OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 23, 2014, 05:57:46 PM *
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 22526 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Online Online

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,493


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #450 on: February 28, 2013, 12:50:24 PM »

And maybe the father wants the baby.

Nice job ignoring this part.  I guess fathers actually wanting to be fathers doesn’t matter anymore.

Then they should only bed women who want to be mothers. Preferably after marrying them.

Yes, they should.  As should women only bed men who want to be fathers.  Preferably after marrying them.

Ah, wouldn't that make things so much simpler. *le sigh*

Wait...are you saying that responsibility goes both ways?  That women are capable of making rational decisions as well? 

That's crazy talk.

Oh, we are. Except that time of the month. No, not that time, the other time, the one that triggers severe grooming issues! Tongue
Logged

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

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #451 on: February 28, 2013, 12:51:29 PM »

And maybe the father wants the baby.

Nice job ignoring this part.  I guess fathers actually wanting to be fathers doesn’t matter anymore.

Then they should only bed women who want to be mothers. Preferably after marrying them.

Yes, they should.  As should women only bed men who want to be fathers.  Preferably after marrying them.

Wait...are you saying that responsibility goes both ways?  That women are capable of making rational decisions as well?  

That's crazy talk.

Well, alright....The part about women making rational decisions would, I guess, be dependent upon where in their menstrual cycle they are.  Grin Grin

(Now I shall don my flame resistant armor and DUCK!  Grin Grin)



EDIT:  Have you ever looked up the etymology of the word "hysteria"?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 12:54:43 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,092


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #452 on: February 28, 2013, 02:03:43 PM »

It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.

Uh oh..didnt your parents ever have "The Talk" with you?  Smiley
Which has nothing at all to do with the utter uselessness of the above pseudo argument.

Well..Men cant be impregnated.. Therefore, the decision making are the Woman's. She is the one carrying the baby.  

Kinda basic
Kinda basically wrong

You may not like it but that's the situation. Impregnation is within the Woman's body.. That means she has more say so.. And should.. Live with it.
It takes two people to make a baby, so 50% of it is the property of the father.  If she wants to terminate the baby, should should be willing to compensate monetarily with an agreed amount by the father.  

By the way,  surrogate mothers don't get to terminate based on the foolish terms you stated.  Nonsense and a failed reasoning.

Surrogate mothers sign a contract and waive their rights.. It they didnt, they would have all the say so.. Your information is lacking so your logic is flawed Smiley

Men have few rights and lots and lots of responsibility if they get a woman pregnant. This is not only the legal situation but reflects natural law IMHO.

Human babies are not property and dealing with them does not fall under property law, formally speaking.

How is this natural law?  A man does not have a right to sex on demand.  Thus, if a woman gets pregnant, she had an equal say in the decision.  I agree with you that a man doesn't have many rights but lots of responsibilities, as things are, but I do not see this as being right in any way, shape, or form.  If you want to do law of the jungle, a woman does have a responsibility to pick a man who will do these things by the nature of his character and suffer the consequences for choosing a cad.

The Man's participation  in procreation is momentary. The Woman carries the baby, risks her own life and body to deliver it (not to even mention that she must bare great pain).She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it. Pregnancy itself occurs within her body. Therefore, she has more say so. It's a natural consiquence of the process .
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 02:04:38 PM by Marc1152 » 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: 6,488


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #453 on: February 28, 2013, 02:43:10 PM »

Since half of the arguments you used happen when the man has rights by your own definition......
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: 13,092


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #454 on: February 28, 2013, 02:49:16 PM »

Since half of the arguments you used happen when the man has rights by your own definition......

Come again?

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: 6,488


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #455 on: February 28, 2013, 03:33:17 PM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.
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
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,744


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #456 on: February 28, 2013, 04:33:03 PM »

Then they should only bed women who want to be mothers. Preferably after marrying them.

The way I see it is that sexual intercourse--excluding rape--takes the consent of two people. I think that any two people having sex without taking precautions or communicating what they want to do if the woman conceives are pretty stupid. I really hate the victim-complex that society gives to women. A guy impregnates someone's daughter, he gets blamed more than anything, even though she consented to it, a woman is left with a kid, the father is blamed for impregnating her (even though she consented), a woman leaves her husband and demands alimony because she can't find a job, that's her fault for putting her trust into the wrong man and not having a back-up plan on what to do if they ever separated or he died. On the other hand though, if a greedy or manipulative woman takes advantage of a man or uses him, no one cares at all and blames it on him for being stupid, yet, the moment we even suggest that maybe the woman is responsible for something, the feminists immediately accuse us of being misogynists.

