Pro-life Racist

[zeyeon]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1132375' date='Nov 30 2006, 08:15 PM']
So you asked a loaded question.
[/quote]

yea... to myself. When you ask yourself a question...It's a literarry device called interregation. I used it to emphasize how distraght I am over the fact that people are actually voting yes.

problem with it?

Edited December 1, 2006 by zeyeon

[toledo_jesus]

i voted yes. I'd rather have a racist than someone who would advance the practice of abortion in the country.

Hell, I'd vote for a guy who was racist towards whites if it cut down on abortions. I'll take a little persecution to save a couple lives.

[iKonstantin]

I agree, they should be called 'Negro(or Black)-Americans'

Two things

How do you define a racist? Seriously? Has he killed someone because they are another colour? Post prejudices have a basis, and you cannot be certain that this man hasn't been harmed repeatedly by people of colour. It is human nature to want to protect oneself. That being said, we need to keep and trans-generational prejudice from the system, that is what causes the damage.

How can anyone here vote for the pro-choice man? Is this not a Catholic forum? You may as well go join the church of milingo! Someone having an opinion doesn't mean that you should condemn him. If he acts badly then you condemn him.

Reminds me of Pat Buchanan. Who was the only real Catholic Choice.



bpat Konstantin

[zeyeon]

[quote name='iKonstantin' post='1132439' date='Nov 30 2006, 09:14 PM']
I agree, they should be called 'Negro(or Black)-Americans'

Two things

How do you define a racist? Seriously? Has he killed someone because they are another colour? Post prejudices have a basis, and you cannot be certain that this man hasn't been harmed repeatedly by people of colour. It is human nature to want to protect oneself. That being said, we need to keep and trans-generational prejudice from the system, that is what causes the damage.

How can anyone here vote for the pro-choice man? Is this not a Catholic forum? You may as well go join the church of milingo! Someone having an opinion doesn't mean that you should condemn him. If he acts badly then you condemn him.

Reminds me of Pat Buchanan. Who was the only real Catholic Choice.
bpat Konstantin
[/quote]

What does being catholic have to do with voting a certain way when faced with racisim or abortion? Isn't saving souls supposed to be more important than saving lives?

[Winchester]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1132426' date='Nov 30 2006, 07:54 PM']
yea... to myself. When you ask yourself a question...It's a literarry device called interregation. I used it to emphasize how distraght I am over the fact that people are actually voting yes.

problem with it?
[/quote]
Yes.
Firstly, a loaded question id not a "literary device." Nor is the simple sentence used as an attempt to scuttle the results of the votes.

Secondly, lay off the ellipses. They are fine when used sparingly, but your use of them has become cliche.

Thirdly, the poll is the loaded question, not the quote. And asking yourself a question in exasperation over answers you have not had explanations for is not a "literary device," either. You are not writing literature. You are having a debate in colloquial language. It does not approach the timless beauty that prose must possess to begin to argue by its merits that it is literature.

Your distress is due to your value judgement. You have placed racism as a worse evil than abortion. Your reaction to the "yes" votes indicates you had an outcome in mind--I have asked a question to verify the suspicion.

Anything you post on here is not to yourself. An aside spoken by Hamlet is "to himself," but presented to us. You are not in a play and we are not an audience. An aside is, arguably, a literary device. By writing the question, you have asked invited the entire board in on your internal dialogue and thus made that internal dialogue external. It has become a tool of your argument. It is an editorial comment.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1132465' date='Nov 30 2006, 11:47 PM']
What does being catholic have to do with voting a certain way when faced with racisim or abortion? Isn't saving souls supposed to be more important than saving lives?
[/quote]
stopping abortion is about all we can do towards saving the souls of the mothers and those who tolerate abortion.

[SJP]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1132282' date='Nov 30 2006, 07:15 PM']
are you really trying to resort to this as an attack on being pro choice? lol

being tollerant to a girl that was rapped and cannot afford to go through the 9 months of carrying a child is alot different than being tollerant to a group of people who's sole purpose is to segregate other human beings based on skin color. It's not even in the same realm. How dare you try to use such a misshapen analogy to justify your intollerance. That's sick man lol.
[/quote]

zeyeon,
Perhaps the point was lost on you. As Norseman82 said, I'm simply following your line of reasoning.

