Though this is still in the religion forum, it is also a political issue and a spiritual issue (which to me has some additional/different attributes than as a religious issue)
As a spiritual issue, for me, believing what I do from my years of experience, study and practice of spiritual things...the female egg and the male sperm are sacred components for the process of producing human life and to be treated as such, as well as the process.
Though I believe that human laws are ultimately meant to align with Universal/God's laws of life, ie "that all (aspects of) life (are) is sacred", as a race we are not there yet.
So...boots on the ground here, I can hold an ultimate sacred view and still desire to sincerely find common ground and understanding for meeting the needs of all people.
Though I wouldn't vote for legality of abortion, if it came up as majority in my state. I have to vote my conscience, but I can still act to uphold the vote if it was different than my conscience. I would expect to see that there was equal rights in the laws for upholding the beliefs of either choice.
when I hear that Obama is going to abolish all the laws that have come forth in the current, soon to be passed administration...that does not bode well for equal rights of beliefs of either choice.
SparklingJewel…with all due respect to you…
Such a broad utterance as “all life is sacred” does little more than dilute the meaning of the word “sacred”… reducing it to a meaningless and senseless cliché’.
Concerning the laws that have come forth in the Bush administration: “Homeland security” for instance, an infant could look at the resources of the “so called terrorist” and see that they had “shot their wad” with the hijacking of our own planes that they flew into the WTC. Again, an infant should be able to look at the act and realize that it was designed to cause America to spend itself into bankruptcy trying to guard every single asset to the point of insanity. I have never known of anyone other than Bush to be so lame as to fall into such a shallow financially devastating trap. Bush’s declaration to Americans that homeland security has worked because of no recent terrorist attacks on Americans…is liken to one bragging that his elephant repellant works because there are no elephants around.
My take on it is that there are cases in which abortion is called for. But, birth control is not one of those cases. Abortion because you had unprotected sex or your birth control failed is not reason. I don't feel that the government is taking away the rights of women, I feel that legalized abortion takes away the rights of the baby. And since they are killed, they don't get to speak up for themselves. People rationalize this to make it an ok thing to kill the 'fetus'. They never use the word for what they are- babies. I guess it's easier to kill a 'fetus' than a baby. I worked with women who have tried to commit suicide after having abortions. It does emotional harm to many women and also physical harm to them. There's a cost for abortion more than what $$ is paid. Many women feel it's the thing to do at the time out of fear, not enough money, not finished with college yet, shame, etc, only to realize years later they killed their baby and have a very hard time emotionally and many have a hard time forgiving themselves. I wonder how many of those planned parenthood people share this with girls/women. When you see a woman with half a face because she blew the other half off with a pistol because she couldn't deal with what she had done, it's something you'll never forget.
It is both. Allowing women to have an abortion takes away the rights of the unborn baby and making it illegal takes away the right of the woman to choose.
You have decided that - even though you are a big fan of small government - in this case you want big government. Just like you want big government when it comes to building armies and killing born children in Palestine and Iraq.
Because they don't count as much as a collection of cells.
Because you do not understand the biological process.
Because you get all your "facts" from a 2,000 year old book and a parochial pastor.
Jesus would be turning in his grave - if he had one
Would you like some examples of people whose lives were destroyed because they were born into an untenable situation? Or babies that were sexually abused when their mother should have had an abortion? or women who ended up killing themselves or their children because they could not cope and society and the church had shunned them?
Because once you see that you will never forget........
No one can say for sure which individual decision will be "better."
But taking away the choice is just wrong.
I support small government
ASU…you proclaim that a fetus is a baby…if that is true, then, a fertile egg must be a fetus, and so on and so forth. Exactly, how far back must a conception go before it is not actually a baby? Is it a baby when it pops out of a women’s ovary in the form of an egg? Or, does the egg become a baby when it is fertilized by male sperm? Surely, with your expertise in every field of human involvement, you can give us a simple answer to this simple question. your humble servant, Pylos
You are obviously a very caring and thoughtful person. You state your point of view very well.
Here's where I have three, separate, distinct, and serious issues to contend with:
1) taking away freedom of choice is a step backwards in civil rights.
2) illegal abortions are dangerous, do happen, and will happen more frequently should a woman's right to choose be taken away from her
3) -- and here's where I have had the most difficulty -- life is either worth something, or it isn't. Stay with me while I try to unravel this Gordian knot: respect for life is realizing that sometimes the most compassionate action is to let one life go.
Enacting a law is, by definition, a limitation of possibility. Laws do not allow for circumstance or in many cases for compassion.
I remember when I had no opinion on abortion. Honestly, I was a teen mother in the early 70s, raised in a small Kansas Town, and had not even heard of the word or deed abortion when I was going through my two teen pregnancies.
It wasn't until I moved to a larger city in Kansas, that I heard of it when my kids were 6 and 7.
I still hadn't heard big controversy, but had many friends who had had abortions; each was an emotional mess because of them, according to their own words; I was not a completely healthy young women either, having real issues with men. I still did not form an opinion. I was not politically active either.
So I ended up giving birth to two more children as a single parent.
My point being that I lived many of the controversy of choice, that a woman is better off aborting if she doesn't have this, that, or the other. I never regretted having my children, and my spiritual life has proven the challenges I faced as a single mother to be beneficial for my soul evolution, and especially that of my children.
But my life was mine, and I can't pretend that I could make a decision for another in their life.
At this point in time, I know there are women who have been harmed by having an abortion, and that they actually have been made to feel they did something wrong by admitting they feel they harmed themselves by having the abortion.
And I haven't traveled in enough circles to have heard from many that having an abortion was good for them.
I do believe that the "sides" need to inform themselves about the other sides, since they obviously have an opinion about abortion that comes from a completely different position.
ie some have more concern for the soul of the unborn, and the other more concern for the mother.
Now I have read about, and experienced that those concerned for the unborn soul have also moved to embrace and meet more of the mother's needs that made her feel that she needed to abort. But I have not read about, and experienced that those that are more concerned for the mothers needs have moved to meet the needs of the unborn soul (let alone understand what the other side means about meeting the needs of the unborn soul).
I offer to you to look at all the research information at the Elliot Institute, that focuses on post abortion effects of women and society since Roe v Wade. Even the woman that was the Roe in the case, is against abortion now, and claims she was used to create the pro abortion agenda. And look as well at the numerous women that have stood up to defend themselves for saying that abortion hurt them. I even read one the other day by a young woman that became a lawyer, she was the "product" of a failed saline solution (or whatever it is) abortion. She lived and grew up needing people to understand that she has had to deal with believing she deserved to live. She has quite a unique perspective.
If you have similar places I can read where women have given their story on abortion being good for them i would like to read them.
I think that is a good place to start; to understand each side better. I don't know about you, but I cannot separate the political from the personal. My life perspective is one of wholeness, that means to me that my personal spiritual informs my political perspective.
My centrist perspective at this point in time is that women need information and support from both perspectives... and be uncoerced/allowed to make a genuinely fully informed choice. And it looks to me that it will take all sides to help that to happen.
You are making some awfully big assumptions here.
You seem to be assuming that anyone who advocates a woman's right to choose to have an abortion is unaware that there are potentially damaging effects to the mother. Speaking personally, I am aware of these and there is no shortage of information on the subject available for anyone willing to do a little research.
A simple search on google brings up 64,000 pages listing the harmful after effects of abortion.
It is not possible to say for certainty which road taken would have the best/least damaging outcome. I am sure you can find a whole host of people who's lives suck ass because their mother chose to go through with a teenage pregnancy rather than have an abortion. But that is not really an argument for abortion.
The real question is whether the woman should be allowed the choice. On the surface you seem to think she should and seem also to be just making a case for choosing not to.
Underneath your argument it seems you are trying to make a case to have the law changed and would vote to make abortion illegal if you had the option in your state.
