 2008, 11:28:45 PM »


Even if we allow that my reasons for not considering an abortion in the case of an incurably diseased baby are completely irrational; that biologically a fetus is just a bunch of cells; it would surely be my right as the mother/carrier to bear the child and bear the consequences. And yes, I'm aware that the consequences would be hard for the child, too, but as a fallible human being I could only hope to be making the best choice in a no-win situation.


Yes, I understand. A totally irrational hope...
Logged

Love never fails.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #284 on: February 16, 2008, 11:34:19 PM »

If defending unborn children, advocating against stealing intellectual property and stating that heroin and cocaine should be illegal make me an "enemy of freedom" in your world, so be it.  I stand accused by GIC! Wink

Well, now that you have confessed to the crime of despotism we'll arrange the firing squad. Wink

Quote
I must admit though, you are disappointing me. More personal attacks and grandiose inferences that you understand the founding fathers better than me and most people on this board.  And my favorite, you demean my life by bringing up Nazi Germany and Maoist China.

Oh, I wasn't demeaning your life, only questioning the aspects you put forth to illustrate your love of freedom. I would have thought you'd list things like the right to bear arms or criticize the state rather than the right to visit prisons and serve in the military...those arn't the freedoms we have to fight for.

Quote
I think I liked you better when you were an Agent of the Phanar. C'mon Howard, you can do better than this! Wink

Well, as I've said before I like it when people dislike me, it helps me avoid dealing with any psychological issues due to the residue of my former morality when I stab them in the back. Grin
« Last Edit: February 16, 2008, 11:34:48 PM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #285 on: February 16, 2008, 11:44:58 PM »

It's funny, I was reading something today and it said how Susan B. Anthony was against abortion and a lot of the early women's right's people saw abortion as something men wanted to force on them.  Now I'm not sure how accurate this is, and obviously the position of the woman't rights movement has changed.  But I wonder what someone like Susan B. Anthony would think if she could see how woman were objectified and sexualized in our society today.  I mean to go to any grocery store and look at the magazines on the rack.  We've turned the value of women into a superficial shell of a human being.  To me, that is the greatest danger of abortion.  It dehumanizes the unborn child, objectifies it, and allows us to conveniently sacrifice it in the name of freedom.  But if we can objectify unborn children when it suits our desires, we can objectify anything.  And unfortunately, all you have to do is look on the magazine rack of a grocery store and see that is what we are doing to our daughters.

("When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly wronged." Susan B. Anthony, 1869

Sounds a lot like the great philosopher and founder of the french school of feminism Simone de Beauvoir, wrote a far harsher condemnation of the circumstances that lead to abortion as being crimes against women. That the circumstances can exist where a pregnancy is unwanted is most unfortunate and a failure of society. But to forbid abortion only makes these circumstances, these social sins, worse by inflicting hardship and economic disadvantage upon these poor women. Which is why de Beauvoir, though opposed to the social institutions that made abortion necessary, lead the movement to legalize abortion in France and was ultimately successful in '74.

If you want to stop abortions, change the social circumstances that lead to them. Don't use your faux 'morality' to impose hardships you will never have to bear on others.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #286 on: February 16, 2008, 11:48:54 PM »

Said like a good commissar!

Quote
Oh, I wasn't demeaning your life, only questioning the aspects you put forth to illustrate your love of freedom. I would have thought you'd list things like the right to bear arms or criticize the state rather than the right to visit prisons and serve in the military...those arn't the freedoms we have to fight for.

When's the last time you had to "fight" for a freedom.  Ever been in jail to minister to people or served in the military.  Doing both are much harder than pontificating on freedom.  Sitting in front of a computer like I'm doing now is easy.  Or pontificating on the right to bear arms or criticizing our tax policy is easy.  Going into a prison to minister to men and help them find freedom, and serving in our all volunteer military to protect our freedom, now those take effort and thus I mentioned them.  Of course, that doesn't make me any more or less right than you, thank the lord we can still have public disagreements on what "freedom" means. God Bless the USA!

Quote
Well, as I've said before I like it when people dislike me, it helps me avoid dealing with any psychological issues due to the residue of my former morality when I stab them in the back. Grin

Man, you must have a really interesting "Happy Place"!  Shocked

I fixed the quotes, nothing more.--YtterbiumAnalyst
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 12:21:45 AM by ytterbiumanalyst » Logged
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #287 on: February 17, 2008, 12:01:39 AM »

Man, you sure like making condescending inferences about people you know nothing about. My wife and I lived well below the poverty level for years and had 2 children during that time.  I've walked to the store at night with nothing to feed my family but the change we found in the sofa. 

"Hardships".  While delivery is a hardship that I can attest to as I've been at all our children's births, there is no shortage of people who want to adopt children and would take the hardship of raising the child.


