Info Your political lean, and why

[Victorian Gray]

Catholics don’t realize how common unintended pregnancies (and thus, abortions) are because no one will fuck them.

Someone is because Catholics get abortions at the same rate as non-Catholics

https://www.americamagazine.org/pol...e-just-likely-get-abortion-other-us-women-why

and a majority believe that abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

"Catholics are somewhat more divided; 51% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases and 42% say it should be illegal"

http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm not pro abortion, that's a straw man. I'm pro choice, as in allowing people to make that choice for themselves. If you want to convince women to continue on with a pregnancy that might kill them or require them to raise a child that will require assistance to live for the rest of their lives, or put them in such a situation that may endanger society or their child in the future, well that's on you. If a woman wishes to terminate a pregnancy, that's their right and its their conscious they have to deal with.

I used pro abortion because the right term slipped my mind. Otherwise, I don't think you know how to read. I am pro abortion in the sense that I believe the right to have an abortion is a necessity of law. I also believe it is the killing of a potential human being. I simply can't believe it better for pregnant mothers to die in back alleys, which we know they will if abortion is outlawed, plus a bunch of other negatives, is preferable to the taking of the life of a still unconscious being.
I find it lamentable that pregnancy is not volitional.

 

[ivwshane]

I used pro abortion because the right term slipped my mind. Otherwise, I don't think you know how to read. I am pro abortion in the sense that I believe the right to have an abortion is a necessity of law. I also believe it is the killing of a potential human being. I simply can't believe it better for pregnant mothers to die in back alleys, which we know they will if abortion is outlawed, plus a bunch of other negatives, is preferable to the taking of the life of a still unconscious being.
I find it lamentable that pregnancy is not volitional.

I can read just fine. You, like I did with your post, took exception to something that was said. In my case it was your use of the phrase, "pro abortion", in your case you took my use of the word "you" as if I was talking directly to you and not the pro life person you were speaking for.

 

[Moonbeam]

Please explain.

ivwshane went after religion which is generally anti abortion claiming it has been responsible for the death of millions of lives. I would say that is not the fault of religion as it was intended but religion that has become mechanical and monstrous because humanity is asleep. To combat that negative view of religion and to show it's biased slant, I pointed out that it is religion generally that opposed abortion which involved killing human beings. So which is it? Religion kills or saves or sometime one and sometimes the other, or that in it's real form all life is considered sacred?

My point is both that abortion is the taking of innocent human life but that women must have a choice to chose that or the societal consequences are even worse for everybody. It is an argument from utility and legal as a court decided compromise, an inevitable conclusion based on unbiased reason. The only proper action of the issue is to reduce the need for it not the availability.

 

[Moonbeam]

I can read just fine. You, like I did with your post, took exception to something that was said. In my case it was your use of the phrase, "pro abortion", in your case you took my use of the word "you" as if I was talking directly to you and not the pro life person you were speaking for.

I did however admit that I used the wrong term. Are you fine with how you used 'you'?

If I were replying to your post and wanted to make clear that you wasn't intended to mean me, I think and hope I would have said:

"If (somebody) wants to convince women to continue on with a pregnancy that might kill them or require them to raise a child that will require assistance to live for the rest of their lives, or put them in such a situation that may endanger society or their child in the future, well that's on {them). If a woman wishes to terminate a pregnancy, that's their right and its their conscious they have to deal with."

 

[Blackjack200]

ivwshane went after religion which is generally anti abortion claiming it has been responsible for the death of millions of lives. I would say that is not the fault of religion as it was intended but religion that has become mechanical and monstrous because humanity is asleep. To combat that negative view of religion and to show it's biased slant, I pointed out that it is religion generally that opposed abortion which involved killing human beings. So which is it? Religion kills or saves or sometime one and sometimes the other, or that in it's real form all life is considered sacred?

My point is both that abortion is the taking of innocent human life but that women must have a choice to chose that or the societal consequences are even worse for everybody. It is an argument from utility and legal as a court decided compromise, an inevitable conclusion based on unbiased reason. The only proper action of the issue is to reduce the need for it not the availability.

23.7% of women in America have an abortion before the age of 45. You are surrounded by murderers.

 

[Vic]

Catholics don’t realize how common unintended pregnancies (and thus, abortions) are because no one will fuck them.

Monty Python disagrees with you.

 

[Ajay]

I guess you need to be ' senreminded that it was you that brought up your religion as a constitutional right and as your excuse for supporting policies that negatively impact the country.

Why back down now?

