Did The "pro-life" Movement Permanently Change Because Of Romn

[stevil]

[quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1352773265' post='2508885']
At the same time, we cannot relegate abortion to being a "Catholic" issue. Until the nation becomes overwhelmongly practicing Catholic, we need more than just Catholics to win this battle. If we wait until the nation bacomes practicing Catholic, millions more unborn will be killed.
[/quote]
In my opinion, and I know you are going to disagree with me, but I think the approach is wrong. People don't want laws to force their hand.

Education is key, if the pro-life take the approach to educate people, try to convince them to choose the non abortion approach then they will be much more successful than trying to force a law onto people.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1352916894' post='2509902']
Just because a person is pro-choice it doesn't mean they like or would participate in abortion, it just means they don't want to force others not to choose the abortion option.
[/quote]

Nope. It means they are indifferent to whether or not a unwanted person is murdered by another person.

[stevil]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1352917452' post='2509905']
Nope. It means they are indifferent to whether or not a unwanted person is murdered by another person.
[/quote]
Doesn't mean that at all.
If you try and pass a law allowing government to cull homeless people, then see what happens, what will the pro choice people do?

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1352918123' post='2509914']

Doesn't mean that at all.
If you try and pass a law allowing government to cull homeless people, then see what happens, what will the pro choice people do?
[/quote]

Yes indeed it does mean that. But you do point out how these indifferent barbarians are hypocritical in their relativistic point of view on the right for innocent members of humanity to exist.

Edited November 14, 2012 by KnightofChrist

[stevil]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1352918515' post='2509918']
Yes indeed it does mean that. But you do point out how these indifferent barbarians are hypocritical in their relativistic point of view on the right for innocent members of humanity to exist.
[/quote]
I see you are unwilling to understand the issue, to understand the pro choicer's point of view.

You can continue to volley for impossed law, but without trying to understand the issue (from your opponent's perspective) your cause will be futile.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1352918515' post='2509918']
Yes indeed it does mean that. But you do point out how these indifferent barbarians are hypocritical in their relativistic point of view on the right for innocent members of humanity to exist.
[/quote]It's not hypocrasy if you don't believe a zygote or fetus is a person [i]yet[/i].

Stevil has a valid point, that was brought up recently that you don't simply change the perspective of people that abortion is a viable choice when the alternatives are so bad (especially if they don't recognize personhood).

It's hypocrasy when good people shun and shame an unwed mother because it's the child who suffers most.
It's hypocrasy when it's inconceivable how a single mom can afford to give birth to an unplanned child when help is given first to anyone else.
It's hypocrasy when society doesn't shame the baby father or force financial liability.
It's also hypocrasy when people believe only the two participants deal with the consequences of consensual sex.

Possible legal foundations would be identifying personhood at conception. Giving legal protection to the unborn child that is equal to the mother. Holding the father as liable and responsible financially. Making adoptions easier. (Wouldn't it be better to let single or gay people adopt rather than killing inconvenient children?)

There's lots of attitudes to change and goals to achieve that aren't accomplished by simply outlawing abortion that support and reinforce the right to life.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1352919554' post='2509927']
I see you are unwilling to understand the issue, to understand the pro choicer's point of view.

You can continue to volley for impossed law, but without trying to understand the issue (from your opponent's perspective) your cause will be futile.
[/quote]

I understand you quite while. You are simply wrong. If one claims to be pro-choice as you define it they are indifferent. Indifferent to whether or not a unwanted person (a child) is murder by another person (the abortionist).

[stevil]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1352919783' post='2509930']

I understand you quite while. You are simply wrong. If one claims to be pro-choice as you define it they are indifferent. Indifferent to whether or not a unwanted person (a child) is murder by another person (the abortionist).
[/quote]
Pro choicers aren't indifferent. They actively want people to be in control of their own lives rather than have government impose.
They respect the decisions of adults, of parents, they understand the complexities of life and society, and don't paint the world black and white.
They don't necessarily think all human life is sacred.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1352923241' post='2509965']
Pro choicers aren't indifferent. They actively want people to be in control of their own lives rather than have government impose.
They respect the decisions of adults, of parents, they understand the complexities of life and society, and don't paint the world black and white.
They don't necessarily think all human life is sacred.
[/quote]
I guess life's only worthwile if you are completely non-dependent. It's okay for others to impose, just as long as it's not society or the government.

