OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 04:10:13 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 21 22 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Abortion actually murder?  (Read 22397 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #315 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.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,478


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #316 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.
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #317 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   

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #318 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.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,478


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #319 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?
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #320 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. 
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #321 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.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #322 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.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #323 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.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,478


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #324 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.
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #325 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"
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #326 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.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #327 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.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 04:19:18 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #328 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"..

« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 04:23:33 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #329 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.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #330 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
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #331 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.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #332 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.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #333 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.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #334 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.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #335 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.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,738


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #336 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.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #337 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.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 05:19:08 PM by Arachne » Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,738


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #338 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.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #339 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.
Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #340 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?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 05:35:42 PM by Arachne » Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #341 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?
Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #342 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. Wink
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #343 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.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #344 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.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #345 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?
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #346 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.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Android_Rewster
Raving fanatic of Jesus Christ
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Not a Protsetant anymore
Posts: 43


I need you so much closer


« Reply #347 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
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #348 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.  
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #349 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. 
Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #350 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.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #351 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?
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #352 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.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #353 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.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #354 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. 
Logged
OrthoNoob
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,015



« Reply #355 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?
Logged

http://avengingredhand.wordpress.com -- My blog

'These words I, Leo, have set down for love and as a safeguard of the Orthodox Faith'
choy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,316


« Reply #356 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. Wink

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.
Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,489


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #357 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.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 07:05:04 PM by Arachne » Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #358 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?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 07:08:22 PM by Aindriú » Logged


I'm going to need this.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,083


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #359 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.

« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 07:10:17 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Tags: abortion cheval mort totes pferd horseus mortus 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 »   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 0.185 seconds with 72 queries.