No, others challenged me and I responded, try and keep up. Apparently, even a fucking observation offends your 'refined' sensibilities. You want to cover up the realities of the human condition with mass executions rather than trying to solve the root problems and accept that not all can be solved. Your lame excuse is free choice and fake societal benefits. Approximately 9 million of the unborn are killed, dead, snuffed out of existence in he US alone. No free choice for them, no thought of the imperfect, yet beautiful lives that the vast majority of them will lead. You look at suffering as a disease that must be eradicated at ALL costs, including the death of others. Your truth is a delusional fantasy of what real human life is and yet you pugnaciously claim I don’t see. You can spread these lies about the value of human life all you want, I suppose; after all, the only cost to you is your black heart and a glazed over mind immune to the crushing reality that what matters most is human LIFE. Life that is infinitely more important than choice.

 

[Vic]

No, others challenged me and I responded, try and keep up. Apparently, even a fucking observation offends your 'refined' sensibilities. You want to cover up the realities of the human condition with mass executions rather than trying to solve the root problems and accept that not all can be solved. Your lame excuse is free choice and fake societal benefits. Approximately 9 million of the unborn are killed, dead, snuffed out of existence in he US alone. No free choice for them, no thought of the imperfect, yet beautiful lives that the vast majority of them will lead. You look at suffering as a disease that must be eradicated at ALL costs, including the death of others. Your truth is a delusional fantasy of what real human life is and yet you pugnaciously claim I don’t see. You can spread these lies about the value of human life all you want, I suppose; after all, the only cost to you is your black heart and a glazed over mind immune to the crushing reality that what matters most is human LIFE. Life that is infinitely more important than choice.

Life that can be born so you can enslave it, eh?

 

[ivwshane]

ivwshane went after religion which is generally anti abortion claiming it has been responsible for the death of millions of lives. I would say that is not the fault of religion as it was intended but religion that has become mechanical and monstrous because humanity is asleep. To combat that negative view of religion and to show it's biased slant, I pointed out that it is religion generally that opposed abortion which involved killing human beings. So which is it? Religion kills or saves or sometime one and sometimes the other, or that in it's real form all life is considered sacred?

My point is both that abortion is the taking of innocent human life but that women must have a choice to chose that or the societal consequences are even worse for everybody. It is an argument from utility and legal as a court decided compromise, an inevitable conclusion based on unbiased reason. The only proper action of the issue is to reduce the need for it not the availability.

I agree 100%

To be clear my intention wasn't to go after religion but to point out the posters hypocrisy.

More importantly, your point about the need to reduce the need for an abortion cannot be understated.

I think an acceptable position of a pro lifer would be to be pro choice and support policy positions that reduce the need for abortions; things like youth sex education, free contraceptives, free prenatal care, paid maternity leave, etc.

 

[Moonbeam]

No, others challenged me and I responded, try and keep up. Apparently, even a fucking observation offends your 'refined' sensibilities. You want to cover up the realities of the human condition with mass executions rather than trying to solve the root problems and accept that not all can be solved. Your lame excuse is free choice and fake societal benefits. Approximately 9 million of the unborn are killed, dead, snuffed out of existence in he US alone. No free choice for them, no thought of the imperfect, yet beautiful lives that the vast majority of them will lead. You look at suffering as a disease that must be eradicated at ALL costs, including the death of others. Your truth is a delusional fantasy of what real human life is and yet you pugnaciously claim I don’t see. You can spread these lies about the value of human life all you want, I suppose; after all, the only cost to you is your black heart and a glazed over mind immune to the crushing reality that what matters most is human LIFE. Life that is infinitely more important than choice.

You have decided, I think, that your absolute certainty should apply to others when it is actually religiously derived. But I think if you peer deeply into the past and the origin of your religious beliefs they come from a time when a human life was defined as beginning some few days after birth, doubtlessly, in my opinion, to soften the blow of the very high infant mortality rate of those times, in that the death of soul possessing beings would have made the loss of those children far far more difficult to accept on an emotional basis.

I think this a great kindness that was extended in the past is lost on fanatics these days because their moral certainty isn't just to govern their own life, but lacking any real moral conviction, intuitively, they need to see their morality accepted by others in order to bloster their convictions it is correct.

You think abortion is murder of a human being. Don't get an abortion and if you are a male, stay the fuck out of it. Not your decision ever to need to make.

(Edited to better express what I was trying to say.)

 

[ivwshane]

I did however admit that I used the wrong term. Are you fine with how you used 'you'?

If I were replying to your post and wanted to make clear that you wasn't intended to mean me, I think and hope I would have said:

"If (somebody) wants to convince women to continue on with a pregnancy that might kill them or require them to raise a child that will require assistance to live for the rest of their lives, or put them in such a situation that may endanger society or their child in the future, well that's on {them). If a woman wishes to terminate a pregnancy, that's their right and its their conscious they have to deal with."

