Abortion as seen through a perspective of civil rights.

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
reply to post by windword

 

God is a hypocrite.

Your mocking God gives me no desire to talk with you.

Nope, not mocking God. Telling the truth. The God of the Old Testament is a hypocrite and does not deserve respect, little alone worship. Jesus seems to have a different, father God. Seems to me that you worship biology.

You're just using your "holier than thou" moral high ground to avoid addressing my comments by hiding behind your need to protect your God.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea."

Mark 9:42

like I said before....
it might prove more effective if society started addressing those things that cause women not to want to have babies to begin with!.

people could start that process by just stop acting like pregnancy is a punishment given to women for having sex!!!
then they could on to stop acting like sex is a god-given right to men...
and then they could continue and accept the fact that women have just as much right and need to earn a living as any man does!!!
an onward, to the acknowledgement that if one is working 40+ hours a week, one should be earning enough to support a family!!!
and on and on an onward we go.....till women have the respect that is deserving for those who bring life into the world... till every person's work is seen as deserving of a wage that can support them and their dependents....

but as it is now, those churches who are preaching such scriptures can't seem to acknowledge that a women has any right whatsoever to deny anything under the sky to their husband at their request, and that includes sex!!!

seems to me that the religious right is saying two opposite, conflicting things when the churches are preaching for women to be submissive to the man IN ALL THINGS, and then turning around and saying "well, if she didn't want to have a kid, she shouldn't have had the sex"!! they are trying ever so hard to convince her she isn't the one who has that choice, the man is, and then condemning her for not making that choice herself!!!

obviously, your religion isn't as near perfection as you wish to believe!

reply to post by dawnstar

The truth is that the pro-life stance does not depend on religion. The logical case for life is built entirely upon premises grounded in the Constitution and science. These premises lead to the pair of conclusions that form the crux of the pro-life argument. The first is that the only relevant question in the debate over the legality of abortion is whether or not the fetus should be considered a human person. If the fetus is a human person then abortion should be illegal; if the fetus is not a human person then abortion should be legal. The second is that the fetus should be considered a human person. Together these statements comprise the pro-life conviction that abortion should be illegal.

stanfordreview.org...

What I wrote came from my heart.

Perhaps you might appreciate a pro-life article that is not based on religion at all.

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady

What I wrote came from my heart.

Perhaps you might appreciate a pro-life article that is not based on religion at all.

Why?

All you care about is the God perspective - - judgment - - or some written article.

I doubt you appreciated my REAL LIFE experience I wrote from the heart.

I am a REAL LIFE breathing woman - - not some panel of old men discussing my rights.

reply to post by beezzer


Please explain how men have no rights with-in an abortion conversation? We may not have the final say but we at least have a voice in the matter.

BTW - - - here is another little ditty by Charlie Capps - - who wrote the review The Pro-Life Argument Does Not Depend on Religion.

Oh yes BTW - - Mr. Capps writes from a Christian perspective.

You should read his "I'm not taking any sides "white washed" - - - article on how you can't be Christian and homosexual - - because the bible doesn't allow for it.

The Straw Man of Theological Voluntarism

by Charlie Capps on May 21, 2010

Recently, the Atheists, Humanists and Agnostics of Stanford (AHA) invited Greta Christina to campus to speak about atheism and sexuality. Although I was not able to attend, I have heard Christina speak on that subject before, and unless she has drastically altered her talk, it will have been chockfull of mischaracterizations of religious approaches to sexual ethics. With Exotic Erotic last weekend and Genderfuk the week before, I can’t think of a better opportunity to offer a few clarifications from a traditional Christian perspective. stanfordreview.org...

Only U.S. citizens are granted the rights enumerated in the constitution.
In order to be considered a U.S. citizen you must be born in this country, a fetus is not yet born and therefore is not a U.S. citizen and has no rights under the constitution.
If we start granting citizenship ,and by extension constitutional protection,to every fetus conceived within the borders of the U.S., what will the effect of that be on the illegal alien population and status in this country?
if a fetus is going to be granted constitutional rights and considered a human citizen of the U.S. at the time of conception then will we have to start paying the mother additional foodstamps and welfare from the date of conception rather than from the date of birth?

Why is it so important to grant fetuses the right to life under the constitution when we don`t even grant that right to U.S. citizens who are without health insurance or the means to pay for life saving health care?Your right to life only extends as far as your ability to pay for healthcare.

Who`s going to pay for all these newborn citizens? welfare? foodstamps? or maybe they can all come live with you and you will support them?
What about my right to the pursuit of happiness by keeping more of what i work for instead of giving it to the government in the form of taxes to support all these millions of newborn citizens?

Is quantity of life so important that it`s worth risking bankrupting the country for? What quality of life will they and we have when we are living in a bankrupt 3rd world country? How long will they or any of us survive when our quality of life has fallen to that of a 3rd world overcrowded country that is unable to feed itself?

reply to post by EvilSadamClone


Let's say I want to kill you right now. But the laws of this country prohibit me to do it.

I guess I'm a second-class citizen now? Life sucks...

Originally posted by beezzer

Do black people deserve rights?
Do gay people deserve rights?

All I'm asking is that the same consideration be given to those human individuals that have yet to be born.

Humans deserve rights.