Now you keep accusing me of making assumptions about your political leanings, but this is what you have said recently on the subject:
So, in spite of your so-called "centrist" viewpoint, and claiming to want to see "both sides" of the argument heard. You have put yourself in exactly the same box you claim you do not fit in.
You really should try and communicate more clearly. Look at the preceding statements and tell me you believe a woman should always have the choice to abort or not.
Disguising right-wing political values is not helping any one. Least of all your desire to see "equal rights of beliefs of either choice."
Which, if you give it a moments thought, makes no sense whatsoever. If you respect the anti-abortion side and make it illegal, you are necessarily not respecting the other side's viewpoint.
People would not make these assumptions if you were more clear in your communication.
On to the next problem. Your sacred view - including the suggestion that the act of procreation (sex) is also sacred. What exactly are you [planning - sex being made illegal unless the two parties sign a form stating they will have the baby and love and look after it if their act results in a baby?
Next issue -
Unborn souls. You believe in reincarnation. Literally, there are souls hanging around a soon-to-be mother who has not yet had sex. I recall this from one of our previous conversations. Not many people believe this. In fact, I would hazard a guess that most people think this is complete garbage. Sure, you are free to believe whatever you like, but it is hardly possible to turn this into a legal argument.
And surely these unborn souls suffer no ill-effects of an abortion? They must just move on to the next available body.
There is no doubt in my mind that some women suffer ill effects after going through with an abortion.
Some women also move on with their lives, and learn and grow from the experience.
Some women destroy their lives and the lives of their children and those around them by giving birth to a slew of babies when they are ill-prepared to care for them.
Some women also move on with their lives, and learn and grow from the experience.
Now - surely your holistic view of life has lead you to believe that this also is the woman's choice? And she should be allowed to make those choices without legal interference.
respect for life is realizing that sometimes the most compassionate action is to let one life go.
This one alone justifies abortion...
You take one or two lives and you become a murderer... take the life of a thousand and you become a hero.
I wonder, indeed, if we should not be spending our time and energy arguing rather for an end to war, than for any understanding on a private issue, that is solely between a woman and her belief system, that brings no grand-scale devastation, but that may (no matter how reluctantly the woman comes to her decision) be a compassionate act, rather than a destructive one.
All I have to say is, pro-choice gives women the option of "choice", they can have an abortion if they feel that is what is best for them, or they can chose to have the baby.
Pro-Life, there is no choice, you must have the baby. Doesn't matter what "you" feel is best, you do as I say and that is that.
SJ, which one makes more sence? Many women who would not have an abortion, me being one of them, vote pro choice because I get to make one. That is what I chose and in the event that something more tragic were to happen it would be good to know that I could have an abortion in a facility that is sanitary, that I could get the emotional help I would need and to know that regardless of the choice I had made, someone is there to "help".
Pro-life voids women of their own feelings. You had a feeling that having your children as a teenager was right, and that was right for you but be in another girls/boys shoes. It is a very different world today then it was in the 70's.
And Mark is absolutely right; some children wish their parents would never had, had them to begin with because their lives suck ass and a lot of the time those kids choose suicide. Of course this is a statement made with the condition being that their parent or parents were deadbeats, unable to provide, gave them up for adoption etc...and I know the otherside may be good too. But it is a choice.
Just some thought.
My feelings exactly. I don't think abortion should be an easy choice, but it absolutely needs to be a free and safe one, and I think restricting it to cases of rape/incest/risk to the mother would put an unfair burden of proof on women who are already suffering.
Moreover, societies that restrict abortion have historically had very high rates of unsafe black market and do-it-yourself abortions, infanticide ( I did a hub on this - by some estimates as many as 15-20% of all children ever born have been deliberately murdered by their parents, and in some times and societies, closer to 50%), child neglect, and abuse. That's not a situation I'm eager to return to at all.
I agree that abortion is evil, but it's a necessary evil.
Being pro-choice gives every woman a choice, you can choose to have a child or you can choose to have an abortion. This shouldn't even be a religious decision anymore, it's a societal calamity: look at where the world is, we're over-populated, under-funded and bursting to the seams with abused and neglected children. Instead of marching to support taking my right to choose away, why don't those who are pro-life take in some of the children who are abused and neglected and give them a home and a chance to live a real life, instead of the hell they're having to endure. A lot of people shouldn't be parents, and I fully respect the right for every one of them to go down to a Planned Parenthood clinic and get an abortion, before they end up ruining more people's lives. Not everyone in America ... (or the world for that matter,) is Christian, I realize that it is against the faith to have an abortion, but legally, I don't think our laws should be based solely on Christian morality. It strikes me as being "off" in a country founded and based on principles of freedom.
--- Nicole A. Winter
Nicole...I read your comment twice...because i couldn't believe that some other person could share my feelings exactly. Your comment truly gives me a warm feeling of hope for society...
So true that many people are basically unprepared and ultimately incapable of handling the responsibilities of parenthood. Alas, these tend NOT to be the people who choose to terminate their pregnancies. I think they call that irony.
There is no doubt that the decision to either terminate or proceed with an unwanted pregnancy is gut-wrenching, even in the best of cases. Abortion should never be entered into lightly. But then, neither should parenthood. No child should ever enter this world unwanted to face certain hardship and abuse. Bringing your child into the world under those circumstances strikes me as a not only supremely selfish, but sinful. Wouldn't that "baby" be better off heading straight to heaven with God? I mean really. If your main argument is religious, that would seem to me an obvious choice.
P.S. I am a child of adoption and grateful to my parents for bringing me into the world. However, with the way adoptions are handled nowadays, I can't say I even support that unilaterally.
Mark Knowles: I love you in a very non-dirty way.
--- Nicole A. Winter
If I felt that was a real question and that you were genuinely interested in my opinion, I would answer that. But, I don't feel it is. I think you are trying to start something with me and I didn't come here to fight. I came here to answer her question. There are different views on here and no one is starting anything. It would be nice if it stayed that way I think. I honestly think no matter what I say and no matter how true and factual it is, you will attack me. I feel this because of your history with me on the forums and on my hubs.
I am exactly on topic with SP's hub title...the matter of aborting or not aborting a fetus...and since you make a statement and refuse any further discussion on it, i will answer my question for you...You apparently believe that an undeveloped fetus in the womb is the same as a healthy breathing child outside the womb, and to abort it is an act of commiting murder. If this is your thinking, and you have demonstared that it is, then, like a fetus, the human egg must be a child also. now, I have no idea where you stand in your child bearing years (nor do I care to know) but it you are in your furtile years, then every egg/child you allow to die through default (that being none fertilization) every month, by your own admission, makes you a mass murderer.
do you see the reasoning here sweetie. Its like you quoting your bible. If part of it is true, then all of it must true. No picking and choosing to suit one's own interest here allowed.
ASU...you opened the gate on the subject...and now that you see that the idea of a fetus actually being a healthy child is rediculous, you want to turn tail and run. I simply asked how far back does the conception process of child development go before it actually is "not" a child. You are the expert here, so tell us where, in the process, it is not a child, unless you don't know. and of course I am guessing that you don't have a clue. I remain your humble servant.
I will answer this pylos...*clears a large audience and her throat*
A baby is a baby when it is conceived. HUH? No, no, no...why must I go into details. A baby must first be thought of before it is a baby. This is called conception.
So birth control is not baby killing...it is a misconception.
*audience is rolling with laughter and one person stands up from the crowd and says*
But Miss Rinck, that is not natural and againts God's will and it is a sin to use birth control.
I reply, when did God say that? He says, in the Bible. I said really, I never heard of God ever talking about birth control.
But abortion is the same as killing a baby! He yells out in anger and I reply, I must be killing babies every month when I have my period.
*the choir sings angelic humm*
the man says, but...the egg needs to be fertalized by a man. I said, tell that to the virgin mary.
