Dont Like Bush Or Kerry?

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='JP2Iloveyou' date='May 1 2004, 04:16 PM'] The Church supports the DP in very rare circumstances. Check the Catechism. [/quote]
I'm not aware of this. Are you sure that's an accurate statement? To the best of my knowledge, the Church is nonpartisan in that it doesn't support any particular political party.

God bless,

Jennifer

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='BeenaBobba' date='May 2 2004, 09:54 AM'] He also supports abortion... :angry:

...and hugs trees. <--

God bless,

Jennifer [/quote]
...which means he ain't gettin' my vote.

God bless,

Jennifer

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='the_rev' date='May 1 2004, 08:02 PM'] Whoopi Goldberg was at that march and had a hanger and hung it around her neck saying it was a human abortion, or something.  It was quite weird wording. [/quote]
I saw that, too. A common pro-"choice" argument is that if abortion is made illegal again, women will have to resort to so-called "back-alley" abortions. In the past, women died doing this -- mostly due to bacterial infections before the advent of antibiotics. Pro-"choicers" tend to exaggerate the number of women who did die from abortion complications when abortion was illegal, but you can read the [i]real[/i] statistics [url="http://www.roevwade.org/myths2.html"]here[/url].

Anyhow, women often aborted their preborn child with hangers before abortion was made legal. Whoopi was probably alluding to that.

God bless,

Jennifer

Edited May 2, 2004 by BeenaBobba

[JP2Iloveyou]

That is really bad logic though. I've heard that argument before, and it simply makes no sense. As usual from the pro-choice crowd, they don't attack the argument. They dodge it because they know they are in the wrong. They try and appeal to feelings instead of to fact. Anyway, the response to that argument should go something like this. "It may be true that that happened at some point in time, but that still does not address the issue of whether abortion is right or wrong. Using your logic, since many women are raped in back alleys, we should make rape legal. That way, women will never again be subjected to dangerous rapes. Just think, fifteen years from now, we can look back on the day when rapes were illegal and dangerous and laugh at how out of touch we were. A rapist will just be able to call a girl up, tell her he wants to rape her, they can set up a time, and just have at it. It can be done in the open because the guy will no longer have to worry about a prison term. It can be wonderful for both people involved."

Now, the pro-choicer will probably respond to this argument like this, "That is not even comparable. That is an absurd comparison because a woman getting an abortion is doing something of her own free will to her own body. If we legalized rape, a man she didn't know would come over and do whatever he wanted with her body without her consent. It's ridiculous."

To that, the pro-lifer should respond, "Yes, it is ridiculous. It's also ridiculous that a woman can perform an act on another human being without his or her consent, especially when that act results in the end of that human being's life. An unborn baby is not the woman's body. That's a medical fact. It has a different genotype, a different blood type, and a different gender in some cases."

[quote]I'm not aware of this. Are you sure that's an accurate statement? To the best of my knowledge, the Church is nonpartisan in that it doesn't support any particular political party.[/quote]

Yes, I'm sure. The Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty if it is the only way to ensure the safety of society. In the United States, these cases are, "Very rare if not practically non existant," quoting our Holy Father. However, the Church also leaves it up to the temporal authority to determine when such a case may arrise.

Furthermore, you can't equate capital punishment with abortion. Both take human lives, yes, but there is NEVER a case where abortion could be justified. It kills an innocent person. As for the DP though, there are cases in which it could possibly be justified. Also, over 41 million innocent babies have been slaughtered post-Roe. I believe the number is two people who have been executed under the federal death penalty in the same time span. It might be a few more, I'm not sure, but it isn't even in double digits, as opposed to approaching nine digits. The federal DP is all the president would have power to change, nothing else.

[Seatbelt Blue]

Irony: I saw a bumper sticker that said "execution stops a beating heart" on the same car sporting a NARAL bumper sticker.

[Lounge Daddy]

[font="Courier"]this is a few days late - but about that DC "poor-choice" march
[url="http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/001682.html"] [b]click[/b] [/url][/font]

[BeenaBobba]

I'm sorry, JP2. By DP, I thought you were referring to the Democratic Party for some reason. LOL. Sorry about that. Because I thought you were referring to the Democratic Party, I was like, "Huh, the Church is nonpartisan."