I don't think it has to do with 'civil' rights....if humanity truly recognized HUMAN rights, then the fight for civil rights would be unnecessary.

If you call it civil, you invoke legislation.
And if you invoke legislation...if a child is born to a mother who cannot afford to feed herself (regardless of the circumstances of conception)...who is going to feed her during pregnancy? And feed her and the child when it is born?

Combine the pro-life stance with the often associated cry against 'entitlements' and you have quite the dilemma.

How can the law tell anyone they must have a child they cannot feed?
Is it any less murder to allow a child to be born and then let it starve or grow up disadvantaged because the law forbids preventing the situation?
And if birth control is unavailable to someone who is in that situation...what, then?

People WILL have sex.
That is HUMAN nature.
Therefore we must consider HUMAN rights.

I'm not advocating or condemning abortion. I'm just saying the root problem is much deeper and can't be fixed with legislation.

How is abortion wrong but allowing people in other countries to die a slow and painful death because of starvation okay?

Life involves more than just a heartbeat.

reply to post by ArnoldNonymous


The laws don't prohibit you from killing someone. They merely reflect the consequences of doing so, if you get caught.

reply to post by Annee


I did, though...thank you, Annee, for giving us a personal true-life example of just one of the countless possible set of circumstances outside of anyone's power to predict, alter, or judge.

People forget that the mother is forever tied to the life of every child she brings into the world...to somehow take care of that child, no matter what. No one else can shoulder this responsibility the way that a mother can and will...

Originally posted by ArnoldNonymous
reply to post by EvilSadamClone

 

Let's say I want to kill you right now. But the laws of this country prohibit me to do it.

I guess I'm a second-class citizen now? Life sucks...

That's an incredibly naive way to put it.

You left out the key difference between your poor and not well-thought out example and his post: one is potential human being living off of a host's body (and ergo is part of it), and the other is a human being not living off of a host's body.

Try reading posts fully before replying to them, your posts will sound less ignorant that way.

Originally posted by queenannie38
reply to post by Annee

 

I did, though...thank you, Annee, for giving us a personal true-life example of just one of the countless possible set of circumstances outside of anyone's power to predict, alter, or judge.

People forget that the mother is forever tied to the life of every child she brings into the world...to somehow take care of that child, no matter what. No one else can shoulder this responsibility the way that a mother can and will...

Thank you.

And - - if anyone thinks its easy to come on here - - explain and post such a personal extreme part of your life - - it isn't.

I do it for REAL awareness of those standing on the sidelines - - with their self-righteous judgments.

I was one of those "Never in a million years" . . . until . . .

No one knows what they will do when faced with a situation - - - until it happens.

Originally posted by Annee

I was one of those "Never in a million years" . . . until . . . No one knows what they will do when faced with a situation - - - until it happens.

Agree. I was the same way. Used to say that I love kids so much, I would never have an abortion and then life circumstances hit you and your idealistic views dramatically change...

Originally posted by LanaDan

Originally posted by Annee

I was one of those "Never in a million years" . . . until . . . No one knows what they will do when faced with a situation - - - until it happens.

Agree. I was the same way. Used to say that I love kids so much, I would never have an abortion and then life circumstances hit you and your idealistic views dramatically change...

Yes. Abortion does not in any way mean you do not love children. It actually often means the complete opposite - - in many cases.

Being a mother along with with living life as part of the Peace Corp was my childhood dream. It was my only focus. Other girls were becoming interested in boys - - - as I was still playing mom to one of the ugliest rubber faced - - canvas bodied - - dolls that was ever made.

Today I live for my 4 year old grandson I have been with since the day he was born. We share a bedroom and a bed.

Those who think abortion is anti-baby/child - - - are so wrong.

The laws don't prohibit you from killing someone. They merely reflect the consequences of doing so, if you get caught.

reply to post by windword


Hmm I like that way you think. Let's team up and become supervillains! I hear it can be quite the lucrative position.

You left out the key difference between your poor and not well-thought out example and his post: one is potential human being living off of a host's body (and ergo is part of it), and the other is a human being not living off of a host's body.

But what if he is "living off me" as in my hard earned tax money? Pay for your own da** living expenses and stop knockin people up!

reply to post by nixie_nox


Don't you ever talk about my mother like that - that is a direct and personal attack AND OFF TOPIC.

Yes she made a mistake but she didn't take the easy way out. She raised me, worked hard, made sure I had a good safe place while she worked and made me feel loved and cherished.

I didn't find out I was not planned until I was 29 and she had been dead for 20 years.

She raised me and gave me such a good base, such love and devotion that from age 9 to 20 I was able to withstand not childhood abuse but down right torture after her death at 52.

You are off topic and you personally attacked me by attacking my beloved and kind mother.

Twisting the topic around, good manipulative game - my mother chose to have me, to give me life.

Yes she made a mistake but she was woman enough to own up to it and to raise me with a kind and loving heart.

Evidently your mother failed in that department.

Again, you were totally off topic by attacking my mother and making a personal attack which is against ATS protocol.

Originally posted by ofhumandescent

Evidently your mother failed in that department.

Isn't that an attack on Nixie Nox mother?

This thread is at least temporarily closed.

We expect civility and decorum within all topics - Please Review This Link.