Sandra…your skit is not only hilarious, but rich in that priceless commodity of humor and wit…I do believe my lame question has been adequately answered. Thank you for a great performance, Pylos
Sandra, I do hope that any of what you said in this post had nothing to do with me nor my beliefs. It's apparent that neither you nor plyos knows what I believe but that y'all love to assume you do. You know what happens when you assume things, right? Abortion is a serious subject and should not be treated as a platform for your shot at a comedy routine. Babies are precious and they are gifts and should be treated as such. Not a way to get your kicks laughing at their demise. How cold and sad. I will repeat, you and pylos and most people on here have no idea as to what I believe about abortion and should not assume you do. And for MM who feels that people who don't want to murder babies should 'get a life' and 'do something postive', how do you know what anyone does in their own time? How do know people who love babies and are against abortion do not help those who need it like pregnant teenage girls? That's another assumption. I kinda thought y'all would know when an egg becomes fertilized and is then a baby since y'all have such great public school educations. Guess I was wrong. You can ask my son when it happens, he can tell you.
Whatever, you don't know what I believe and you don't have a sence of humour and if you had gotten a proper education you couldn have seen the fundamental arguement I was making with my hellarious commentary.
I agree with Mark, do your kids a favor and let them have a better education.
After these remarks, I think people can see why I would not answer them. This is how they have fun. This thread is about a serious subject and they want to make it a stand up comic thing. To me that is insulting to all aborted babies. And the things she said toward me just now is a great reason not to trust them. No one would trust this type of thing. I hope people can understand this. If someone I felt was trustworthy asked me the question, I would have gladly answered. But he is the one who started this and I have only had bad experiences with him and now with her and several more on here that are liberal and hate what I stand for. They attack me since they don't agree with me. Abortion is bad, it's murder, and I can find nothing funny about it. To me, it's heartbreaking and a silent holocaust happening in our country with government support. I have a public school education Sandra, just so you know. That's the 'proper' education I didn't get that you are referring to. I am a product of public education.
Unlike them, I know you are lying. That is because I used to believe what you believe, I used to stand outside of abortion clinics and protest. I used to be out at the grassroot level. Eventually it dawned on me that the "bondage" in our society was promoted by people like you. It was promoted by people like James Dobson, and Frank Pavone. It was promoted by people like Judy Brown. It was promoted by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church and the hierarchy of the modern Bishopric in the Evangelical Church, disguised as "ministers" without that official title.
You see, unlike them I know how very very hard you try to dissemble and lie, to hide and misdirect what it is you believe. Because the reality is you are a scared and frightened person who thinks she is in a godless world fighting the good fight for the Cause. That is who you are and that is what you represent. I know EXACTLY what you believe (but obviously not to the nth degree). When I say I know exactly I mean in plain English I know the exact mindset you possess.
Except now I know better. I know better than to do as I'm told just because "God" (translate the priesthood or the local Bible Study), says so. I know that people of your kind are far more at home with shady operations like Operation Rescue, and the extremists who kill abortion doctors in the name of "God".
I know far more about you, and no I don't assume. Also, the only way you can disprove this is by lying through your teeth (and not just spinning half truths with "mental reservation"). A lie is not just what you say, it is also what you don't say. I have found in my twenty six years that the most skilled liars are none other than Christians. It's not that a lie is always bad, would you lie if you had Jews in the Cellar? It's that Christians use "God" to sanctify their lies and they use "Jesus" as a license to lie to everyone who isn't part of their little Christian niche. After all, if you didn't lie how could you convert anyone? It's no small secret that people such as yourself like to legislate morality because people wouldn't choose it otherwise, "free will" and all. Of course if you are a Calvinist this isn't necessarily a problem for you.
WE live in The Republic For Which It Stands One Nation Indivisible With Liberty and Justice For ALL. That Republic was founded on principles which no amount of grandstanding by Christians such as yourself will ever usurp. We do not live in a raw democracy as others have asserted here (yes I am sure you supported Prop 8).
I'll leave you with a quote:
“On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind.”
You left out One Nation under God, don't get me wrong, I see what you are saying here and the point worth making yet, I find the line, One Nation under God, as directly and indisputable as part of what our Country was founded on.
The trouble with the word isn't God, as Jefferson suggested, it's in establishing a truth to God other then a basic componenet of life that is incomprehensible to the human mind.
As such regardless the problems seems that Christians seem to think this means their God, though our Founding Fathers were specific about God being only between a man and well...his God. As a personal belief and not to be imposed as law that all man shall even be governed by something that cannot be explained or proven nor disproven, as cleche' as the saying is. ugh!
Anyways, I am absolutly not in any arguement with you, just thought for a second, that not being as truthful as you know that you could be doesn't do much for the cause when you do the same.
I'm not going to argue with you. State how you feel about the subject and leave it be. I am not scared nor running anywhere. I just have more respect for the author of this thread to engage in your egging on to start a fight.
I just want to say, Mark Knowles--
This is the soundest presentation of an argument I've seen you make & I appreciate your take on freedom of choice very much.
Just a few notes: For every woman experiencing emotional trauma after having an abortion (and I suppose there are a few), there are many, many more perhaps in some ways more realistic and adjusted, who don't go into emotional meltdown and just go on with their lives. Not many of these women--for obvious reasons, some of which are judgmental attitudes spelled out here, are out and out going tell everyone they've had an abortion. (It is a very personal matter, after all.)
In example, I will mention the case of my sisters (not giving their names, obviously, for sake of privacy), now moving into their 30's. Both have had more than one abortion. All of these abortions were done within the first two months of accidental conception. One of my sisters is married and has two children. The other is single and dating. With both, it was a failure of birth control, and not irresponsibility (I guess the women in my family are ultra fertile, lol, I've chosen not to find out out of choice.)
Neither have freaked out and had their lives destroyed by guilt after an abortion. Mostly what they felt, I know, is intense relief for various reasons. Neither sister is particularly un-Godly or sinful, for that matter, either--they lead pretty standard, good citizen lives.
The fact of the matter is, an nonviable fetus IS NOT a baby. And it has never, since ancient times, been considered a full person or soul, in any legal or human rights sense. In fact, roughly 30-60% of fetuses are spontaneously aborted (nature's way often, of correcting fetal mistakes).
Of course, I was slightly angry with one of my sisters when she found herself 1 month pregnant and she had not heard of Plan B, the morning-after pill--which already has taken a lot of the angst out of birth control failure. But she didn't know, had a D&C within a month of the accident, and I fully supported her decision.
Now, there are pro-life activists (hard core cases) that would also see this kind of emergency contraception (it prevents the implantation of a zygote within the wall of the uterus if taken within 72 hours of intercourse) as 'killing' the unborn and would not give a woman and her partner that choice, either. I think they need their heads examined (I'm sorry) given all the truly horrendous things in life that exist--including child abuse, violence against women, starvation, murder, and poor education. I feel they should busy themselves with issues where there is a real cause for concern, not with people, frankly, trying to be responsible in their lives by preventing unplanned, unwanted pregnancies.
Why thank you. High praise indeed
I can string an argument together when I want to, but time has taught me it is a waste of time when speaking to certain types of people. No matter how compelling and logical the argument, when you are up against the certain knowledge that some one is speaking for god, you are wasting your breath.
I tend to lose patience with some, and resort to ridicule, and I suspect that is what you may have seen from me when coming to your first impression of me. Take a wander through the older threads and you will see similar logic to what I have used here.
Waste of time? I don't know - I am not really speaking to people like asu because I know she has all the knowledge and facts she needs.
The massive contradiction behind saying that all human life is sacred and then advocating the death penalty, the right to carry a handgun and applauding the Israeli bombardment of Gaza tells me all I need to know about these people.
Unfortunately they have latched on to abortion as another issue they feel god has an opinion on and seem to be able to ignore the enormous contradictions in their opinions. No wonder they are all ill all the time.