If you want to stop abortions, change the social circumstances that lead to them. Don't use your faux 'morality' to impose hardships you will never have to bear on others.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 12:13:08 AM by livefreeordie » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #288 on: February 17, 2008, 12:13:18 AM »

Said like a good commissar!

Dang, I was going for the Jacobinist label...I guess I'll have to try harder.

Quote
When's the last time you had to "fight" for a freedom.  Ever been in jail to minister to people or served in the military.  Doing both are much harder than pontificating on freedom. Sitting in front of a computer like I'm doing now is easy.  Or pontificating on the right to bear arms or criticizing our tax policy is easy.

I'm not really a huge opponent of our tax policy, can it be improved? Of course, but I think we have larger problems. Though the right to keep and bear arms is a pet issue for me.

Quote
Going into a prison to minister to men and help them find freedom, and serving in our all volunteer military to protect our freedom, now those take effort and thus I mentioned them.

Well, I've already expressed my opinion about a peace time military, a few times I almost joined, almost had myself convinced (or, at least, my friends in the military almost convinced me) that I would be a mere mercenary rather than a peace time soldier of a once-free republic, or that joining the Corps would be tantamount to helping maintain a standing Navy instead of a standing army; but I can't quite convince myself. Between the two degrees I already have and the Masters in Military Science I'm working on, I could probably do quite well for myself. Plus, nothing would have made my grandfather prouder while he lived than had I joined the Corps. But even he had great respect for the ideal that we should only form a standing army during time of war.

In any case, I spend my time at the rifle range, at the gym, and in the formal study of the art of war, in the event of actual need against real threats and enemies (internal or external, and probably the former) hopefully I won't completely useless, at least my professors of Military Science don't think I would be. It's a great tragedy that the noble tradition of the militia has been replaced by a standing army loyal to the federal government.

Quote
Of course, that doesn't make me any more or less right than you, thank the lord we can still have public disagreements on what "freedom" means. God Bless the USA!

Here, at least, we are in agreement. One of the greatest things about this republic is that we can publically disagree with each other and with the state; and our freedom of conscience is valued above all else by our laws and principles.

Quote
Man, you must have a really interesting "Happy Place"!  Shocked

Eh, I don't know that you want to go there. Grin Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #289 on: February 17, 2008, 12:26:46 AM »

Man, you sure like making condescending inferences about people you know nothing about. My wife and I lived well below the poverty level for years and had 2 children during that time.  I've walked to the store at night with nothing to feed my family but the change we found in the sofa. 

"Hardships".  While delivery is a hardship that I can attest to as I've been at all our children's births, there is no shortage of people who want to adopt children and would take the hardship of raising the child.

You've 'been' at your children's births, I'm guessing that you haven't given birth to any of them. See, I can make certain inferences based solely on your biological gender. Not to dismiss your opinion based on this alone; but the fact that you would take the position of wanting to use oppressive law to impose hardships you will never experience does make me take note.

And, I will even confess, your living below the poverty line has probably placed you slightly closer to these circumstances than I've even been (or ever want to be). I was pretty poor as a student (but according to Karl Marx, at least, that doesn't mean anything since I should be judged based on the standing of my parents...so much for the ideal of every person being judged for who the are, independent of who their ancestors were), but other than that I've always managed to find jobs that placed me firmly in the upper-middle class. But, still, you didn't have to give birth and at least you had your wife and did not have to deal with it alone. And, even then, if you had gone through that and had managed it just fine, I still don't believe you would have the right to presume that all people can do it and impose these hardships on them.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #290 on: February 17, 2008, 12:27:14 AM »

A little advice if you ever decide you join the Corps.  God help us all! Wink

The men you lead could care less about your degrees and your philosophy.  They'll care more about how you mentor them, your character, and that you are willing to lead from the front, not talk about it from the rear.  If you talk to your men like you debate people on this list, they'll be following your rank but they won't be following you.

I'm sure you know this intellectually.  But if you can learn to address people here more like a good leader, you'll be better prepared for whatever lays in front of you.  If you think some of us here are intellectually challenged, wait till you meet some enlisted soldier fresh out of high school! Lots of enthusiasm though.

The troops HATE know-it-alls. HATE, as in, bullet in the back hate.  Much worse than someone who back-stabs their friends and enjoys being disliked! Wink

Turn yourself into a good leader though, and they'll follow you to hell and back.  And no book teaches you that.  It must be practiced.

Dang, I was going for the Jacobinist label...I guess I'll have to try harder.

I'm not really a huge opponent of our tax policy, can it be improved? Of course, but I think we have larger problems. Though the right to keep and bear arms is a pet issue for me.