Anyhow, if morally you believe that raising a child is the responsibility of both parents, then why shouldn't the father be allowed to raise up the child on his own if the mother does not want it? If the woman can force a deadbeat father to pay child support for the child, then why can't a man force a deadbeat mother to birth the baby for him to have?
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.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #457 on: February 28, 2013, 04:34:18 PM »

The Apostles mentioned abortion? And they said the word "abortion" itself, not something else? This happened when?

 Huh



From The Didache:
Quote
And this is the second commandment of the teaching. 2 Thou shalt do no murder, thou
shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not corrupt boys, thou shalt not commit fornication,
thou shalt not steal , thou shalt not deal in magic, thou shalt do no sorcery, thou shalt not
murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born,

http://www.annomundi.com/bible/didache.pdf

Questions?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,092


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #458 on: February 28, 2013, 04:50:45 PM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 04:51:14 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

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

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,836



« Reply #459 on: February 28, 2013, 05:32:39 PM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

So why do men have responsibilities if they have no rights? 

If it is true as you say, that since a woman must carry the child, thus has the right to determine life or death, why the heck can't she foot the bill?
Logged
OrthoNoob
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #460 on: February 28, 2013, 05:35:35 PM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

They have never been heard of before because the idea that men needed a 'right' to prevent their children from being murdered would have struck previous generations as idiotic. Only when abortion (which had never been accepted in Christendom) becomes accepted can a man's 'right' to prevent his child from being aborted be meaningful.

Personally, I don't think framing the issue in terms of 'men's rights' is useful for an understanding of the real moral issues at play here. But I support laws requiring the father's consent for abortion if they will prevent some abortions.
Logged

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

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

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,570



« Reply #461 on: February 28, 2013, 05:40:44 PM »

No!  No!  You have to understand that libtards believe that they have all the rights and the rest of us have the responsibility to foot the bill.  

Anyone who thinks that a Father is tangential is a complete idiot, and one of the reasons that we have the problems that we have in this country.  They also have absolutely NO understanding of Fatherhood.  Typical for the emasculated mush that passes for males these days.  I suppose that such a person would think that God is really a woman.

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

So why do men have responsibilities if they have no rights? 

If it is true as you say, that since a woman must carry the child, thus has the right to determine life or death, why the heck can't she foot the bill?
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #462 on: February 28, 2013, 05:42:22 PM »

+1.

No!  No!  You have to understand that libtards believe that they have all the rights and the rest of us have the responsibility to foot the bill.  

Anyone who thinks that a Father is tangential is a complete idiot, and one of the reasons that we have the problems that we have in this country.  They also have absolutely NO understanding of Fatherhood.  Typical for the emasculated mush that passes for males these days.  I suppose that such a person would think that God is really a woman.

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

So why do men have responsibilities if they have no rights? 

If it is true as you say, that since a woman must carry the child, thus has the right to determine life or death, why the heck can't she foot the bill?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,744


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #463 on: February 28, 2013, 06:08:49 PM »

Isa is a father and he's a greater parent to his children than their mother. I would hardly call his role in their lives as "tangential."
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 06:09:01 PM by JamesR » 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.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #464 on: February 28, 2013, 08:39:48 PM »

And maybe the father wants the baby.

Nice job ignoring this part.  I guess fathers actually wanting to be fathers doesn’t matter anymore.

Then they should only bed women who want to be mothers. Preferably after marrying them.
Perhaps women who do not want children shouldn't bed men.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #465 on: February 28, 2013, 08:41:59 PM »

It's a bunch of bull, tbh. All these nazi-feminists pushing their "choice" crap. The way I see it is that if it takes two people to make a baby, then it takes two people to decide what to do with it.

When men find a way to carry and birth the babies they want and their women don't, then they will have an equal say. Until then, all the decisions are firmly on the woman's side.

This is one of the most useless and baseless arguments I have ever heard in my life, ever.

Uh oh..didnt your parents ever have "The Talk" with you?  Smiley
Which has nothing at all to do with the utter uselessness of the above pseudo argument.

Well..Men cant be impregnated.. Therefore, the decision making are the Woman's. She is the one carrying the baby.  

