|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5 |
To deprive a pregnant woman of ANY say-so in the matter just offends my common sense.
It's not mine or your opinion on the matter we need to worry about. We have the Word of God to reveal what he thinks, and we would be well to do as He sees just, and set our own thoughts aside. And there you are, right back to the religious argument, trying to establish a portion of yours though an act of Congress.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 18,352 Likes: 2
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 18,352 Likes: 2 |
General question.
Should IUD's be banned? What about levonorgestrel prior to intercourse?
Carpe' Scrotum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5 |
Sometimes we must slide partway down a slippery slope to find a level spot where we can rest firmly.
Sometimes, but not in the case of human life. I'm pretty sure the top of the slope looking down is the place you want to be come judgement day. I'll rest there. The passion of both sides on the issue has resulted in what I see as a mountain range with a peak that has been whittled down to a knife edge. I can't stand at the top of that. My fate at Judgement Day was decided quite some time ago. Aside from that, I can neither have, nor provide, an abortion. To deprive a pregnant woman of ANY say-so in the matter just offends my common sense. Curdog, I'm glad to see your libertarian position of the subject. You choose not to engage in the process, but you are also choosing not to inflict your belief on others. Well done, there is hope for you yet. Personally I'm opposed to the Chinese government imposing forces abortion/sterilization on it's citizens, and I'm also opposed to ours interfering in the personal, private decision of family formation here as well. Who do I trust to make these decisions... Government?? Preachers?? Families?? For the most part, I'll defer to the families....
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,590 Likes: 8
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,590 Likes: 8 |
So....... my 9 week threshold doesn't work for you? Curdog, I wanted to congratulate you on your willingness to make such a concession. One this thread, I believe you are the only "prolife" person to make ANY concessions. By the same token, I'm willing to concede everything after 20 weeks. Perhaps we could leave the middle ground to the individual states to decide? The assumed value of compromise and concession can seem almost mind-boggling at times. One guy says "not after 9 weeks", and another says "not after 20 weeks" and proposes that they both leave the "middle ground" up to individual states to decide. This, on a matter of intentional homicide. Is such maneuvering based upon presumed superior wisdom, or on what? Just how important could an "exact" time period be if left to a "compromise" window agreed by two indivduals with a proviso that invidual states should decide where within the window is "good"?. Whence such confidence in the erudition of any two human minds and the moral sense of any political subdivision? The uber serious matter of abortion reduced to compromise and then a political decision? It would be interesting to read an explanation of why anyone's offering up a personal "concession" on a matter of intentional homicide would be worthy of congratulation.
NRA Member - Life, Benefactor, Patron
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,069 Likes: 15
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,069 Likes: 15 |
So....... my 9 week threshold doesn't work for you? Yeah, that works. I would be okay with anything in the first trimester being legal.
You are simply trying to reason your way into a liberal stance on abortion under 12 weeks. You know in your heart of hearts that that fetus is a human being. Let me give you a gross example that may possibly shock you into correct thinking.
We are both very hungry, possibly starving. We would have no problem eating a plate of eggs, raw eggs, or even a bowl of soup made from those 10 week baby joey's that Cowboy posted. Would you eat a bowl of soup made from 10 week old human fetuses? I wouldn't and I bet you would rather starve too, because you know in your heart that even if they don't look human , they are.
Most of my family would starve to death before they would eat a slice of pork, or allow shell fish to touch their lips. That does not make shell fish or pork human. I am not going to taste placenta either, though many in this nation now do. And that is not because the placenta has a soul. Yes, I do use my brain and my reasoning power to make important life decisions. Without reasoning all we have to guide us is myth and tradition. Many times either of those is far from being the best guide.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 56,361 Likes: 9
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 56,361 Likes: 9 |
God gave you free will antelope, you are free to work within the bounds of the law. I'm not imposing anything on anyone, just saying what I believe to be in a persons best interest. I will act as I see right since I answer for it. Just don't tell me I have to kill a baby and we'll get along fine. If you want to kill babies, I pity you, but that's your choice to make and cross to bear at the same time. No condemnation from me to worry about. Like I said, I'm not the one you need to worry about. Carry on.
_______________________________________________________
An 8 dollar driveway boy living in a T-111 shack
LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5 |
So....... my 9 week threshold doesn't work for you? Curdog, I wanted to congratulate you on your willingness to make such a concession. One this thread, I believe you are the only "prolife" person to make ANY concessions. By the same token, I'm willing to concede everything after 20 weeks. Perhaps we could leave the middle ground to the individual states to decide? The assumed value of compromise and concession can seem almost mind-boggling at times. One guy says "not after 9 weeks", and another says "not after 20 weeks" and proposes that they both leave the "middle ground" up to individual states to decide. This, on a matter of intentional homicide. Is such maneuvering based upon presumed superior wisdom, or on what? Just how important could an "exact" time period be if left to a "compromise" window agreed by two indivduals with a proviso that invidual states should decide where within the window is "good"?. Whence such confidence in the erudition of any two human minds and the moral sense of any political subdivision? The uber serious matter of abortion reduced to compromise and then a political decision? It would be interesting to read an explanation of why anyone's offering up a personal "concession" on a matter of intentional homicide would be worthy of congratulation. The Virgin Birth and Immaculate Conception were political decisions. Why would abortion laws be any different?