Well, I've already expressed my opinion about a peace time military, a few times I almost joined, almost had myself convinced (or, at least, my friends in the military almost convinced me) that I would be a mere mercenary rather than a peace time soldier of a once-free republic, or that joining the Corps would be tantamount to helping maintain a standing Navy instead of a standing army; but I can't quite convince myself. Between the two degrees I already have and the Masters in Military Science I'm working on, I could probably do quite well for myself. Plus, nothing would have made my grandfather prouder while he lived than had I joined the Corps. But even he had great respect for the ideal that we should only form a standing army during time of war.

In any case, I spend my time at the rifle range, at the gym, and in the formal study of the art of war, in the event of actual need against real threats and enemies (internal or external, and probably the former) hopefully I won't completely useless, at least my professors of Military Science don't think I would be. It's a great tragedy that the noble tradition of the militia has been replaced by a standing army loyal to the federal government.

Here, at least, we are in agreement. One of the greatest things about this republic is that we can publically disagree with each other and with the state; and our freedom of conscience is valued above all else by our laws and principles.

Eh, I don't know that you want to go there. Grin Wink
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 12:59:30 AM by livefreeordie » Logged
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #291 on: February 17, 2008, 12:35:48 AM »

Well my wife has "given" birth, at home except for the first, naturally, to 5 babies all over 10 lbs, actually I take that back, Mary Inger was 9lbs 10oz.  And I said "we" lived below the poverty line, so she understands the hardships of being poor and giving birth. And her parents were poor if that satisfies you.  And she is more pro-life than me. 

I did "deliver" 4 of the babies though.  Is that more valid to you than just being there?  It was a walk in the park compared to what my wife was going through, but it wasn't easy.  And when you are poor, it's a little freaky thinking how you are going to pay for it all. 

Fortunately, the struggle was worth it and now we are very successful.  So if we have a 6th under these circumstances I'll ask my wife if it is any less or more of a hardship.  She'll probably slap me! Wink

Oh, and I'm sure now you are typing, "yeah, but your wife might have been poor and understands the hardships better than most, but she had you, what about poor single woman, do you understand their hardship?  Would you impose such a hardship on them?"  I'll save time and answer you now, obviously I'm not a poor and single mother, but our church is in the inner city and we help these woman.  And there are multiple families in our church who have adopted children from poor single mother's and would adopt more if they were available.  None of the poor single mother's we help seem anything but grateful and happy to have not aborted their babies.  And I've never heard any of the adopted children say or be rumored to say, "man, being adopted by this Orthodox family sucks, I wish my mom would have ripped me apart in the womb instead of waiting 5 months to deliver me."

I wouldn't want to impose a hardship on anyone.  I would ask them to deliver the baby and then ask me or someone like me to help them endure the hardships and get them whatever help they need.  Except for the very rare cases where a mother's life is truly at risk, I don't know why an Orthodox Christian, or any Christian for that matter, would have any other response.  I do believe that before we can tell women, "no abortions of convenience", we must be ready to help them with the hardships of caring for them.  And that means Churches and Christians who are against abortion must be ready to get out of their pews and help people on a personal level. If not for the poor mother, for the poor mother's children.

You've 'been' at your children's births, I'm guessing that you haven't given birth to any of them. See, I can make certain inferences based solely on your biological gender. Not to dismiss your opinion based on this alone; but the fact that you would take the position of wanting to use oppressive law to impose hardships you will never experience does make me take note.

And, I will even confess, your living below the poverty line has probably placed you slightly closer to these circumstances than I've even been (or ever want to be). I was pretty poor as a student (but according to Karl Marx, at least, that doesn't mean anything since I should be judged based on the standing of my parents...so much for the ideal of every person being judged for who the are, independent of who their ancestors were), but other than that I've always managed to find jobs that placed me firmly in the upper-middle class. But, still, you didn't have to give birth and at least you had your wife and did not have to deal with it alone. And, even then, if you had gone through that and had managed it just fine, I still don't believe you would have the right to presume that all people can do it and impose these hardships on them.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 12:58:25 AM by livefreeordie » Logged
Myrrh23
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,639



« Reply #292 on: February 17, 2008, 01:09:11 AM »

LiveFreeorDie, I mean absolutely no offense to you, but why did you keep having more children if you were below the poverty line?
Also, it is honorable to ask a person to deliver a baby so as to keep abortion totally out of the picture, but how many of these poor, inner-city women keep having baby after baby after baby, that they know they can't take care of? Perhaps the care that some of these women also need is a good smack in the back of the head and a tube-tying party. I say these latter words because it pains me that so many children end up in foster care home after foster care home, and the irresponsibility of their parents is like the Energizer Bunny for the poverty cycle. What do you presume to do, LiveFree--have your family and other families continually adopt these children?

It is not the fault of these children to be born in such circumstances, and I do know that there are beloved saints who were born into stark poverty. However, I think there needs to be a movement to encourage all people, rich and poor, to practice natural contraception or have their reproductive powers taken from them. I also write these lines knowing that some poor women make damn fine better mothers than some that are more well off. My own mother is an example of this. She was well-off, with a job working for the State, yet was a horrible and abusive mother.