Kinda basic
Kinda basically wrong

You may not like it but that's the situation. Impregnation is within the Woman's body.. That means she has more say so.. And should.. Live with it.
It takes two people to make a baby, so 50% of it is the property of the father.  If she wants to terminate the baby, should should be willing to compensate monetarily with an agreed amount by the father.  

By the way,  surrogate mothers don't get to terminate based on the foolish terms you stated.  Nonsense and a failed reasoning.

Surrogate mothers sign a contract and waive their rights.. It they didnt, they would have all the say so.. Your information is lacking so your logic is flawed Smiley

Men have few rights and lots and lots of responsibility if they get a woman pregnant. This is not only the legal situation but reflects natural law IMHO.

Human babies are not property and dealing with them does not fall under property law, formally speaking.

How is this natural law?  A man does not have a right to sex on demand.  Thus, if a woman gets pregnant, she had an equal say in the decision.  I agree with you that a man doesn't have many rights but lots of responsibilities, as things are, but I do not see this as being right in any way, shape, or form.  If you want to do law of the jungle, a woman does have a responsibility to pick a man who will do these things by the nature of his character and suffer the consequences for choosing a cad.

The Man's participation  in procreation is momentary. The Woman carries the baby, risks her own life and body to deliver it (not to even mention that she must bare great pain).She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it. Pregnancy itself occurs within her body. Therefore, she has more say so. It's a natural consiquence of the process .
This reasoning is garbage.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,092


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #466 on: February 28, 2013, 08:52:57 PM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

So why do men have responsibilities if they have no rights? 

If it is true as you say, that since a woman must carry the child, thus has the right to determine life or death, why the heck can't she foot the bill?

Men have to provide

And they can't tell her what to do Smiley

Paradise is for the next life
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #467 on: February 28, 2013, 10:47:05 PM »

If it was all about the mother having a say, then I don't think she would mind not getting child support either.

Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #468 on: March 01, 2013, 12:54:34 AM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

So why do men have responsibilities if they have no rights? 

If it is true as you say, that since a woman must carry the child, thus has the right to determine life or death, why the heck can't she foot the bill?

Men have to provide

And they can't tell her what to do Smiley

Paradise is for the next life
They should, but don't always do what they should.  Ask my sister.

I tell my wife what to do all the time and she me.  And we both listen.  It's called not being stupid.

Then people should stop trying to achieve it in this life.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #469 on: March 01, 2013, 10:36:56 AM »

And maybe the father wants the baby.

Nice job ignoring this part.  I guess fathers actually wanting to be fathers doesn’t matter anymore.

Then they should only bed women who want to be mothers. Preferably after marrying them.
Perhaps women who do not want children shouldn't bed men anyone.

Fixed it  Grin.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #470 on: March 01, 2013, 10:44:42 AM »

And maybe the father wants the baby.

Nice job ignoring this part.  I guess fathers actually wanting to be fathers doesn’t matter anymore.

Then they should only bed women who want to be mothers. Preferably after marrying them.
Perhaps women who do not want children shouldn't bed men anyone.

Fixed it  Grin.
Even better. Smiley
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #471 on: March 01, 2013, 11:13:08 AM »

If it was all about the mother having a  THE ONLY say, then I don't think she would should mind not getting child support either.



Could not resist...
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,488


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #472 on: March 01, 2013, 11:18:28 AM »

Quote
To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before
Ah, so father's rights have never been heard of before? Wow.
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: 13,092


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #473 on: March 01, 2013, 12:47:21 PM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

So why do men have responsibilities if they have no rights? 

If it is true as you say, that since a woman must carry the child, thus has the right to determine life or death, why the heck can't she foot the bill?

Men have to provide

And they can't tell her what to do Smiley

Paradise is for the next life
They should, but don't always do what they should.  Ask my sister.

I tell my wife what to do all the time and she me.  And we both listen.  It's called not being stupid.

Then people should stop trying to achieve it in this life.

Yes, but it has to be a voluntary listening.. Welcome to America
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,092


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #474 on: March 01, 2013, 12:51:10 PM »

Quote
To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before
Ah, so father's rights have never been heard of before? Wow.

To begin with we were originally talking about a Man who was not married to her.. Sorry, he has absolutely no say so.

An actual husband has more rights of course but ultimately the Woman is the decider.