They also manage to turn the argument in to an issue over whether you are in favor of abortion or not.
I am not in favor of abortion. I do not encourage anyone to have an abortion.
I favor a woman's right to choose to have one if she so decides and I am well aware that it is a difficult decision with down and up sides whatever the choice made.
But that has somehow been turned into saying that I want women to kill babies.
Politics and religion...........
In general, the pro-life stance is that life begins at the moment of conception. This of course, usually depends on how 'conservative' in viewpoint the person is--the most conservative or 'religiously' (in quotes because it depends on the religion) informed often believe this.
....Well, yeah, and you know, masturbation and the spilling of seed is a grave sin. Masturbation will make you blind, lol, on a lighter note.
In my Opinion if the parent is not in a condition to take up the responsibilities of the child then they should not opt for a child at all. But rather than being irresponsible they should opt for condoms and after morning pills in such cases. Also in cases when the pregnancy is a result of rape or when the child is with problems then it is better aborted.
Let us also not forget the trauma and guilt the lady goes through after the Abortion. In some cases they even end up with complications when they really wish to have a child.
Well.... I'm glad you haven't researched that pamphlet thoroughly! Anyway, it is well known that it isn't that long or that well-written.
But you know what I want to COMPLAIN about? The pro-life demonstrators (yeah, yeah, realize the right to protest) who still crowd womens' health and gynecological facilities.
Don't matter--you can be coming in for a check up or something and they are there intimidating with their presence. God forbid you go on a day abortion procedures are scheduled. You might just get murdered, as they scream at you, "Mother! Turn away from this sinful act. We can help you and your child!" bleck, augh, spare me. Maybe they could just hold the signs and not get in people's faces?
This whole "baby killer" mantra is so irrational and annoying. Reminds me of Salem in the 1600s and the so-called "witches." Holier than thou people need to get a real life. And if they really want to save babies, they might volunteer their time to help CPS with their enormous case backloads. Or actually take in a pregnant teen and support her through the birth. Or do something, anything POSITIVE instead of pontificating at people who are exercising their legal rights.
Know what really, really gauls me? Those hypocritical MEN. Yeah, buddy. I bet you know all about how it feels to be pregnant. Oh, you don't? Well, why don't you come back when you've got some direct experience and we can talk then.. Maybe you'd change your tune about the whole pregancy/abortion decision if it was your body, not mine.
This is my main beef with the pro-life movement too. ASU talks about all these women she knows who are devastated to the point of suicide attempts after having abortions and all I can think about is how these women were allowed to have so little support that it came to that! First, if they weren't ready to have a baby and the pregnancy didn't result from a failure of birth control, why weren't they using birth control and/or why were they allowing themselves to be pressured into having sex they weren't ready for? No sex ed? No self respect? There's already a problem here and we haven't even gotten to the actual abortion. Second, if they didn't really want the abortion, why were they made to feel that it was their only option? Where were family and friends who could have helped support these girls instead of leaving them a choice between abortion and welfare? And third, after having it, why weren't they supported emotionally, instead of being exposed to endless rants about how abortion stops a beating heart and women who choose abortion are baby killers? I'd probably blow the side of my face off too!
I'll start believing that pro-life advocates are really pro-life and not just cynically exploiting an emotional issue to get votes/control women's sexuality when they start advocating for comprehensive sex ed and easy access to birth control, support programs that allow women (especially teenagers and single mothers) who experience unplanned pregnancies to continue their education and/or get inexpensive, high quality childcare so they can continue supporting themselves without going on welfare, and stop waving pictures of aborted fetuses and screaming "baby killer!" in the faces of women who have gotten or are about to get abortions.
Well when religion and legislation is mixed then it becomes a very difficult combination. When killing a "Baby" is unfortunate in certain aspects where the particular majority religion advocates it then Killing/Consuming a Cow in India/Nepal or Killing/Consuming a Pig in certain Muslim countries could also be legalized in those countries.
Societies have personal laws(as per religious beliefs) and other laws. Should abortion be included in personal laws is the question. If it is included then within that community should it be strictly enforceable. When we have answer to this question then we can proceed further. When on any issue we try to have our set of beliefs/values being made the "law" of the land then it may not be conducive for a heterogeneous society.
This is a really touchy subject, so I agree with you, allshookup, let's keep it very cordial. I appreciate your comment, earlier pylos26, I'm happy someone agrees with me, because I know I'm probably in the minority. allshookup: What happened to your friend is a tragedy. I'm very sorry to hear about that While I agree that abortion shouldn't be used as birth control, I hold a very unique and unpopular belief that no child should be born unplanned. If someone is uneducated and doesn't understand that taking an antibiotic while on the pill renders their pill useless, I don't think they should possibly have the rest of their lives ruined because of it. On the other hand, pylos26, when do you think a baby becomes a baby? I've been pregnant, I didn't call my daughter my fetus when she was in the womb, I called her my baby. She was my baby, to me... I dunno. I'm not sure the fetus / baby factors into the decision, (a very hard one,) to have an abortion. We make choices and we have to deal with the consequences of those choices, whether it be to have an unplanned pregnancy terminated or to have a child we haven't prepared for. If abortion was made illegal it'd still be performed, you'd just be putting the mother's life at greater risk.
--- Nicole A. Winter
I think that's taking it a bit far - there is a difference between "unplanned" and "unwanted".
My apologies, LondonGirl, I know your little one was a wonderful surprise. I should have clarified my position, obviously being unplanned doesn't necessarily lead to being unwanted, however, I believe that children should be born with some kind of foresight in mind. I know this is no comparison to make, but it's the best one I can think of: You wouldn't buy a car without doing some research first. Parenting, like the art of buying a car does *not* come naturally to most people. Every once in awhile there is the rare woman or man who was MADE to have babies or bring children into the world, they're naturals at it. For the rest of us, though, we should take some parenting classes, read some books and spend time with the kids of other family members to know what we're getting ourselves into. I wrote a hub on what I believe it takes to become a parent here:
I realize you've read it, so I think you understand, (hopefully) how committed I am to the concept of effort that bringing a child into this world should be. My apologies if I offended you, I appreciate you calling me on my comment, it was short sighted.
--- Nicole A. Winter
WE did have 9 months odd to get used to the idea!
But we didn't do parenting classes, read books, or spend much time with other children. Partly because we are both the oldest in our families, and Isaac's the first grandchild on either side. My mother was my help, in person and on the end of a phone. Otherwise, we deal with him as we'd want to be dealt with if we were a child, and love him, and hope for the best.
I think parenting does come reasonably naturally, though.
Nicole…I’m not qualified to answer your question as a professional…but commonsense tells me that a fetus is the product of a “work in process”, if you will, of one of Mother Nature’s phases of a diligent effort of creation, aimed at the completion of a whole infant, child or baby at birth.
I don’t suppose it would be improper for one to refer to her unborn as her baby, but technically a baby may not be fully developed until after its first breath, and of course some aren’t then. A fetus may be called a baby but a baby may not be called a fetus, so there is a definite transition of the term of “fetus” into the term of “baby” between the very last stages of confinement until after birth.
I believe the only possible existing means of “proof of the status of term” lies in a scientific test known as falsification. That is that the only existing means of proving that a thing is true is to prove that the thing is not false. So, in the absence of a scientific falsification experiment, a layperson’s only seemingly absolution may be of one’s own commonsense. Pylos…
Hi Nicole, although my performance was of a humorous nature, I was also making a point about when a baby is a baby and what exactly conception is.
Seems like you know what it is. When "you" yourself have concieved in yourself, your mind etc.. that what you have is not a fetus, it is a baby.
I want a baby... *frowns at the gameruterus*
On a different note: Abortion: Every teenage girl's method for not becoming Juno.