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,137 Likes: 5 |
God gave you free will antelope, you are free to work within the bounds of the law. I'm not imposing anything on anyone, just saying what I believe to be in a persons best interest. I will act as I see right since I answer for it. Just don't tell me I have to kill a baby and we'll get along fine. If you want to kill babies, I pity you, but that's your choice to make and cross to bear at the same time. No condemnation from me to worry about. Like I said, I'm not the one you need to worry about. Carry on. FB, I never said anything about my person decisions on this matter, I'm debating the role of government in this matter. If you think the decisions could reside primarily with the family and not the government, then we agree on this issue.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,972 |
Sometimes we must slide partway down a slippery slope to find a level spot where we can rest firmly.
Sometimes, but not in the case of human life. I'm pretty sure the top of the slope looking down is the place you want to be come judgement day. I'll rest there. The passion of both sides on the issue has resulted in what I see as a mountain range with a peak that has been whittled down to a knife edge. I can't stand at the top of that. My fate at Judgement Day was decided quite some time ago. Aside from that, I can neither have, nor provide, an abortion. To deprive a pregnant woman of ANY say-so in the matter just offends my common sense. It just seems like you are depriving the woman of say so about her body because you can't see the child inside her. There would be no question about depriving her if the child was on the outside. Same woman can kill the same child as long as it's on the inside. We would lock her up if she killed the same child a few months later on the outside. That's the choice you don't want to deprive her of.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301 |
FB, I never said anything about my person decisions on this matter, I'm debating the role of government in this matter.
If you think the decisions could reside primarily with the family and not the government, then we agree on this issue.
Well I do agree it is a moral issue and should not be a legal issue. I am still against it but making it illegal or making it legal won't change a thing. You believe it is wrong or you believe it is right. There were abortions long before Roe vs Wade and if that decision were reversed there would still be abortions.
The first time I shot myself in the head...
Meniere's Sucks Big Time!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239 |
Paul, the "concession" I made was an internal one, affecting only MY conscience. A man must have a starting place if he is to reason things out to his satisfaction.
My starting place was "abortion is wrong". Over a considerable period of time, most assuredly not during the course of this thread, that position did not set well.
For me, a man, to claim that a pregnant woman gives up ALL her rights to her own body just by virtue of becoming pregnant is too presumptuous for me personally.
But condemning the practice of late term abortions for the sake of convenience comes easy for me.
Prior to 1973, as I recall, Doctors who would perform first trimester abortions most often refused to perform them later in the pregnancy. I'm talking about G.P.'s, not abortion specialists.
That became my position as well.
I don't recall many, if any, other posters explaining THEIR thought processes on their way to a conclusion.
God gave me a conscience AND a brain to use to make my own moral and ethical judgements.
To subcontract the job to Science or the Bible is a cop out as far as I'm concerned.
The fact that other folks arrive at a different conclusion surprises me not all, since we were created, not cloned.
Never holler whoa or look back in a tight place
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239 |
I'm sorry, friend, but even after reading your post several times, I can't see how it is responsive to any of my comments, yet you addressed me.
Want to try again?
Never holler whoa or look back in a tight place
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,590 Likes: 8
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,590 Likes: 8 |
Paul, the "concession" I made was an internal one, affecting only MY conscience. A man must have a starting place if he is to reason things out to his satisfaction.
My starting place was "abortion is wrong". Over a considerable period of time, most assuredly not during the course of this thread, that position did not set well.
For me, a man, to claim that a pregnant woman gives up ALL her rights to her own body just by virtue of becoming pregnant is too presumptuous for me personally.
But condemning the practice of late term abortions for the sake of convenience comes easy for me.
Prior to 1973, as I recall, Doctors who would perform first trimester abortions most often refused to perform them later in the pregnancy. I'm talking about G.P.'s, not abortion specialists.
That became my position as well.
I don't recall many, if any, other posters explaining THEIR thought processes on their way to a conclusion.
God gave me a conscience AND a brain to use to make my own moral and ethical judgements.
To subcontract the job to Science or the Bible is a cop out as far as I'm concerned.
The fact that other folks arrive at a different conclusion surprises me not all, since we were created, not cloned. Gene, I realized that your solo determination was internal, and I both understand and respect your reasoning and where you stand. My observations there had to do with that posed process of concession and compromise as applied to a situation involving morals, ethics and homicide. The eventual relegation to politics seemed like an extra measure of degredation.
NRA Member - Life, Benefactor, Patron
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,590 Likes: 8
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,590 Likes: 8 |
The Virgin Birth and Immaculate Conception were political decisions. Why would abortion laws be any different?
Your reasoning and factual basis for your stated position should be interesting to examine, but that is not the point of this reply. In answer to your question, and one would think that the distinction would be crystal clear, neither Immaculate Conception nor Virgin Birth have any relevance or equation to political decisions regarding homicide of innocent babies.
NRA Member - Life, Benefactor, Patron
|
|
|
|
|
528 members (12344mag, 007FJ, 06hunter59, 10gaugeman, 19rabbit52, 10gaugemag, 53 invisible),
2,923
guests, and
1,231
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,970
Posts18,519,709
Members74,020
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