You said that you can't justify pushing your beliefs on someone else because "[b]I'm aware enough to know that not everybody on this planet thinks like I do[/b]"

The logical conclusion of such a statement is that [b]you can't judge anyone [/b] because everyone has there own beliefs, and as you said "[b]those people are on thier own path, not mine."[/b]

So tell me, on what grounds would you protest segregation or genocide? According to your own reasoning, "[b]you can't encroach your beliefs on other people by force[/b]"

[b]So who are you to speak out against racism or genocide[/b]? You yourself said that people have different beliefs and we can't "force our beliefs on others"
What would you say to a group of people who said "We hate Europeans and we're going to put them in concentration camps" According to your own reasoning, you have no right to oppose such people.

Do you understand the difference, I'm not trying to "resort to this as an attack on being pro choice"
This is an attack on [b]your[/b] [u]reasoning[/u]
There is a major difference.

Edited December 1, 2006 by SJP

[zeyeon]

[quote name='SJP' post='1132492' date='Nov 30 2006, 10:38 PM']
zeyeon,
Perhaps the point was lost on you. As Norseman82 said, I'm simply following your line of reasoning.

You said that you can't justify pushing your beliefs on someone else because "[b]I'm aware enough to know that not everybody on this planet thinks like I do[/b]"

The logical conclusion of such a statement is that [b]you can't judge anyone [/b] because everyone has there own beliefs, and as you said "[b]those people are on thier own path, not mine."[/b]

So tell me, on what grounds would you protest segregation or genocide? According to your own reasoning, "[b]you can't encroach your beliefs on other people by force[/b]"

[b]So who are you to speak out against racism or genocide[/b]? You yourself said that people have different beliefs and we can't "force our belifs on others"
What would you say to a group of people who said "We hate Europeans and we're going to put them in concentration camps" According to your own reasoning, you have no right to oppose such people.

Do you understand the difference, I'm not trying to "resort to this as an attack on being pro choice"
This is an attack on [b]your[/b] [u]reasoning[/u]
There is a major difference.
[/quote]

I will answer your question.

Not imposing my beliefs on others means I expect others will not impose thier beliefs on me. Once someone violates that, then they made the first move and I'll respond. I'm fair, not a pushover.

Segregation and genocide means that group will take my friends away from me, or my life away from me. To me, the pro-life philosophy is just that... philisophic. It gives absolutley no regard, no empathy, no understanding to the women that get put into those situations. They are the ones that get my sympathy and my empathy, because they are the ones in that situation. They are the ones that have to face the consequenses of thier actions. They are the ones that either have to carry a baby they don't want, around for 9 months or get strapped in a chair. Not the church.

That's why it angers me when I see people that take philisophic standpoint on this and expect policy to be created off of philosophy, rather than reality.

Edited December 1, 2006 by zeyeon

[Farsight one]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1132506' date='Nov 30 2006, 09:54 PM']
It gives absolutley no regard, no empathy, no understanding to the women that get put into those situations. They are the ones that get my sympathy and my empathy, because they are the ones in that situation.
[/quote]The baby's in that situation too, but it's not "suffering the consequences of it's actions". It's just suffering. I'm going to guess that you have no idea how abortions are performed, do you?

[zeyeon]

[quote name='Farsight one' post='1132521' date='Nov 30 2006, 11:18 PM']
The baby's in that situation too, but it's not "suffering the consequences of it's actions". It's just suffering. I'm going to guess that you have no idea how abortions are performed, do you?
[/quote]


Proove to me that it's suffering? And embryo? I posted earlier the American Journal of Medicine published an article stating that there is no possible way an unborn baby can feel pain prior to 6 months of gestation.

you can't suffer without pain. And as far as I'm concerned... You can't be human unless you suffer.

[Socrates]

Politically incorrect as it may be, the fact remains that abortion, the deliberate murder of an innocent human being, is a greater evil than racism and segregation.

Indeed, equal rights mean little, if one is allowed by law to be ripped from his mother's womb and have his brain sucked out, or be chemically burned to death before one even has the chance to experience the world.