Honestly I am against abortion and they should only be allowed for the following reasons:
Rape, and Incest as for running out sleeping with someone and finding that you are pregnant and then aborting to me is wrong. All of us know how children are conceived and they did invent contraceptives and birth control to prevent those types of situations, and if that does not work abstinence is even better , as they have toys to control those types of urges so that you do not find yourself in that situation.
Presumably you are also recommending some sort of inquisition to determine whether or not a woman qualifies for these?
Perhaps a panel of twelve men interviewing the woman in question with a video recorder, surgical swabs and DNA testing ?
Maybe then "they" will allow it.
Precisely. Paternalistic laws cannot be enacted to ascertain who should and should not have an abortion -- essentially telling grown adults what they can and cannot do with their own bodies, in their most private and intimate relationships and concerns.
I am happy to see a man, lol, and of a certain age, who completely gets it - but then I think that is part of it. If anyone has had real life experience with abortion (and I don't mean dealing with those women who are emotionally vulnerable anyway) or issues surrounding abortion, I think they are more likely to understand what it is really about.
To those women and MEN whose birth control never failed, or who feel they'd have been extra blessed with three or four extra full term pregnancies financially, morally, and socially, or had the 'strength' never to have had sex --aren't you lucky. (BTW, the last statement was ironic in nature.)
Oh Mark you know what I mean and by the way I love the new pic, mysterious very mysterious. You remind me of an undercover agent. Maybe I have been watching to much CSI.
I'm sorry your public education is lacking. But, that's not something I can do anything about. What you said about that being taught no where in public schools is one of the reasons I am homeschooling. I want him to have more knowledge than your teachers share about important things that everyone should know the truth about. You just proved a great point why people should homeschool. Thanks!
yeah...I'm always sticking me foot in me mouth...can you let us know something about your qualifications as an elementary teacher...you know...state teaching certificate, etc. how bout religion...what brand of religion do you subscribe to?...
just curious...please don't allow me to pry...
Do you really think I buy into you being really interested in me or my son when all you do is trash me and everything I say and do your best to pick fights with me no matter what subject is being discussed? Come on. You have proven yourself to me already. You care nothing about me or what qualifications I have or don't have. You are only trying to start something else.
o.k. I admire both of you dearly , Pylos be nice as she is entitled to her opinion and honestly I wish she could be my son's teacher as she sincerely has morals.
allshookup: Pylos is really a great person as they are only trying to understand and they are asking for clarity.
Truce please as you to are wonderful and truly entitled to your thoughts as this discussion can make anyone heated, always has and always will.
Thanks AEvans for those kind words...you hit the nail on the head bout me just asking for "clarily" ...I just wish that she would say if she is a licensed teacher or not...Obviously, others are concerned too about the education of the young that will someday run this country.
I mean why does it have to be a secret about one's qualifications and maybe what flavor of religion one aspires to.
ASu's method of systematically dodging simple inquiries naturally give rise to suspicion.
And why in the world would an old hen make it a habit of dancing and clucking around directly in the entrance to the fox's den?
It shouldn't be a secret and I am certain that once she feels comfortable she will share it, I know you and you are a kind person you are simply looking for clarification on a very touchy subject.
In regards to why in the world? Sometimes people do not realize that they are doing such and simply go in with a warm heart without any ill intention.
About education I too am concerned however I do believe she is a qualified teacher with a degree and she is a Christian as I have seen her on other forums, I sincerely hope this answers your question my friend.
Remarks like that is why I don't feel he genuinely cares and is looking to attack me for whatever my answers are. He has done this on the forum many times and he does it on my hubs also. That's why I hesitate to answer his questions. I have answered his questions before only to be attacked. And I don't come here to argue. I come to state what I feel about whatever thread or hub I am on.
Allshookup: Pylos has a very kind heart , you only have to open your heart like a Christian and you would not feel attacked , he honestly has a very soft side just like you and I do. Don't feel attacked just respond with kindness remember WWJD? We do not fight fire with fire as you will get burned. I have felt that way with others and I just step in to God's shoes.
You seem like a nice person. And I appreciate what you are trying to do. But, I don't think you realize the history I have with him. He comes to my hubs only to attack. Never to learn or be civil. I am only protecting myself from more attacks by not giving more ammo to him or Sandra or Mark or Mike or anyone else who disagrees with me. I'm glad he has been kind to you, but he has been the opposite with me. And I don't think Jesus wants me to give people who hate me ammo to use against me.
For you, AEvans, I will answer. I do have a college degree and am liscensed to teach (I taught in a public school and that's when we decided that it was not where I wanted our son. The public schools here are in horrible shape. So so sad.). We go to a Baptist church, but the chruch we go to is independent, it's much different than most Baptist churches you will ever go to. We do not believe the same doctrines normal Baptist churches believe. Also, if anyone out there is interested in homeschooling, parents don't have to have a college education and be liscensed to teach in Mississippi. In many states you don't have to. You have to register you child/ren and be accountable for them in Mississippi. I don't know the laws in all states. We are also a members of the HSLDA and have been for 9 years. I am now going to bed. I am answering these questions for you, AEvans, because you seem genuine. We will now see for what reason he asked and how they respond to it. I'm going to bed now. I have an early day tomorrow at the doctor's office. Have a good night.
Aw, guys... c'mon. Just let it drop at this point. Take a step back from the keyboard and calm ya'all's self down. WWJD? Love each other.
--- Nicole A. Winter
Such childish ways of so many here. Every time ASU posts in a forum, she is bombarded with the order to send her son to public school. It is time to stop playing games and trying to control her life and the life of her son.
Stop trying to make her believe what you want her to believe. It behooves me how so many talk about having their own opinion about something refuse to let someone else state their opinion about the same subject.
1Co 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1Co 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Sir Dent -
No one is stopping anyone from having an opinion. But when you and a few others state archaic opinions that are so out of whack with the modern world, you are likely to come in for some criticism and people are going to point out the obvious worthlessness of those opinions.
I feel strongly about child abuse, having been abused as a child myself, and will continue to speak out against it.
And if you do not see the wonderful irony in telling some one to stop trying to make some one believe something they cannot see and then quoting out-of-context passages from a bronze-age book that you spend your entire life trying to persuade people to believe.............
What is wrong with being effeminate anyway? Is that another guaranteed-to-prevent-you from entering heaven type of sin?
You guys are so funny it is not even funny.
Sorry gg - can't resist
Speaking out against child abuse is one thing. I speak out against it myself. When you abuse others in order to state your opinion, how can it help?
Every time you write a word or make a case that I am not living my life correctly and will be punished you are abusing me and every one who does not agree with your ridiculous beliefs.
And it is no good using the usual, "well, I did not say this, god did when He wrote the bible," argument.
Stand up and take some responsibility for your own actions and opinions instead of blaming it on your invisible friend.
And do not be surprised when people take offense and return the compliment.
My first reply was above just before GG';s comment on this thread. Go back through the posts and see how much abuse has been directed at ASU and possibly others. No matter what she says, you and a few others start going on about her son.
Trollish behavior is what it is. It doesn't bother me that you insult me. I am used to it.
I know that the Bible offends. It offends me also, but it is the truth whether it offends or not. To have an opinion is one thing. To berate others for having a different opinion is another.
I did read a lot of comments on this thread as they were posted. From what I gather. many state that the child will be abused if not aborted. Where is the logic in that? There are children all around the world that are not abused. Nothing in this life is guaranteed. Life is hard on everyone.
By the same token, the baby who is aborted might be a future president or similar leader. Might be the one to bring peace to the Middle East. One never knows and will never know of babies are aborted.
Freedom of choice never seems to care about the child (foetus).Only the mother. That may account for a small %ge, but certainly not the majority.
Sir Dent - you are twisting the tone of this discussion and no one said all babies that are not aborted will be abused.
I know this is the christian way, but please go back and read what was actually said.
And there you go hiding behind god again. It is not your opinion, it is god's.