Myrrh23
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 01:10:33 AM by Myrrh23 » Logged

*I am no longer posting on OC.net*

We all have a Black Dog and a White Dog inside of us. The One you feed the most eventually eats the Other.

All are tempted, but it is the courageous person who clings to God during the storm. For the Ego is a prison, but Christ is the Liberator
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #293 on: February 17, 2008, 01:09:58 AM »

A little advice if you ever decide you join the Corps.  God help us all! Wink

True, if I did by some outside chance both join and move up through the ranks we'd all be in trouble. Grin

Quote
The men you lead could care less about your degrees and your philosophy.  They'll care more about how you mentor them, your character, and that you are willing to lead from the front, not talk about it from the rear.  If you talk to your men like you debate people on this list, they'll be following your rank but they won't be following you.

I'm sure you know this intellectually.

Of course I do, I'm sure everyone knows this on an intellectual level. And I'm probably at a position in my life that, psychologically speaking, I wouldn't have a problem putting myself in a position to get myself killed, I can't think of a better way to die...though outside of combat it's anyone's guess. Grin Wink

Quote
But if you can learn to address people here more like a good leader, you'll be better prepared for whatever lays in front of you.  If you think some of us here are intellectually challenged, wait till you meet some enlisted soldier fresh out of high school! Lots of enthusiasm though.

The troops HATE know-it-alls. HATE, as in, bullet in the back hate.  Much worse than someone who back-stabs their friends and enjoys being disliked! Wink

Turn yourself into a good leader though, and they'll follow you to hell and back.  And no book teaches you that.  It must be practiced.

Eh, I've had the opportunity to be in charge of about 15-20 people in the civilian life, don't know how well that'd translate into a combat situation. But, in all seriousness, you really shouldn't judge my leadership abilities based on my posts on OC.net, I tend to view this forum as a medium for academic debate more than anything else. If you have any doubts give cleveland or frchris a PM, while I'm still probably not fit to lead a sizable military unit, this forum really isn't a good reflection of who I am in real life.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #294 on: February 17, 2008, 01:20:38 AM »

No offense, but ask my wife your first question!  She loves children and takes care of them like a saint! We only gave birth to 2 living under these conditions, and by the 5th we were doing pretty good. But if there is a lot of love in the house, you'd be surprised how you can get by with little money.  You might be surprised to know we look back on those days fondly. 

Sure it's honorable when their are plenty of people who would take care of the baby.  These woman should have their children taken away sooner when their children can be placed in a good home.  The problem is they are allowed to live in abusive homes too long.  I agree, foster care for older children is horrible.  I saw first hand as my mom was a social worker and we had foster children growing up.  I heard plenty of horror stories.  But never did I think they would have been better off dead.  A Boy my parents took in when he was 14 came from a horribly abusive background and was mentally slow.  He lived with them for 4 years.  Today he is married with a child, makes a decent living as a truck driver, is happy, and keeps in touch with my parents.  When he was 14, as the mentally handicapped abused son of a drug user, he would have been a poster boy for the "should have been aborted crowd."

There might be a day when there were more babies being born who the mother was willing to put up for adoption than people looking to adopt, but I'm willing to save as many children as we can now and face that world, if it ever comes, when it comes.  One of my dreams is to build an Orthodox Home for children.

I have no problem teaching and teaching and teaching people contraception.   And women who turn out baby after baby for welfare checks shouldn't be rewarded.  They should be punished and their babies taken away while they are young enough to have a family adopt them.

I'm truly sorry you had to overcome an abusive mother.  God be with you, and thank God you survived.

LiveFreeorDie, I mean absolutely no offense to you, but why did you keep having more children if you were below the poverty line?
Also, it is honorable to ask a person to deliver a baby so as to keep abortion totally out of the picture, but how many of these poor, inner-city women keep having baby after baby after baby, that they know they can't take care of? Perhaps the care that some of these women also need is a good smack in the back of the head and a tube-tying party. I say these latter words because it pains me that so many children end up in foster care home after foster care home, and the irresponsibility of their parents is like a the Energizer Bunny for the poverty cycle. What do you presume to do, LiveFree--have your family and other families continually adopt these children?

It is not the fault of these children to be born in such circumstances, and I do know that there are beloved saints who were born into stark poverty. However, I think there needs to be a movement to encourage all people, rich and poor, to practice natural contraception or have their reproductive powers taken from them. I also write these lines knowing that some poor women make damn fine better mothers than some that are more well off. My own mother is an example of this. She was well-off, with a job working for the State, yet was a horrible and abusive mother.