[b]Life is the most basic and fundamental of all human rights.[/b]

I don't think a segregationist would go far in today's political climate, but if it somehow came down to a choice between racial segregation and legalized murder, I would have to choose the lesser evil.

I know some of the "bleeding hearts" on this board are going to jump in and accuse me of being a racist, blah, blah, blah, but I'd have them read my whole post - I'm not defending segregation or racism, merely pointing out that murder of the innocent is a greater evil.

(And I'm not sure exactly what the point of this poll is)

[zeyeon]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1132528' date='Nov 30 2006, 11:28 PM']
Politically incorrect as it may be, the fact remains that abortion, the deliberate murder of an innocent human being, is a greater evil than racism and segregation.

Indeed, equal rights mean little, if one is allowed by law to be ripped from his mother's womb and have his brain sucked out, or be chemically burned to death before one even has the chance to experience the world.

[b]Life is the most basic and fundamental of all human rights.[/b]

I don't think a segregationist would go far in today's political climate, but if it somehow came down to a choice between racial segregation and legalized murder, I would have to choose the lesser evil.

I know some of the "bleeding hearts" on this board are going to jump in and accuse me of being a racist, blah, blah, blah, but I'd have them read my whole post - I'm not defending segregation or racism, merely pointing out that murder of the innocent is a greater evil.

(And I'm not sure exactly what the point of this poll is)
[/quote]

I disagree. I believe a united philosophy based on hate, such as segregation, can be much more dangerous to the human race than abortions which are done for an extremely varied amount of reasons.

[Socrates]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1132506' date='Nov 30 2006, 10:54 PM']
To me, the pro-life philosophy is just that... philisophic. It gives absolutley no regard, no empathy, no understanding to the women that get put into those situations. They are the ones that get my sympathy and my empathy, because they are the ones in that situation. They are the ones that have to face the consequenses of thier actions. They are the ones that either have to carry a baby they don't want, around for 9 months or get strapped in a chair. Not the church.
[/quote]
This shows that you don't know jack squat about the pro-life movement.

I do know many active in the pro-life movement. I know a single mother of two who has dedicated her life to helping women with crisis pregnancies, and helping care for them and their babies.
I've seen a whole lot more charitable action for women with difficult pregnancies from convicted pro-lifers than I have from so-called "pro-choicers", whose sole concern often seems to be pushing abortion. And many of these active pro-lifers are women and mothers themselves.
Sorry, your words don't hold weight, and merely reflect your own prejudice and bigotry.

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1132532' date='Nov 30 2006, 11:33 PM']
I disagree. I believe a united philosophy based on hate, such as segregation, can be much more dangerous to the human race than abortions which are done for an extremely varied amount of reasons.
[/quote]
Whatever the reasons, abortions always result in the taking of an innocent human life.

That's a more serious evil than being forced to the back of the bus. (And I'm sure segregationists can provide lots of reasons for their thinking other than simply "hate" - not that it excuses them, either.)

Edited December 1, 2006 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1132130' date='Nov 30 2006, 05:28 PM']
As I've said before... making it Illegal will NOT stop it. You can't stop every abortion. It's impossible and you have a messiah complex if you think otherwise. I support making it SAFE for the mother by regulating the procedure.[/quote]
This is nonsense. Making murder or any other crime illegal will not totally stop it either. Murders still happen all the time. Should all murder (of anybody) be legal then?
Complete anarchy is the only logical conclusion to your logic.

[quote]The reasons a woman get's an abortion are about as numerous as the grains of sand on a beach. I can in no way go through all of the reasons women have had abortions and say I supported them or not.[/quote]
Of course the same thing could be said of murders of already-born people.
That doesn't mean we should legalize murder, or other such crimes.

Edited December 1, 2006 by Socrates

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1132533' date='Nov 30 2006, 11:38 PM']
That's a more serious evil than being forced to the back of the bus. And I'm sure segregationists can provide lots of reasons for their thinking other than simply "hate" -not that it excuses them, either.)
[/quote]

Remember the racist that came to us just a week or so ago? In their minds they didnt hate at all, they just wanted people of colour to go back where they came from.


Abortionist dont think they hate ether, their just ridding us of unwanted cells...


Both who which believe the unwanted are ether sub-human or not even human...