[stevil]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1352924441' post='2509981']
I guess life's only worthwile if you are completely non-dependent. It's okay for others to impose, just as long as it's not society or the government.
[/quote]
I'm an atheist therefore nothing is sacred. Everything is up for debate, I try to keep an open mind to everything.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1352938696' post='2510108']

I'm an atheist therefore nothing is sacred. Everything is up for debate, I try to keep an open mind to everything.
[/quote]LOL. I'm the atheist. You're the amoralist.

Edited November 15, 2012 by Anomaly

[stevil]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1352943154' post='2510152']
LOL. I'm the atheist. You're the amoralist.
[/quote]
i don't believe in gods, that makes me an atheist. I'm also an amoralist as I don't believe in objective morality, I'm also a guitarist, I'm also a father and a husband, a son and a brother, I am also a heavy metal fan, also a Sarah Brightman fan, a Bic Runga fan and a Dave Dobbyn fan, also a Peter Jackson fan, also a runner and an IT professional. I can wear many labels, but none of my labels dictate that I must hold anything sacred.

[Aloysius]

Atheist fight!!! It's on now.

btw, you should both team up and even the playing field, currently the Christians are beating the Atheists in this thread: http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/125255-christians-vs-atheists/

current score:
Christians: 3, Atheists: 2, Cthulhu: 1

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1352919641' post='2509928']
It's not hypocrasy if you don't believe a zygote or fetus is a person [i]yet[/i].[/quote]

I don't agree, but would you prefer contradictory? Because it is at least that much. Still, because object truth, real truth exist, it is an act of hypocrisy to say one is for freedom and liberty for one group of persons while being indifferent to the denial of freedom and liberty of persons one does not recognize as persons. This is perhaps more easily understood if we remember the very similar example of those that supported slavery in America. Stevil's pre-American Civil War counterparts held a very similar contradictory indifferentism. They supported the freedoms and rights of the slave owners to choose to do what he wanted to do with his property. But they were completely indifferent to the freedoms and rights of the slaves of whom they did not recognize as persons.

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1352919641' post='2509928']Stevil has a valid point, that was brought up recently that you don't simply change the perspective of people that abortion is a viable choice when the alternatives are so bad (especially if they don't recognize personhood).

It's hypocrasy when good people shun and shame an unwed mother because it's the child who suffers most.

Not if the person
It's hypocrasy when it's inconceivable how a single mom can afford to give birth to an unplanned child when help is given first to anyone else.
It's hypocrasy when society doesn't shame the baby father or force financial liability.
It's also hypocrasy when people believe only the two participants deal with the consequences of consensual sex.[/quote]

It is most interesting that you would object to my reasoning and use of the term hypocrisy. Then use it the same way as I. All your examples are hypocrisy even if the one guilty of that doesn't recognize the person he is harming or indifferent to is a person.


[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1352919641' post='2509928']Possible legal foundations would be identifying personhood at conception. Giving legal protection to the unborn child that is equal to the mother. Holding the father as liable and responsible financially. Making adoptions easier. (Wouldn't it be better to let single or gay people adopt rather than killing inconvenient children?)[/quote]

Any life is better than not life at all. But I am sure there are some examples where we would both agree where it would not be suitable for a child to grow up in, just because being raised by a homosexual is neither ideal or suitable for the child doesn't mean that the child should be murdered.

[quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1352919641' post='2509928']There's lots of attitudes to change and goals to achieve that aren't accomplished by simply outlawing abortion that support and reinforce the right to life.
[/quote]

I agree but that doesn't make the term pro-choice good terminology. It doesn't make those that would label themselves as such any less contradictory, indifferent, anti-life and anti-freedom.


[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1352923241' post='2509965']
Pro choicers aren't indifferent. They actively want people to be in control of their own lives rather than have government impose.
They respect the decisions of adults, of parents, they understand the complexities of life and society, and don't paint the world black and white.
They don't necessarily think all human life is sacred.
[/quote]

They are indifferent to the rights and liberties of the unborn babies that they do not recognize as persons, or perhaps they do recognize their personhood but still are indifferent to whether or not their rights and liberties are honored.

There will come a day when 'pro-choicers' are remembered with the same disgrace and dishonor as those who were pro-slavery, and all the other evil, wicked and indifferent people who did not care about the rights and liberties of innocent but unwanted 'non-person' persons.

[stevil]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1352990723' post='2510520']
They are indifferent to the rights and liberties of the unborn babies that they do not recognize as persons, or perhaps they do recognize their personhood but still are indifferent to whether or not their rights and liberties are honored.
[/quote]
Thus you show how poorly you understand the position of your opposition.