Stand up and be counted. It is not the truth. It is your personal opinion. Be a man and admit it.
LOL Mark. I truly believe that you can't help yourself.
Who am I to tell God what His opinion should be? God's word is truth. It is never a lie nor has it eve been a lie.
I might be wrong about many saying they will be abused. I will go back and read through. I do recall some saying that though, and if I recall you stated it yourself on at least one occasion.
Sir Dent -
I am trying to explain to you why this might be taken the wrong way. I will try again.
I do not believe in god. I do not believe the bible was written by anything other than men not unlike myself.
When I read the bible, I read something very, very different than you do. Here is a quick precis (I am actually going to come out of hub-writing retirement to do this properly when I get the time):
There is no external God
God is a man-made device
God is used to subjugate other men by evil men
All men can be evil or good or both
Churches are evil and useless
Men who use the word of god to threaten others are evil and doing the work of the non-existent devil
Be wary of men who threaten with god's words and take no responsibility for themselves
So. As far as I am concerned, if I wanted to get all religious -
You are satan and evil
And I will fight with you - Just like it tells me to in the bible.
And yes, I can back all this up with scripture, but as you may recall I do not do that because people like you always manage to twist it and find some other reference that allows you to "Interpret scripture using scripture."
Be a man - stand up and take responsibility for your own opinions.
I have a question.
If a statement is made, public in nature. Not aimed specifically at anyne (you). Why take offence?
You make very public (and , sometimes very negative, offensive) statements about anyone outside of your opinions. I take no offence.
Are you THAT sensitive?
Well, as you may have noticed, I tend to stick with the maxim, "do unto others as they do unto you." And you will have noticed that the tone of my replies to you is generally different to the tone I use with some others......
Although, when some one says "All who do not believe in christ as their personal savior are going to burn in hell and are living their lives against the wishes of god and are sinners."
How is this not aimed specifically at me?
I don't know. You seem to respond to those "general" statements as though they were aimed at you.
OK - Hypothetically, how about if I say this?
"All christians are lying murderers"
Would that apply to you even though it is not aimed specifically at you?
And let's see if anyone takes this as something I said
Well you act as though she never does the same things. She is pretty adiment about not liking anyone who thinks differently from her.
She has said it a few times. Plus while a lot of people can see and understand what she is saying, she likes to take it upon her judgment box and insist that she knows and everyone else is just evil.
I only got annoyed because she practically called me a heartless baby killer for believing that every women should be allowed to chose what is right for herself and her baby.
Doesn't matter that I said, I believe that every women should have the right to chose etc...I myself, would not have an abortion but it is good to be able to have a choice.
That's all. Then she assumed that I was making fun of her or calling her names, which she always does and it gets to be irritating.
In the words of Inigo Montoya:
"I do not think it means what you think it means."
SirDent, click here.
Anyway, yet another argument thread in the religion forum. Are you guys proud?
I am a child of God. You are abusing me. Therefore you ARE guilty of child abuse, and you "deserve" all the wrath of God for it!
Sarcastic humor sux. No offence intgernded!
Having read through all the posts up to this point, I, as usual, have another wholy different perspective on the issue of abortion.
The soul. The soul of an individual is my point. The soul that is the spirit of our very being of existence is my point...that it is sorely ignored and abused.
The soul exists before conception, the sou is eternal, except when it gets lost from the abuses of humanity in their non-recognition of it as a living essence that needs to be loved and accepted.
Each soul has a purpose in life, a purpose that is the sole drive for that soul to want to be born...to need to be born, usually, regardless of the parental environment it may be born into.
Because the opportunity to have a life in a body is the first big hurdle to pass, it seems the most important to me. Seriously...where would we be if we didn't have a body to live in?!!!
When we get past all the human reasoning and logic for accepting abortion as a "necessary evil", or the need for abortion as the answer to human weaknesses, or the religious points that are trying to be made (but because they are spiritual in nature they are not easily expressed for understanding to secular minds), we still have the soul and its need for evolution to higher realms of consciousness, period.
It is not the souls fault that is was conceived in whatever circumstance...give her/him the opportunity to live a life !
Whatever it takes to teach humanity healthier respect for oneself and the soul of others, it will be psychologically healthier....WHEN, we teach children respect for the process of life and living, so that they will take the self initiative to prevent a pregnancy by considering themselves above the instant gratification of their base sexual urges that can create a life.
Teach the children respect for themselves by providing the environments for lifting up their lives and believing they deserve greater opportunity...but first there has to be a life there to consider!
Think about it. Over 40 million souls in the US alone, have not had the opportunity to create their own lives...to be here to discover and bring forth new ideas and answers to the world problems by accomplishing their reason for being, their purpose in life.
Let us make the whole point a focus for providing the soul a chance to live. When we respect the soul...which is the spirit of our feeling world as an individual, then the youth and adults will respect themselves and each other more.
We need to change the perspective to one of giving our youth what they need to prevent pregnancy and be psychologically healthier and productive in life...but that self respect and respect for others comes first.
Get rid of all the worthless sinner putdowns and the putdowns of peoples ideas of God (those two attitudes themselves that continue, by the adults that are suppose to be setting an example of how to love)...and love people in their circumstances, which means give them the support they need to respect themselves before pregnancy, to respect unborn life as innocent regardless of their means of being conceived, to protect unborn life and give it a chance to live, it is not that souls fault it was conceived...it seems to me the lack of respect is the cause and core of the problems on the planet.
When we raise up the spirit of the soul as paramount in life and give the growing generations the support they need to do better for themselves, abortions will naturally subside...abortions are a ragged haphazard band-aid, leaving all the edges exposed to infection. The wounding is what needs to stop.
thank you GG...I love you, too!
Truly my heart is heavy with such anti-love being heaped upon others. I am not perfect, by any means, but we have so many other ways we could be dealing with things instead of continuing to be stuck in the same old rhetoric.
SJ, although I am sympathetic to what you have expressed, you seem to believe that your readers share your assumptions about existence which are, among other things, as follows:
1. The existence of soul and spirit
2. The existence of a higher purpose beyond ones worldly desires
3. The distinction between right and wrong.
I happen to share your assumptions SJ, but you have a powerful burden of proof to overcome when the secularists and socialists hurl their abuse and mockery--which is why I myself don't throw my pearls, so to speak...all you can do is point the way and fight them on more solid ground, which is why I set forth constitutional arguments. You will note that when they don't have a substantive argument they make personal attacks or just mock.
What I find most disturbing is that many here don't even want to permit your perspective a fair hearing, and so they hide behind mockery, emotional rhetoric or the unconstitutional decrees of judges--judges who impose their existential assumptions on a nation with widely divergent political, religious and social perspectives. The population of each respective state should have the right to make its own decision on how and to what extent abortion should be regulated. There should be a free marketplace of ideas where everyone has an opportunity to speak their peace and try to attempt to convince their fellows of the justice of their perspective. As long as usurping judges impose their will on the people, and deprive the People of the opportunity to resolve the issue FOR THEMSELVES through the democratic process, there will never be consensus or harmony on this issue.
Dear, I am 50 years old, do you really think I believe others share my assumptions?...but that should stop me from speaking ?
I think what you do is equally important, and no less or more valid than my perspective.
No, all perspectives are important...and they do affect others. It is never pointless to say what you feel and what you believe. In fact, that is what makes us a whole human/divine being, right?
It was when we stopped trying to understand/contemplate all the perspectives that has caused the problems.
I happen to share the ‘assumptions’ that you have listed above here.
We simply have a distinctly different understanding of the facts, philosophies, and history surrounding this issue. (And I’m being generous, given your rather simple analysis agreements, and parochial legal arguments—which is not being derisive—just truthful.)
Your hub war is in the making. No worries.
Anyway around it, you will need to be able to play with the big boys and girls in your future life’s work, so good in some form will come from it. And! I need a workout other than biking to keep me occupied.