Myrrh23

« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 01:33:48 AM by livefreeordie » Logged
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #295 on: February 17, 2008, 01:25:23 AM »

Then there is hope for you!  Shocked Wink

. If you have any doubts give cleveland or frchris a PM, while I'm still probably not fit to lead a sizable military unit, this forum really isn't a good reflection of who I am in real life.
Logged
Myrrh23
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,639



« Reply #296 on: February 17, 2008, 01:32:52 AM »

LiveFree, you know all about force in the military. I'm sure you also know that it is saddening when force must be used. I personally think some of these women should be forced to have their tubes tied. I'm not talking about Nazi methods or anything.

Myrrh23
Logged

*I am no longer posting on OC.net*

We all have a Black Dog and a White Dog inside of us. The One you feed the most eventually eats the Other.

All are tempted, but it is the courageous person who clings to God during the storm. For the Ego is a prison, but Christ is the Liberator
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #297 on: February 17, 2008, 01:36:13 AM »

I'd have a hard time disagreeing in the extreme cases.  My greatest fear would be GIC labeling me an even greater attacker of freedom and personal liberty!!!! Wink

I would just equate it to a crime.  We lock people up for child abuse, we've castrated rapists.  If a women neglects children and keeps having them, there should be some recourse that keeps this from happening.  Not sure about tying her down and having her tubes tied though.

I have a feeling we would never need to think about such drastic measures if we just took the babies away once their were signs of abuse.  Almost any baby a year old or younger can get adopted pretty easily and if the woman knows she won't gain welfare checks from it and went through the effort of delivering it only to get no benefit, I have a feeling the incident of this would drop significantly.  Their would still be plenty of unwanted pregnancies, but don't think for a minute the serial mom's you are talking about don't know how to milk the system.  And do.

And I really believe, as I stated before, any solution means we as Christians must get up out of our pews and truly help those around us on a personal level. If we don't, I believe our faith is as empty and shallow as the secular world around us.

LiveFree, you know all about force in the military. I'm sure you also know that it is saddening when force must be used. I personally think some of these women should be forced to have their tubes tied. I'm not talking about Nazi methods or anything.

Myrrh23
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 01:43:17 AM by livefreeordie » Logged
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #298 on: February 17, 2008, 01:58:07 AM »

Not sure how much it would translate to leading men in combat. Leading men otherwise, I'm sure it's taught you a lot.  Leading Marines or any soldiers is a 24 hour a day job.  You live, eat, breath and work with them.  One of the best practices as a civilian would be to help out with a Scout troop.  Seriously, you'll learn a lot about yourself as a leader of men spending a week camping out with a bunch of gung ho 16 year olds.  They see you 24hrs a day, they see all your faults, and all your strengths.  How they respond to your leadership is a good indication of what you know and what you have to learn.  I helped my Uncle with an Explorer Post off and on for almost 6 years and it's amazing the leadership lessons I learned from that and use to this day.

Put your enthusiasm for learning into something like that and you'll be thankful you did it.

Eh, I've had the opportunity to be in charge of about 15-20 people in the civilian life, don't know how well that'd translate into a combat situation.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 02:04:08 AM by livefreeordie » Logged
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #299 on: February 17, 2008, 04:15:38 AM »

Riddikulus, we agree! I was worried based on earlier postings we'd be forever doomed to be in contention.

Forever is such a long time! I'm sure we would have worked something out.  Wink

Quote
I must say, I'm jealous.  Queensland sure seems like a nice place to be as we look to the end of our grey Indiana winter. silouan

It's just lovely here, although we have had an unusual amount of rain this summer. Perhaps that is not such a bad thing, seeing as it is my first here and I was dreading very high temperatures. Grin
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,359



« Reply #300 on: February 17, 2008, 08:25:04 AM »

Apparently you forgot some of the recent threads in the politics forum.

Perhaps you can post them to "remind" me.

Quote
If you are using the state apparatus to impose your views on those who don't hold them, then yes.


So, I am supposed to use MY vote to voice YOUR opinion.  Sounds like elections in the Middle East, Eastern Europe,...

Quote
If you are going to use a single political issue as a litmus test, I also think that is incredibly simplistic.

yes, you have voiced your ASSUMPTION that I have a single issue litmus test.  It makes things simple for you.


Quote
 There are a broad range of political issues dealing with Christianity today

Pro death politicians rarely fail to have a whole host of issues in train, as reasons for me not to vote from them.

Quote
, creating a litmus test on a single issue  eliminates any ability to compromise whatsoever.
 

sorry, but I'm not signing on to your convenant with death and agreement with Hell.

Quote
And of course, nobody has yet demonstrated that my position is at all at odds with any part of the New Testament.

You yourself stated no one in the NT had political power, and set no political power.