My mistake was assuming we were both talking to the same person you were speaking as. It wasn't meant to be an attack on you but rather a response to the reasoning a pro lifer would use.

 

[Ajay]

Someone is because Catholics get abortions at the same rate as non-Catholics

https://www.americamagazine.org/pol...e-just-likely-get-abortion-other-us-women-why

and a majority believe that abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

"Catholics are somewhat more divided; 51% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases and 42% say it should be illegal"

http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/

These surveys are useless without the qualifier 'practicing catholic'. Sadly, for our faith, the majority Catholics aren’t practicing and don’t even realize that Sunday mass is an obligation under canon law.

 

[Moonbeam]

I agree 100%

To be clear my intention wasn't to go after religion but to point out the posters hypocrisy.

More importantly, your point about the need to reduce the need for an abortion cannot be understated.

I think an acceptable position of a pro lifer would be to be pro choice and support policy positions that reduce the need for abortions; things like youth sex education, free contraceptives, free prenatal care, paid maternity leave, etc.

Cheers!

 

[Moonbeam]

My mistake was assuming we were both talking to the same person you were speaking as. It wasn't meant to be an attack on you but rather a response to the reasoning a pro lifer would use.

No problem. I don't know if the confusion was grammatically baked in or I read in a defensive posture. All's well on my end now.

 

[Ajay]

I think this great kindness that was extended in the past is lost of fanatics these days because their moral certainty isn't just to govern their own life, but lacking any real moral conviction intuitively, they need to see their morality accepted by others as the only proof it is correct.

I don’t know what motivates others, you may be correct. I know that I, as a convert, studied the teachings of the catholic faith in detail by reading quite a bit of church history and theology. The moral conviction I have developed is part of an active engagement and passive reflection and prayer. I didn’t posses such conviction from earlier life, nor did I simply accept the teaching of the church a priori. Ultimately though, no level of intellectual engagement bears any fruit if one stumbles when encountering the cross of Christ. Acceptance of ones personal culpability, and the gratuitous gift of redemption are essential for moral, psychological and spiritual transformation and integrating.

 

[Ajay]

Life that can be born so you can enslave it, eh?

Seriously, wtf?

 

[Ajay]

I think an acceptable position of a pro lifer would be to be pro choice and support policy positions that reduce the need for abortions; things like youth sex education, free contraceptives, free prenatal care, paid maternity leave, etc.

For a pro lifer to be pro choice would be an obvious oxymoron. Im all in for education and services geared towards reducing the abortion rate. I would be happy to have my tax dollars so spent.

 

[Vic]

Seriously, wtf?

What kind of life will this precious life be living once it's lived past the point of your caring?

 

[Ajay]

What kind of life will this precious life be living once it's lived past the point of your caring?

I care for the welfare of all our citizens regardless of age. As an example, that’s why I support universal health care.

 

[Vic]

I care for the welfare of all our citizens regardless of age. As an example, that’s why I support universal health care.

So you support us paying for all of these unwanted children too?

 

[dank69]

So, abortion is a contraceptive.

My bad, 'a substitute' for contraceptive.

For a guy who was starting to get uppity about me not understanding biology this seems like a pretty big mistake, no?

Regardless, let's back up a bit. First of all, you asked for examples of how outlawing abortion raises overall healthcare costs and I provide some for you. You completely ignored them. This is not arguing in good faith. Can we assume you have accepted it as fact? Do you wish to dispute it and force me and some of our savvier members to drag out evidence to prove the obvious or are you smarter than that?

I'm going to assume you are smarter than that, but please at least acknowledge you understand that being pro-life means you support a policy that would cost the government more, which flies directly in the face of being a fiscal conservative. Don't worry, we can move on to discussing why you do not actually believe the following after we tidy up a bit:

I vote mainly for democrats, which is against an interest that is very important to me. I do it, in part, because the republicans suck at just about everything else. I have hope that Democrats will do the right thing and rescue the middle class and our democracy. For some reason people just assume I’m a conservative because I’m Catholic, it’s not axiomatic. I understand exactly what I am doing. And I understand the difficult circumstances that some women are in. I think we should be doing more to help those women rather that snuffing out the lives of ~9 million equally valuable lives. The mentality that finds that acceptable baffles me.

You do not actually believe that the lives are equally valuable. I know you think you do. You all do. But you all do not. We can get to that.

 

[Pohemi]

Yep, pretty much as expected.

 

[Ajay]

I don’t normally get involved in debating hot button issue like this because they always devolve. I apologize for taking the thread so off track and making this too personal.

 

[brandonbull]

It's gotta be difficult to move the cultural needle right of center without oppressing gays and suppressing abortion.

Sexual preference doesn't factor into my daily concerns nor do people wanting to have abortions.