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #475 on: March 01, 2013, 12:54:46 PM »

Quote
To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before
Ah, so father's rights have never been heard of before? Wow.

To begin with we were originally talking about a Man who was not married to her.. Sorry, he has absolutely no say so.

An actual husband has more rights of course but ultimately the Woman is the decider.



Any married man who doesn't know this, is, well...just plain stupid  Grin.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #476 on: March 01, 2013, 11:57:42 PM »

Your reasoning for men having no rights to the kid before birth are because its the mom's body. Yet these arguments:

Quote
She breast feeds it  her own milk and is the one that must initially bond with it
Occur outside the body. SO using them as a reason to limit the men's rights because of it being the mother's body dont make sense. Unless Im reading this wrong.

The Mothers role is central. The Fathers role is tangential.
Gestation occurs inside her body. Breast feeding comes from her body and is sucked from it. Mother's bare the pain of childbirth...etc.

Men's rights arent being limited. To "limit" a right it must first exist. You seem to want to call for new rights that have never been heard of before.  

So why do men have responsibilities if they have no rights? 

If it is true as you say, that since a woman must carry the child, thus has the right to determine life or death, why the heck can't she foot the bill?

Men have to provide

And they can't tell her what to do Smiley

Paradise is for the next life
They should, but don't always do what they should.  Ask my sister.

I tell my wife what to do all the time and she me.  And we both listen.  It's called not being stupid.

Then people should stop trying to achieve it in this life.

Yes, but it has to be a voluntary listening.. Welcome to America
Yes.  Maturity, being a grown up and not a sniveling child.  It has nothing to do with America.
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,744


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #477 on: March 02, 2013, 02:11:52 AM »

To begin with we were originally talking about a Man who was not married to her.. Sorry, he has absolutely no say so.

What difference does it make whether or not they are married? He's still the father. Children aren't just private property tossed around depending on the marital status of their parents.

Quote
An actual husband has more rights of course but ultimately the Woman is the decider.

Yeah, so it's not my child or decision when she wants to abort it, but when she wants child-support, then it's my responsibility. Makes perfect sense. Seems very matriarchial and inconsistent to me, tbh. Either the child is fully the father's responsibility as well, and thus he gets a say in whether or not she can have an abortion if he is expected to pay child-support, or he has absolutely no obligation to the child and the mother at all. You can't have both. That shifty, selfish liberal logic of "It's my freedom at your expense," isn't going to work here.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2013, 02:12:10 AM by JamesR » 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.
OrthoNoob
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #478 on: March 02, 2013, 03:02:26 AM »

I never thought I'd see the day when JamesR would be the voice of reason.

Amazing.
Logged

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

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

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


« Reply #479 on: March 02, 2013, 07:34:07 AM »

I never thought I'd see the day when JamesR would be the voice of reason.

Amazing.

I've got my fingers crossed here, too. Well done, JamesR.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #480 on: March 02, 2013, 07:45:04 AM »

I never thought I'd see the day when JamesR would be the voice of reason.

Amazing.
Doesn't everything JamesR say not in framework of reason?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,047


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #481 on: March 02, 2013, 11:01:04 AM »

Here's a thought: far fewer men would have to pay child support if they never shacked up with their girlfriends, or used condoms more often. Sad but true. Don't even think about having a baby with someone unless you are confident that the relationship is healthy and the other person has a reliable character. You can love anyone, but you can't always be a good parent with anyone. These days, people start young, don't know what they're doing, get an apartment together because they want to save on the bills... and a year later you see them on the Judge Judy show. Awful. There are ways to save yourself some trouble.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,092


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #482 on: March 02, 2013, 12:19:51 PM »

To begin with we were originally talking about a Man who was not married to her.. Sorry, he has absolutely no say so.

What difference does it make whether or not they are married? He's still the father. Children aren't just private property tossed around depending on the marital status of their parents.

Quote
An actual husband has more rights of course but ultimately the Woman is the decider.

Yeah, so it's not my child or decision when she wants to abort it, but when she wants child-support, then it's my responsibility. Makes perfect sense. Seems very matriarchial and inconsistent to me, tbh. Either the child is fully the father's responsibility as well, and thus he gets a say in whether or not she can have an abortion if he is expected to pay child-support, or he has absolutely no obligation to the child and the mother at all. You can't have both. That shifty, selfish liberal logic of "It's my freedom at your expense," isn't going to work here.

