Pro-abortion Or Pro-choice

[StColette]

[quote name='kujo' post='1619156' date='Aug 6 2008, 12:27 PM']Addelyn Berru, about 7 months old.[/quote]

Very cute, I have one of those too

Baby Murphy at 24 weeks

[Fidei Defensor]

I'm going to conceed the point because no offense, but I don't really feel like arguing a point that I don't care as much about. I view life as just another part of the universe. If you feel the need, call me whatever names you want and talk about how it's a "slippery slope" between that and legalized whatever. But since I don't believe in absolute morality, life and death are just desirable and undesirable things, respectively. So no, I don't propose legalized murder, I just don't really think having such a strong strong opinion about underdeveloped organisms in the womb is that important.

Sorry. You win.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1619175' date='Aug 6 2008, 11:39 AM']sorry to hijack my own thread..
This is a most excellent point.[/quote]

aside from the fact that rape, holocausts etc,,,, are not at all the same as abortion in every state. this issue he did not address. probably disagrees, but.
and even if they were the same,, it doesn't mean you should allow people to remain unchanged simply to due principled lines of thinking that's not even sinful were they to be breached.

eg/ie
also, he didn't address the fact that by not ever compromising on mere use of words, he's preventing the very goal the prolife cause seeks, ie, changed perspective from prochoice people. he can't tell me it's never effective to meet them at their level. never is a strong word... he has a big burden there. so, if he insists it,,,, he hasn't explained his reasoning at all, as to how he thinks that's necessarily the case, other than to conclussorily state that it is the case. considering that this is the main issue that the prolife people who would use the word would argue,,, he's completley missing the points that matter.

also he hasn't even conceded, that he's allowing people to go unchanged due to his principles on the word, if he'd agree they might remain unchanged. at least conclude the logical conclusions of your actions.

so.. he can just be a hard hat, and appear uncompromising, and as if there's total merit to his cause,,, by insisting that it's never effective in any situation to compromise the usage... or, while not even conceding the points that make his position uneffective

[StColette]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1619416' date='Aug 6 2008, 03:33 PM']I'm going to conceed the point because no offense, but I don't really feel like arguing a point that I don't care as much about. I view life as just another part of the universe. If you feel the need, call me whatever names you want and talk about how it's a "slippery slope" between that and legalized whatever. But since I don't believe in absolute morality, life and death are just desirable and undesirable things, respectively. So no, I don't propose legalized murder, I just don't really think having such a strong strong opinion about underdeveloped organisms in the womb is that important.[/quote]

I really wish you would not back out of the discussion. I saw you asking for dialogue in previous posts, which makes it seem as if you are wanting to discuss the issue at hand. And then when someone is willing to discuss with dialogue, with no name calling and not just simply saying you're wrong, you turn tail and run. If you weren't looking for dialogue then why ask for it?

[dairygirl4u2c]

probably just having a hard time admitting he's wrong. it appears that way surely to everyone but him. probably him too if he's honest with himself.
he concede that others won,, but it was only based on the idea that it didnt matter to him and he'd left the debate.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='StColette' post='1619434' date='Aug 6 2008, 01:55 PM']I really wish you would not back out of the discussion. I saw you asking for dialogue in previous posts, which makes it seem as if you are wanting to discuss the issue at hand. And then when someone is willing to discuss with dialogue, with no name calling and not just simply saying you're wrong, you turn tail and run. If you weren't looking for dialogue then why ask for it?[/quote]
Without some religious belief, I have no reason to be "right." This dialogue was enough for me to see that it really is not worth my time because we aren't going to get anywhere and I'd rather not waste your time.

Am I wrong? Sure. According to you, I am. That's okay. I don't hold a strong enough position to be anything. Sorry.

[dairygirl4u2c]

you weren't arguing how there is a difference between a bbay five seconds out and five seconds in, truly arguing it i mean.... you simply said stuff about how everything is everything, mumbo jumbo nonsense. to eat is to sleep is to work all is one, etc. when i read you say thosethings, i read the subtext, ratioanlizations on your part that you're trying to dodge it. i mean, the fact you used the poorest argument you coudl ever use, and then went on in the same post to say you give up, goes to show.

there's no way to say that a baby five seconds in and five seconds out makes a difference. that i can see. given the stuff i said in my last paragraph, i don't think even you believe there's a difference.... and if i am wrong, your last post is right but if i'm i'm right which i think i am, you're just avoiding the issue.

that's for the bilogical issues. for the social and legal and poltical,, you're not making many arguments other than life is part of the universe mumbo jumbo. i'm nto sure what you're gettin at but.

Edited August 6, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1619581' date='Aug 6 2008, 04:09 PM']you weren't arguing how there is a difference between a bbay five seconds out and five seconds in, truly arguing it i mean.... you simply said stuff about how everything is everything, mumbo jumbo nonsense. to eat is to sleep is to work all is one, etc. when i read you say thosethings, i read the subtext, ratioanlizations on your part that you're trying to dodge it. i mean, the fact you used the poorest argument you coudl ever use, and then went on in the same post to say you give up, goes to show.

there's no way to say that a baby five seconds in and five seconds out makes a difference. that i can see. given the stuff i said in my last paragraph, i don't think even you believe there's a difference.... and if i am wrong, your last post is right but if i'm i'm right which i think i am, you're just avoiding the issue.

that's for the bilogical issues. for the social and legal and poltical,, you're not making many arguments other than life is part of the universe mumbo jumbo. i'm nto sure what you're gettin at but.[/quote]
Sure, whatever. I don't have any other arguments. To me, I'll still see abortion as okay. Oh well.