I eagerly await your hub. Thus far, I have only seen liberal talking points, emotional rhetoric and personal attacks. I have yet to see ANY constitutional arguments or legal analysis from you or those supporting your perspective. I regret that you, in your humble opinion, deem my interpretation of the 14th Amendment as "parochial" as it appears you and a few of your conversational partners do not understand the importance of separation of powers in our political system.
I must admit you are becoming more entertaining by the day.
And by any stretch of the imagination you have not really voiced any argument about anything other than to bleat on about liberals and socialists, and accuse any one who disagrees with you of mocking you. I think perhaps you want the politics forum rather than the religious one.
I personally am a big fan of the constitution. The writers of that document are certainly to be admired. Ensuring that religion should have no say in the government, and written in a way that satisfied the religious zealots of the day.
Fantastic stuff. Clever men.
I think you are missing the point though. Much as you attempt to disguise your intentions, the simple fact is that this is a matter of personal choice for the woman involved. No government should have the right to take away that choice, be it on a country, state, city or street level.
It is rather interesting that you feel you should be able to have an opinion on what a woman does with her own body. I wonder what makes you think you have that entitlement?
Perhaps you crave a return to the traditional values - slavery ?
This is a rather broad interpretation. Why don't you read the TEXT of the 1st Amendment that speaks on this issue:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Note that my argument has nothing to do with CONGRESS making any law respecting the establishment of a religion. I emphatically do not endorse a law requiring everyone to be catholic or atheist, or to worship in any particular manner. I'm talking about the Supreme Court and State Legislatures. If you really had any depth of knowledge about our Founders, you would know that they were DEEPLY religious and that their political perspectives were anything but divorced from their spirituality. If you don't believe me, read the Declaration of Independence. When you are done google searching, please tell me whence the writer of this document derives the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Tell me what gives you the right to say that this is a matter of personal choice for women when the parties involved in this enterprise include many individuals and entities beyond the mother and her body?---For example: The gov't when people seek funds for abortion procedures, doctors who determine the necessity of the procedures, feminists who want to impose their political agenda on the people, the ACLU who wants to impose its Marxist agenda on the people, fathers, communities and, last but not least, the unborn. Even the Supreme Court recognizes that there is a COMPELLING STATE INTEREST [google it] in protecting the lives of the unborn. The State gov'ts under their police powers have the right and obligation to regulate the "health, safety and morals" of its people through their state legislatures. This includes regulating abortion.
I crave a return to Constitutionality and democracy.
You crave no such thing.
Although you are being deliberately obtuse to turn the discussion away from personal choice I suspect.
Not quite sure how you manage to drag the state or Marxism into what is a purely personal choice.
Unless you are suggesting that the state government look after unwanted babies. I assume that is also what you are advocating? Or does the COMPELLING STATE INTEREST stop at birth? Sounds a little socialist to me.
You still didn't answer my question, and I guess you will not.
Love the constitution by the way. Keep the religious zealots out of government. Great idea from those atheists that wrote it.
The Bill of Rights was written by James Madison who was Episcopal, according to Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta … _of_Rights
He was as interested in keeping government out of the church's business as well - it was a dual pronged clause ... No Establishment and No Prevention.
Some people like to cite the first and ignore the second ... while others ignore the first and focus on the second.
Not that I would ever accuse you of bais Mark ...
Oh no, I am well aware of what it says.
I can see the meeting now. "Tell you what guys, let's promise the religious zealots a total separation of church and state so that they will not be interfered with by the government in practicing whatever religion they wish............ None of them will think about the fact that it will be a two way street."
I understand that there are a variety of OPINIONS concerning constitutional arguments and use there of. And I think all the players who are in the know realize this,
So, that's it for now--play with the other 'conversational partners' and don't bug me further. Some of us have jobs and cannot write out lengthy points at a moment's notice.
I might have had to use different words to express what you said, but the truth of it is deeply profound. Thank you for saying it.
She has a kind heart too, let's embrace and allow others to be expressive as although I understand you and so many others does not mean that everyone will look at things the same. Some take things to heart and others going in with an open mind. She just like yourself and all of my buddies on here has a really great soul.
Sure aEvan, believe it not, I even told her myself that I thought she had a kind heart and meant well and then she said that all that stuff about loving people uncondtionally was pretty much bullshit and that she doesn't soo...
And she said that on the Obama is the Anti-Christ hub. No kidding, go look for yourself.
Anyways, enough about that I said what I wanted to say, I still think she needs help.
I didn't know that and I will check it out as Obama is not the Anti-Christ, nobody will know when the Anti-Christ will come as he supposedly comes from the Middle East. I wonder why she gets so upset, as she does mean well? God will humble her heart as he did mine and I used to be the same exact way, many moons ago. I have seen so much life and death as a Nurse that I appreciate the here and now. Thanks for letting me know as I will check it out.
I am just wondering...
Nick, ASU, Sir Dent etc... do you really believe you have a right to say what I can or cannot do with my own body.
What part of my body or that of my unborn (hypothetical) baby is yours?
I absolutely do, and so does the Supreme Court when they say in Casey v. Planned Parenthood that State Legislatures have a legitimate state interest in the life of the unborn.
And if do you feel you have an absolute right to do what you want with your body and your unborn baby, where does that right come from?
It comes from my own free will that God so graciously gave to everyone to make their own choices.
So you believe that the life of something that has not been born, is more important that the one who is already living and breathing. Already here. You are saying that my life is less important then the one not born yet?
Let me ask it this way, hypothetically, if I choose to kill someone (a new born baby) an orphan without parents - A person you don't know do you have the right to put me in jail? If I use my hands, my gun, my knife and kill someone nobody knows why should it be anybody's business?
If this orphan has no family - it's not like anybody would miss them ... if they were a ward of the state, I'd just be saving the tax payers money ... right?
This is not however, an issue that can or should be addreseed logically, socially or even legally. This is a quesiton that needs to be resolved one individual at a time by other individuals who love them.
I actually only think the real issue here is whether or not it is ok for a womens rights to be taken away.
Not all people who are pro- choice are pro abortion but everyone who is pro-life is against choice.
I do volunteer work for a local pro-life ministry. We focus primarily on care and education. Yes, there is an attempt to influence choice, but sometimes the choice is made to abort anyway. When that choice is made, there is grief and pain.
Often, when the woman has made that choice there is pain, regret, depression and more. These same counselors are there with words of healing and forgiveness.
Choices have consequences and quite often those consequences are not obvious before the choice is made.
I am against abortion ... but I dont' believe that changing the law will prevent it. I believe love, education and understanding will save more lives than if the supreme court overturns Roe v. Wade tommrow.
I understand that it is a painful choice to make too, I don't know that anyone could do it without regards to their emotional distress.
I am also against abortion, but I am also for choice. I am much like you. I don't want people to hurt but if they make that choice (which they will regardless) it is better to just help and at least save one life, then lose both because of unsanitary procedures and stuff.
*cough* Did I stumble into the politics forum accidentally?
Come on guys..
"The name of American, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion" ...and later: "...reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle..."--George Washington in his Farewell Address
"We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!"--John Adams and John Hancock
“The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”--John Adams
“ He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all… Our forefathers opened the Bible to all.”--Samuel Adams
“God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel” –Benjamin Franklin at the Constitutional Convention of 1787
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” --Thomas Jefferson (excerpts are inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in the nations capital)
Guess you take credit then, for the what about 200 wars, patriotic america has waged.
Guessin' here for nickny79, but seems like some kind of national religious morality, that disallows abortion.
But just to even things up -
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” Treaty of Tripoli signed by John Adams 1797
“I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved — the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!” Johm Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.” Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association January 1802
“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise....During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.” James Madison
"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies." Benjamin Franklin
Clever men all
I could go on, but I have no idea what this has to do with taking a woman's rights away by force.