What difference does it make whether or not they are married? He's still the father. Children aren't just private property tossed around depending on the marital status of their parents.


Because they are not married he has no legal standing. He has no right to any sort of access or decision making. For example, if the Woman becomes comatose or near death, he can't make any decisions as to her care unless she specifically had named him before hand in a living will or such the like..

No standing.. None...

Society does not look kindly on dead beat dads.. That attitude is far from "liberal shiftiness". If you father a child and dont do right by them Smiley the strong hand of the State will come down on you. You obviously don't watch the Maury Povitch show.

     
« Last Edit: March 02, 2013, 12:29:09 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #483 on: March 02, 2013, 01:35:39 PM »

The Apostles mentioned abortion? And they said the word "abortion" itself, not something else? This happened when?

 Huh



From The Didache:
Quote
And this is the second commandment of the teaching. 2 Thou shalt do no murder, thou
shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not corrupt boys, thou shalt not commit fornication,
thou shalt not steal , thou shalt not deal in magic, thou shalt do no sorcery, thou shalt not
murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born,

http://www.annomundi.com/bible/didache.pdf

Questions?

Even if God Himself said it, discussion would continue. Well, not actual discussion, but you get it.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #484 on: March 02, 2013, 01:38:33 PM »

If a woman gets pregnant, the man who impregnated her shall be killed, rather than the innocent child, because it is the man's fault she got pregnant.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #485 on: March 02, 2013, 03:28:24 PM »

The Apostles mentioned abortion? And they said the word "abortion" itself, not something else? This happened when?

 Huh



From The Didache:
Quote
And this is the second commandment of the teaching. 2 Thou shalt do no murder, thou
shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not corrupt boys, thou shalt not commit fornication,
thou shalt not steal , thou shalt not deal in magic, thou shalt do no sorcery, thou shalt not
murder a child by abortion nor kill them when born,

http://www.annomundi.com/bible/didache.pdf

Questions?

Even if God Himself said it, discussion would continue. Well, not actual discussion, but you get it.

Yeah...I get it.  Roll Eyes
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #486 on: March 02, 2013, 03:31:31 PM »

If a woman gets pregnant, the man who impregnated her shall be killed, rather than the innocent child, because it is the man's fault she got pregnant.

Now that's an interesting take on it.  But...whatever happened to "it takes two to tango?" Now, who shall be killed?  Here's a suggestion....no one.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #487 on: March 02, 2013, 03:36:31 PM »

Here's a thought: far fewer men would have to pay child support if they never shacked up with their girlfriends, or used condoms more often. Sad but true. Don't even think about having a baby with someone unless you are confident that the relationship is healthy and the other person has a reliable character. You can love anyone, but you can't always be a good parent with anyone. These days, people start young, don't know what they're doing, get an apartment together because they want to save on the bills... and a year later you see them on the Judge Judy show. Awful. There are ways to save yourself some trouble.

Ways to save yourself from trouble: Women...keep your legs crossed; Men...keep your penis in your pants; Men and Women...have sexual intercourse in the context of marriage.  (I'm not claiming any of this is necessarily "easy".  Who said life would be "easy"?)

And yeah, you're right...the Judge Judy show, from the very few little snippets of it I've seen, is pretty awful.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,744


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #488 on: March 02, 2013, 03:47:18 PM »

Here's a thought: far fewer men would have to pay child support if they never shacked up with their girlfriends, or used condoms more often. Sad but true. Don't even think about having a baby with someone unless you are confident that the relationship is healthy and the other person has a reliable character. You can love anyone, but you can't always be a good parent with anyone. These days, people start young, don't know what they're doing, get an apartment together because they want to save on the bills... and a year later you see them on the Judge Judy show. Awful. There are ways to save yourself some trouble.

If I knocked someone up, I'd ask her to marry me (even if we hated each other) so the kid would have both parents in its life, and if she didn't want to, then I'd beg her to give me full custody of it. It's called taking responsibility. Plus, single fathers are chick magnets!  Wink
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.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,744


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #489 on: March 02, 2013, 03:49:14 PM »

If a woman gets pregnant, the man who impregnated her shall be killed, rather than the innocent child, because it is the man's fault she got pregnant.