[dairygirl4u2c]

hey at least you're honest and can admit it.
that puts you light years ahead of half of this phorum. (generally speaking, not on this issue specifically necessarily)

[Socrates]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1618412' date='Aug 5 2008, 05:11 PM']Just because something is not living does not make it dead-for example, any non-living matter.

I think where the difference of opinion occurs is that I don't believe in an immortal soul. So something can be a clump of cells, every cell is "living" by the standard that it has all the functions of a cell. However, I don't see a human as fully and functionally human until the point of birth.[/quote]
A human being is alive from the moment of conception. It is alive by any biological definition of life; it feeds, grows, develops, moves, etc. To deny this is to deny factual reality. It is most certainly NOT "non-living matter."
That is not a matter of opinion, or religious belief, but of objective, proven, observed, physical scientific fact.

(Might want to check out [url="http://www.abortionfacts.com/fetal_development/prenatal_developement.asp"]this website[/url] for more details.)

You can insist on saying an unborn baby is not alive, and can insist on calling it a clump of cells, a wad of tissues, or a bunch of bananas - however that does nothing at all to change the objective facts of the matter.

Saying that the unborn child is some dead, non-living thing which suddenly magically comes to life after leaving the womb seems to me the real fairy tale here!

Edited August 7, 2008 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1619452' date='Aug 6 2008, 03:08 PM']Without some religious belief, I have no reason to be "right." This dialogue was enough for me to see that it really is not worth my time because we aren't going to get anywhere and I'd rather not waste your time.

Am I wrong? Sure. According to you, I am. That's okay. I don't hold a strong enough position to be anything. Sorry.[/quote]


[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1619614' date='Aug 6 2008, 05:45 PM']Sure, whatever. I don't have any other arguments. To me, I'll still see abortion as okay. Oh well.[/quote]
In other words, you have no interest in finding the truth about abortion, only in spilling your own bile.

[Deb]

It makes me very very sad that the issue could be something that is not that important to someone. I pray for all of those who will go through life thinking that this is all there is. I always pray that the Lord will reveal himself to those who need to see to believe. I was one of them. Maybe some day, when a person holds a new life that they took part in conceiving in their hands, then they will know the truth of life.

[StColette]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1619452' date='Aug 6 2008, 04:08 PM']Without some religious belief, I have no reason to be "right." This dialogue was enough for me to see that it really is not worth my time because we aren't going to get anywhere and I'd rather not waste your time.

Am I wrong? Sure. According to you, I am. That's okay. I don't hold a strong enough position to be anything. Sorry.[/quote]

I'm not sure if you even read any of my posts, because quite frankly I never told you that you were wrong. I personally believe that you are mistaken in your stance on abortion, but I never said anything of the sort. Dialogue is about detaching yourself from your own personal views and ask questions as to figure out why the other person feels the way that they do. That's dialogue

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='StColette' post='1621326' date='Aug 8 2008, 10:05 AM']I'm not sure if you even read any of my posts, because quite frankly I never told you that you were wrong. I personally believe that you are mistaken in your stance on abortion, but I never said anything of the sort. Dialogue is about detaching yourself from your own personal views and ask questions as to figure out why the other person feels the way that they do. That's dialogue[/quote]
I do read your posts and I appreciate the time you've taken on this topic. Socrates has provided some links in another thread and I am currently in the process of reviewing them. If I find them scientifically sound, I said I would be willing to shift my view and stance on abortion.

[Didymus]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1619428' date='Aug 6 2008, 03:46 PM']aside from the fact that rape, holocausts etc,,,, are not at all the same as abortion in every state. this issue he did not address. probably disagrees, but.
and even if they were the same,, it doesn't mean you should allow people to remain unchanged simply to due principled lines of thinking that's not even sinful were they to be breached.

eg/ie
also, he didn't address the fact that by not ever compromising on mere use of words, he's preventing the very goal the prolife cause seeks, ie, changed perspective from prochoice people. he can't tell me it's never effective to meet them at their level. never is a strong word... he has a big burden there. so, if he insists it,,,, he hasn't explained his reasoning at all, as to how he thinks that's necessarily the case, other than to conclussorily state that it is the case. considering that this is the main issue that the prolife people who would use the word would argue,,, he's completley missing the points that matter.

also he hasn't even conceded, that he's allowing people to go unchanged due to his principles on the word, if he'd agree they might remain unchanged. at least conclude the logical conclusions of your actions.

so.. he can just be a hard hat, and appear uncompromising, and as if there's total merit to his cause,,, by insisting that it's never effective in any situation to compromise the usage... or, while not even conceding the points that make his position uneffective[/quote]

I agree. I didnt change my position, I was just acknowledging his point.

I think really all I could say about my position in response is that if our opponents are to be called pro-abortion, then we ought to rightly be called anti-choice. But then we would have a discrepancy over words, and not be able to move past our terms for each other.

We do have the right argument, because we're arguing for truth. It is of my opinion that the way we can most effectively and fruitfully motion that argument to those that disagree with us without getting caught up in the specific words that we use, that way is the best way to use. We are trying to convey ideas, not words. Let's move those ideas in the best way possible.

Edited August 13, 2008 by Didymus