Me? I favor less government interference. Not a big fan of big government.
Speaking for religious types in general, a theory would be that God is a superior ideal divorced from mankind. Easier for a man to adopt superior ideals than for a woman, who will generally remain more in touch with the natural self, such as child bearing will insure.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Dr. Johnson.
This 'fight', we all know, is about how those who look at things in a very literal fashion will interpret what they will to their very one-sided advantage and their wish to impose those beliefs by law onto everyone. Which, no matter what instrument is used--enacted at the state or federal level--is the very definition of totalitarianism.
It is also, in the case of Nickny (who accused others of mocking) making a mockery of the educated US electorate by trying to obfuscate and intimidate (supposedly, lol) with legal, theological, and philosophical 'knowledge' he thinks others do not have. It is a stance; it is synthetic & I am sorry for any vulnerable young women who in real life may one day be effected by either his legal stance on abortion, or his attitudes toward women and cheap sex in general.
1. If they want to pull the ethics and religion card on the immoral liberal 'sinners,' they really need to look into their own souls.
2. If a lawyer wants to be taken seriously, then he should never assume arrogance when this, a fault, is uncalled for and most importantly, when it may just lose him his case.
Nickny--I assume you know that there are a couple different definitions of parochial. Pls. see dictionary. ( I also think you are just cranky because you are in NYC and hate it and if you actually had a woman you were close to, your views might be a little different.)
Knol & others--Surprisingly (and this may come to a shock to other 'Catholics' out there, not mentioning any names), religious scholars in past history were very divided on the issue of abortion, the nature of the soul, etc. ....The attitudes toward women in regards to 'Godliness' that Knol suggests, are in fact, examined in women's history scholarship. One theory suggests the myth that men are more 'Godlike' and women are lower creatures was developed by ancient societies because men felt left out because of women's great life-giving capacity. So, they developed a 'death' culture and invented a God that would keep women in their place to make themselves feel better.
Well, I can just invision the future of America run by fundamentalist Christians who will be prancing around the churches rejoicing about how God had made it possible for them to run the world etc...and then God comes and says, Sorry....you don't get to go to Heaven with Me God because your heaven is right here.
So when God comes and picks up the rest of us "sinners" and swifts us up into some Heavenly place where only good things exist. They will remain here on Earth given everything they ever asked for and still they will cry...
But Lord our God, we did everything you said for us to do and promised us our reward was in Heaven. God replied...did you love your fellow man as yourself, did you opress them and make them feel bad, did you come try to come between me and them? Did you accept them for exactly the way that they are just as I had accepted you?
They answer, yes but...and God says, exactly but....
Amen, Sandra. And 'prancing' is right.
Every read The Handmaid's Tale, out of curiosity?
One of the weird things about them is that they really feel it is their right to point out everyone's moral failings. Those of more liberal views generally don't do this--perhaps because they know it isn't an adequate argument, perhaps because it is against their religion, lol, but seriously--and anyway, point blank, I don't think we actually have that much to fear from this camp of thinking.
Otherwise, Mrs. Moose Head Barbi would be the sitting VP right now, planning to ban naughty books and refusing to pay for the medical exams of women who have been raped in a 'brilliant' political manuevering to further the pro-life cause. Hmmmm, seems like that line of thinking was universally panned and lost the conservatives the race.
Probably not good thinking (?)
I've read the Haindmaid's Tale. It's 3rd rate feminist propaganda--a insipid tale of martyrdom.
Yeah, tell that to the literature profs, award givers, readers and writers who actually know something.
And BTW, the strength of that book in my opinion, as I admit it is heavily allegorical, is in the portrayal of the divisions that male fascists (and fascists in general) usually come up with in regards women or other 'ideas.' Because that kind of separation is about ideas, not a vibrant reality.
I suppose, similar to the way you view (and spout about) Marxism.
Once again we resort to personal attacks--because substance is lacking. Well said Lita...you're very convincing.
It seems to me that you hide your personal attacks within the very structure of your sentences and thought, and I am not fooled by it.
I also notice that you usually fail to respond to ANY of the substance (I wrote almost a page there) concerning theological perspectives on abortion through history, and myths detailed from a women's history perspective on big religion God.
You also must know that you are gonna need more than dry constitutional arguments approaches to win anything (BTW--that means everything in life, too.) I believe some lawyers are not afraid to use emotion as a perspective? Just what I've read.
And my thoughts towards your very obvious feelings about women are my valid thoughts. Why, does that sting? Machiavelli/Don Juan has, oh my god, feelings? Anyway, we all know us babykillers HAVE none.
Anyhow, this is not my CASE (actually, writers refer to it as their research & work). Just defending the 'conversation partners.'
Well I am still waiting for Nick to answer a simple question.
Why he thinks he has any say over what I or any other woman can or cannot do with her body?
I don't have any say directly--my state legislature does (and every other state legislature) pursuant to its constitutional police powers to regulate the health, safety and morals of ALL its citizens.
His argument amounts to the fact he thinks he is right (probably religiously informed and a priori knowledge, cuz he says nothing else) and will use a constitutional argument to enact this fascist will on everyone, all the while in the name of 'democracy.'
He also thinks women are like, foreign creatures and such, and looks at them like prey cuz he can't relate otherwise....lol. That gives you limited exposure and understanding of issues regarding them.
And want to say, I have fun arguing, and I think he does, too, given what he has written, thus he should not play the 'wounded personal attack' card.
Oh yes, my personal favorite saying, "personal attack". I don't know how much more personal it can get when someone is trying to take away another person, civil, living right, which basically only comes down to your body.
If they take that away too, well...I will be a stow away on a NASA flight into space and hopefully never have to come back.
There is no place left to go. lol
What? And stop saying woman are people, we have a right to our own bodies? It is a discussion that never seems to go anywhere but around and around. But what would you do, GG?
Just let them keep informing others who are easily persuaded, that it is ok to take away peoples rights?
Anyways, I know you mean well. It is one of those things that I feel deserves attention all the time because if we let keep going the way I think it is going; just as gay rights were yanked from under their feet, soon womens rights will be also.
I think that deserves a sigh.
I'm just tired of seeing every thread in this section turn into some kind of underhanded bashfest. (Not blaming you, Sandra.)
Women are people. We're all people. I use people in substitution for the word human being.
Honestly, I know for a fact that we can have a lively debate without resorting to ad hominem attacks - can we try that? For one thread at least? Maybe for more?
by Jackie Lynnley 2 years ago
I read this was true and I just have to know if it is, please! Please provide links to prove what you say. Surely we are not going to be aborting babies ready to come into the world fully developed and healthy?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 7 years ago
liberalization and the broadening of women's reprodutive freedoms, especially in terms of a woman's right to choose and the issue of contraception? What makes some conservative men view a woman's greater reproductive freedom and/or choice is an affront to "morality" and "family...
by Kathryn L Hill 2 years ago
Presently, a woman has, by law, the freedom to end her pregnancy. After all, its her life and her body. Is this issue, free-choice abortion, a matter of politics? Social science/politics is about what is good for society as a whole. Is abortion good or bad in the light of what is best for...
by A Thousand Words 9 years ago
Hello, fellow hubbers! So, this is something that's been bothering me for a while. First, I'd like to open that I am not a christian or religious person. I am simply me, a person trying to understand what people's stances on the matter and why it is a constant debate. To me, the answer is obvious,...
by Credence2 9 years ago
Do you think that the ‘pledge" taken by GOP presidential candidates Santorum and Gingrich to support a constitutional amendment prohibiting all abortions even in cases of rape and incest is a sell out to women and constitutes a dire threat to the principle of Women’s Reproductive Rights?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 7 years ago
There are women who do not believe that women should have equal rights as men do. They are strong proponents that the main roles and goals of women are to be housewives and mothers. They further believe that women should be subordinate to men. There are women out there who clearly do not...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|