To whom much is given, much is expected.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 08:36:04 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,359



« Reply #301 on: February 17, 2008, 08:49:23 AM »

Sounds a lot like the great philosopher and founder of the french school of feminism Simone de Beauvoir, wrote a far harsher condemnation of the circumstances that lead to abortion as being crimes against women. That the circumstances can exist where a pregnancy is unwanted is most unfortunate and a failure of society. But to forbid abortion only makes these circumstances, these social sins, worse by inflicting hardship and economic disadvantage upon these poor women. Which is why de Beauvoir, though opposed to the social institutions that made abortion necessary, lead the movement to legalize abortion in France and was ultimately successful in '74.

If you want to stop abortions, change the social circumstances that lead to them. Don't use your faux 'morality' to impose hardships you will never have to bear on others.

Beauvoir?  Wasn't she the one in the abusive, codependent and parasitic relationship with Sartre?  And one of many (the majority) who falsely claimed  to have had an abortion in the Manefesto of 343, a step to legalization in France?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,359



« Reply #302 on: February 17, 2008, 09:05:58 AM »

In my Sociology 101 class, we learned that many pro-lifers are also anti-welfare.

You learned, or were you taught?

Quote
I wonder which is more selfish: aborting a child or being anti-welfare?


Both are offered as solutions, but they create problems. There are women who have another child for another check. (I am aware you can't raise a kid on it, but that's irrelvant, as that's not what they are thinking). Abortion helps decrease you base on which to base your welfare state (see below).

 
Quote
Also, I'd like to know how much of Michael Moore's Sicko was truth in relation to how new mothers are treated in other developed countries. Anyone know? I think this is relevant because women often abort their unborn babies because they do not have access to the resources to care for them. From watching the movie, it seemed that women are more supported in other countries where raising kids is concerned. If a woman feels she is not, and will not, be supported, more often than not she will probably abort her babies.
To illustrate this latter point, most babies aborted are Latino or black...

Haven't seen it (having seen his 911 farce, I see no reason to).

Most of the developed countries are trying to pay their women into becoming mothers (and the men into becoming fathers, marriage is also in serious decline), to stem their plumeting population (and the tax base problems it brings).

Quote
I especially think it's hypocritical to be anti-contraception if you're also anti-abortion. We all know people are going to "do-it", especially those high-schoolers. I'd rather have people be safe than sorry.

yes, helping people to sink onto all fours, rather than raise them to stand on their own two feet, always solved things.

Quote
Heorhij, I think it has to do with what we've been trained to believe and what we feel is true. A very religious person, though not feeling anything for their baby except that it's their baby, might refuse to abort because they've been taught at Jesus Camp that it's wrong. However, I've heard numerous women say they didn't feel it was a baby until they felt it kick or move. I think your question might deserve another thread entirely...

And those "parents" who don't see their children as seperate individuals in their 30s, what of them?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 09:11:26 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #303 on: February 17, 2008, 01:12:18 PM »

Not sure how much it would translate to leading men in combat. Leading men otherwise, I'm sure it's taught you a lot.  Leading Marines or any soldiers is a 24 hour a day job.  You live, eat, breath and work with them.  One of the best practices as a civilian would be to help out with a Scout troop.  Seriously, you'll learn a lot about yourself as a leader of men spending a week camping out with a bunch of gung ho 16 year olds.  They see you 24hrs a day, they see all your faults, and all your strengths.  How they respond to your leadership is a good indication of what you know and what you have to learn.  I helped my Uncle with an Explorer Post off and on for almost 6 years and it's amazing the leadership lessons I learned from that and use to this day.

Put your enthusiasm for learning into something like that and you'll be thankful you did it.

No thanks, I put up with the whining and stupidity of those under me at work because it pays well; not a chance of my doing it for free...I guess different things motivate different people. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
livefreeordie
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #304 on: February 17, 2008, 02:34:03 PM »

"whining and stupidity"

Did you learn to talk about your subordinates like that from General Stark?!  Shocked

No thanks, I put up with the whining and stupidity of those under me at work because it pays well; not a chance of my doing it for free...I guess different things motivate different people. Wink
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 02:51:58 PM by livefreeordie » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #305 on: February 17, 2008, 02:52:11 PM »

Beauvoir?  Wasn't she the one in the abusive, codependent and parasitic relationship with Sartre?

And her sex life is relevant to her philosophical writings because???

Her open relationship, starting in the 20's, was a revolutionary act that undermined many social institutions that had once been used to oppress women. The took the old Bourgeoise social constructs that allowed men to have socially acceptable affairs and turned them on their head. Her relationship was, in large part, the catalyst of the sexual revolution of the 60's, through it she helped change society by thwarting the traditional stigma (and double standard) associated with women freely exploring their sexuality.

Quote
And one of many (the majority) who falsely claimed  to have had an abortion in the Manefesto of 343, a step to legalization in France?