Now, now, it takes two people to have sex. This is another somewhat odd, sexist view in society. The woman is always seen as this dumb victim who was taken advantage of or fooled due to her "simple mind," and the man is always seen as this horrible manipulator who took advantage of her. In reality, both of them in most cases knew exactly what they were doing and consented to it.

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.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,174


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #490 on: March 02, 2013, 03:50:40 PM »

Here's a thought: far fewer men would have to pay child support if they never shacked up with their girlfriends, or used condoms more often. Sad but true. Don't even think about having a baby with someone unless you are confident that the relationship is healthy and the other person has a reliable character. You can love anyone, but you can't always be a good parent with anyone. These days, people start young, don't know what they're doing, get an apartment together because they want to save on the bills... and a year later you see them on the Judge Judy show. Awful. There are ways to save yourself some trouble.

If I knocked someone up, I'd ask her to marry me (even if we hated each other) so the kid would have both parents in its life, and if she didn't want to, then I'd beg her to give me full custody of it. It's called taking responsibility. Plus, single fathers are chick magnets!  Wink

Don't "knock" someone up and you won't have to marry her, even if you hated each other.  Simple!

But, your willingness to take responsibility for your actions is highly commendable, JamesR!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,744


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #491 on: March 02, 2013, 03:54:38 PM »

Because they are not married he has no legal standing. He has no right to any sort of access or decision making. For example, if the Woman becomes comatose or near death, he can't make any decisions as to her care unless she specifically had named him before hand in a living will or such the like..

Not on her behalf, but a decision about their child is different from a decision about her individual life.

Quote
No standing.. None...

Legally or morally? I'd argue from a moral standpoint that he does.

Quote
Society does not look kindly on dead beat dads..

Yeah, but they practically worship a dead beat mother's "right" to kill a father's child on the grounds that it isn't his responsibility, but when they want to have the child, it becomes his responsibility to pay child support for it.

Quote
If you father a child and dont do right by them Smiley the strong hand of the State will come down on you. You obviously don't watch the Maury Povitch show.

That's a tautology; I'm not denying how the state works. What I'm saying is that it works in a pretty bull-spitty way that is inconsistent from a logical and ethical standpoint.
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.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #492 on: March 02, 2013, 09:31:22 PM »

Here's a thought: far fewer men would have to pay child support if they never shacked up with their girlfriends, or used condoms more often. Sad but true. Don't even think about having a baby with someone unless you are confident that the relationship is healthy and the other person has a reliable character. You can love anyone, but you can't always be a good parent with anyone. These days, people start young, don't know what they're doing, get an apartment together because they want to save on the bills... and a year later you see them on the Judge Judy show. Awful. There are ways to save yourself some trouble.
This applies to women as well.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #493 on: March 02, 2013, 09:33:14 PM »

To begin with we were originally talking about a Man who was not married to her.. Sorry, he has absolutely no say so.

What difference does it make whether or not they are married? He's still the father. Children aren't just private property tossed around depending on the marital status of their parents.

Quote
An actual husband has more rights of course but ultimately the Woman is the decider.

Yeah, so it's not my child or decision when she wants to abort it, but when she wants child-support, then it's my responsibility. Makes perfect sense. Seems very matriarchial and inconsistent to me, tbh. Either the child is fully the father's responsibility as well, and thus he gets a say in whether or not she can have an abortion if he is expected to pay child-support, or he has absolutely no obligation to the child and the mother at all. You can't have both. That shifty, selfish liberal logic of "It's my freedom at your expense," isn't going to work here.

What difference does it make whether or not they are married? He's still the father. Children aren't just private property tossed around depending on the marital status of their parents.


Because they are not married he has no legal standing. He has no right to any sort of access or decision making. For example, if the Woman becomes comatose or near death, he can't make any decisions as to her care unless she specifically had named him before hand in a living will or such the like..

No standing.. None...

Society does not look kindly on dead beat dads.. That attitude is far from "liberal shiftiness". If you father a child and dont do right by them Smiley the strong hand of the State will come down on you. You obviously don't watch the Maury Povitch show.

     
So we like to lean on legalities for killing children and ignore them to do recreational drugs.  Interesting.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #494 on: March 02, 2013, 09:34:50 PM »

If a woman gets pregnant, the man who impregnated her shall be killed, rather than the innocent child, because it is the man's fault she got pregnant.
And his father for having had him, but not the mother.  She is innocent.
Logged
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 0.176 seconds with 72 queries.