I know all that about the death penalty and how it's not the same as abortion. Unlike abortion, the death penalty isn't intrinsically evil since God santioned it in the Old Testament. There are instances today when it would be necessary, but the Pope's said that resorting to it should be rare or perhaps even nonexistent. Abortion is always wrong 100% of the times. I would like, however, to see the death penalty abolished in this country; well, not entirely abolished, but only used for the defense of society in the very, very rare instances when that would be needed. To the best of my knowledge, the Catholic Church teaches that it should only be used defensively and should be decided by the temporal authority. Right?

God bless,

Jennifer

Edited May 2, 2004 by BeenaBobba

[Lounge Daddy]

[font="Courier"][url="http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/001686.html"] [b]CLICK [/b][/url][/font]

[Lounge Daddy]

[font="Courier"]btw - My posted links are to some very cynical-humor stuff [/font]

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='JP2Iloveyou' date='May 2 2004, 10:51 AM'] Using your logic, since many women are raped in back alleys, we should make rape legal. [/quote]
No, no, that's not [i]my[/i] logic. I'm a 100% pro-life Catholic. I was just telling the_rev what Whoopi was trying to argue with the hanger.

The whole argument that abortion should be legal because women died due to "back-alley" abortions begs the question. It only stands on the presupposition that preborn babies aren't human beings. Every single human embryologist has [url="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/817022/posts"]said[/url] that life begins at conception. That being said, abortion can be nothing but murder. When pro-"choicers" say, "Abortion should be legal because women have sought back-alley abortions in the past, and it was unsanitary and unsafe, and many of them died from abortions," one can substitute the word "murder" for "abortion." Then, it'd look something like this: "Murder should be legal because women have sought back-alley murders in the past, and it was unsanitary and unsafe, and many of them died while murdering their preborn children." Obviously, it's absurd. You are quite right to say it's bad logic because it most certainly is.

So, as you know, I'm a pro-life Catholic, and I wasn't arguing for abortion at all . I was just pointing out a common (and logically fallacious) pro-"choice" argument. Thanks for your concern, though.

God bless,

Jennifer

Edited May 2, 2004 by BeenaBobba

[BeenaBobba]

Haha. Good link, Lounge. That describes something that has been called the "Roe effect." People have speculated that the next generation will be more conservative because abortion supporting liberals also usually support birth control and are therefore more likely to have no kids or a small number of kids. No kids = few to carry out your viewpoints. We Catholic pro-lifers will probably have many more kids, and thus there may very well be more Catholic kids to carry on the pro-life cause.

Abortion [b]will[/b] be illegal one day!

God bless,

Jennifer

[Lounge Daddy]

[font="Courier"]God bless you, BeenaBobba
Catholic families are the tidal wave of the future .[/font]

[Trying2BFaithful]

This is a pointless debate. The Church has made it clear: "Pro-Choice" and "Catholic" are mutually exclusive terms. Supporting pro-choice candidates qualifies as support of abortion, even if you oppose it. It is the most important issue, bar none. 1 million lives per year...1 million. Think about it.

Voting pro-choice is mortal sin. No question.

[Trying2BFaithful]

I furthermore call on all faithful Catholics to have at least 6 kids. If you have trouble conceiving, their are millions of orphans around the world who need homes. We need to really push the Roe effect. Mormons will help us on this one.

[JP2Iloveyou]

Trying2BFaithful, worthy goal, but I don't think that it is a good way to state it. I would put instead that all Catholic families should be open to the number of children that God chooses to bless them with. Whether that is one, two, ten, or somewhere in the middle is up to him. Many people cannot afford the money to adopt children. Here's a novel idea. Liberals always want out tax dollars to go to fund abortions for "poor women." Why not have our tax dollars go to fund adoptions for "poor families?"

BeenaBobba, I know you were not advocating that position. I was merely spelling out a sound logical argument against someone who does use that argument.