She was a very influential memeber of France's women's liberation movement and in large part orchestrated the Manifesto of the 343; she was a master of the art of propaganda and had great insight into western society, it was a calculated political move that forced the abortion issue and ultimately helped legalize abortion in France within three years. Much like with her open relationship with Sartre the goal was to take what was traditionally a social stigma and wear it proudly, one of the most powerful weapon against cultural expectations, when the scarlet letter becomes a badge of honour the social customs behind it are undermined. That she hadn't actually had an abortion was a calculated political risk, but it paid off as abortion was legalized before it became public knowledge; but it was certainly an honourable act to take upon herself (as many of the 343 did) a social stigma that she had no need to endure. Through this courageous act she helped overcome misogynistic and oppressive laws and eventually transform French society and western society in general.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 02:53:27 PM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #306 on: February 17, 2008, 02:53:18 PM »

So, I am supposed to use MY vote to voice YOUR opinion.  Sounds like elections in the Middle East, Eastern Europe,...

No, I am saying that there is nothing in the current political system the world's liberal democracies that would keep you from following your religious beliefs.  You believe, as do I, that abortion (and for the sake of brevity, I think we both mean in circumstances not life threatening to the mother when we simply say abortion) is immoral.  How is that impinging on your freedom to practice your religion or moral code?   

Quote
yes, you have voiced your ASSUMPTION that I have a single issue litmus test.  It makes things simple for you.

And the very next thing you say:
Quote
Pro death politicians rarely fail to have a whole host of issues in train, as reasons for me not to vote from them. sorry, but I'm not signing on to your convenant with death and agreement with Hell.

You see it simple, black and white terms and as an agreement with "Hell."  If that is not evidence of using the issue as a litmus test, then I don't know what would be.
 
Quote
You yourself stated no one in the NT had political power, and set no political power.

So where do you get your justification for creating a political Christianity?

Quote
To whom much is given, much is expected.

Relevance?  The ironic part of this is that in the discussion of this topic on the politics forum, one of the loudest advocates of political Christianity admitted that he had a relative who uses abortion as a form of birth control and had had many abortions.  I know that if any of my female relative found themselves in a crisis pregnancy situation, my entire extended family would do everything possible to encourage them to not only keep the baby but then we would all pitch in to raise the child.  Being pro-life is a personal matter and in my personal life I am pro-life.  That is why I tire of your insinuations that I'm making agreements with Hell or whatever.
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #307 on: February 17, 2008, 02:55:44 PM »

"whining and stupidity"

Did you learn to talk about your subordinates like that from General Stark?!  Shocked

Nah, my leadership style is modeled on Heinrich Himmler's. Grin

But, truth be told, I don't really like having to deal with 'subordinates', but those are the jobs that pay well.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 03:00:19 PM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Myrrh23
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,639



« Reply #308 on: February 17, 2008, 03:57:05 PM »

Quote
yes, helping people to sink onto all fours, rather than raise them to stand on their own two feet, always solved things.

Ialmisry, I believe that our children should be taught not to use their sexuality like a snack tray--to be passed around from person to person. We should teach kids to be responsible, but doing so in an abstinence-only program, which seems to me what you might be meaning from this quote, has been shown not to work. Looking at the American culture, we are fighting an uphill battle to teach children how God would want them to act sexually, as LiveFreeorDie had stated concerning how our culture has so sexualized people.

Myrrh23
Logged

*I am no longer posting on OC.net*

We all have a Black Dog and a White Dog inside of us. The One you feed the most eventually eats the Other.

All are tempted, but it is the courageous person who clings to God during the storm. For the Ego is a prison, but Christ is the Liberator
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,359



« Reply #309 on: February 17, 2008, 04:54:02 PM »

And her sex life is relevant to her philosophical writings because???

Her open relationship, starting in the 20's, was a revolutionary act that undermined many social institutions that had once been used to oppress women. The took the old Bourgeoise social constructs that allowed men to have socially acceptable affairs and turned them on their head. Her relationship was, in large part, the catalyst of the sexual revolution of the 60's, through it she helped change society by thwarting the traditional stigma (and double standard) associated with women freely exploring their sexuality.

Yes, Sartre I understand got to milk (and kick around) the cow for free.  How liberating! 

Interesting how you reduce a codependent, abusive relationship to just sex.  I can see why your image of marriage seems to be skewed.

As for the relevence of this relationshop to her "philosophy": if I'm not mistaken when money was tight she would sacrifice her resources to Sartre, because his work was so much "more important."  So much for practicing what you preach.

Quote
She was a very influential memeber of France's women's liberation movement and in large part orchestrated the Manifesto of the 343; she was a master of the art of propaganda and had great insight into western society, it was a calculated political move that forced the abortion issue and ultimately helped legalize abortion in France within three years. Much like with her open relationship with Sartre the goal was to take what was traditionally a social stigma and wear it proudly, one of the most powerful weapon against cultural expectations, when the scarlet letter becomes a badge of honour the social customs behind it are undermined. That she hadn't actually had an abortion was a calculated political risk, but it paid off as abortion was legalized before it became public knowledge; but it was certainly an honourable act to take upon herself (as many of the 343 did) a social stigma that she had no need to endure. Through this courageous act she helped overcome misogynistic and oppressive laws and eventually transform French society and western society in general.

At least the admission that her actions were based on lies to further a political agenda is useful.  And the truth shall set you free.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,359



« Reply #310 on: February 17, 2008, 05:02:25 PM »

No, I am saying that there is nothing in the current political system the world's liberal democracies that would keep you from following your religious beliefs.  You believe, as do I, that abortion (and for the sake of brevity, I think we both mean in circumstances not life threatening to the mother when we simply say abortion) is immoral.  How is that impinging on your freedom to practice your religion or moral code?

Following my religious beliefs includes voting into office pro-life candidates, with a pro-life agenda.

Quote
And the very next thing you say:
You see it simple, black and white terms and as an agreement with "Hell."  If that is not evidence of using the issue as a litmus test, then I don't know what would be.

Again, I've yet to find a candidate whose only issue seperating him from me is abortion.  It is usually (and I've never been shown wrong) an indicator of other problems.
 
Quote
So where do you get your justification for creating a political Christianity?

Where's it in the US Constitution that I get to vote?

Quote
Relevance?  The ironic part of this is that in the discussion of this topic on the politics forum, one of the loudest advocates of political Christianity admitted that he had a relative who uses abortion as a form of birth control and had had many abortions.  I know that if any of my female relative found themselves in a crisis pregnancy situation, my entire extended family would do everything possible to encourage them to not only keep the baby but then we would all pitch in to raise the child.  Being pro-life is a personal matter and in my personal life I am pro-life.  That is why I tire of your insinuations that I'm making agreements with Hell or whatever.

Well, good for you and your entire extended family.  I hope He give you your reward.  But when you are talking about public policy, no, I'm not going to keep the Church's teachings a private matter. As for you, that's between you and God, until you ask me to do it.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #311 on: February 17, 2008, 05:24:04 PM »

Yes, Sartre I understand got to milk (and kick around) the cow for free.  How liberating! 

Interesting how you reduce a codependent, abusive relationship to just sex.  I can see why your image of marriage seems to be skewed.

As for the relevence of this relationshop to her "philosophy": if I'm not mistaken when money was tight she would sacrifice her resources to Sartre, because his work was so much "more important."  So much for practicing what you preach.

Oh, she had her own affairs as well, sometimes with the same woman as Sartre, it was a two way street. Not always the easiest of relationships, but it seemed to last far longer than most marriages do today (though I believe it was entirely platonic after the war) so they obviously had something going for them. She certainly thought very highly of Sartre and he thought rather highly of her. Of course, as to who's work was the most important, history will ultimately be the judge and things seem to be comming out in her favour based both and the quality and the impact of her work. From a social perspective The Second Sex has had a far greater impact than any work of Sartre's ever will.

Quote
At least the admission that her actions were based on lies to further a political agenda is useful.  And the truth shall set you free.

In the end, it didn't matter that she hadn't had an abortion, what mattered was that she was willing to take on the social stigma to transform society. And I have nothing against propaganda when used to advance a noble cause like women's rights...here, at least, the end is justification enough for the means.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #312 on: February 17, 2008, 05:28:13 PM »

Following my religious beliefs includes voting into office pro-life candidates, with a pro-life agenda.

Which is why liberty is too important to be subjected to the whims of the masses and should be codified out of their reach in Constitutional Law. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution in this manner, in the manner most conducive to liberty, though I would feel more secure in the matter if we actually had a constitutional amendment directly prohibiting anti-abortion laws rather than relying on the court's interpretation of liberty.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #313 on: February 17, 2008, 06:08:56 PM »

Which is why liberty is too important to be subjected to the whims of the masses and should be codified out of their reach in Constitutional Law. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution in this manner, in the manner most conducive to liberty, though I would feel more secure in the matter if we actually had a constitutional amendment directly prohibiting anti-abortion laws rather than relying on the court's interpretation of liberty.

Thank God, that the founding fathers of this Republic were deists and secularists and not religious zealots, and that they had the wisdom to craft a constitutional Republic that could prevent the tyranny of the majority. 
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #314 on: February 17, 2008, 06:48:38 PM »

Thank God, that the founding fathers of this Republic were deists and secularists and not religious zealots, and that they had the wisdom to craft a constitutional Republic that could prevent the tyranny of the majority. 
"could prevent the tyranny of the majority" ...so far. 
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Tags: abortion 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.168 seconds with 72 queries.