Pro-life vs Pro-choice

Anything having to do with religion or religious debate goes here.

Moderators: Theodore, elliemaejune

Decrease
User
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Verona VA
Contact:

Postby Decrease » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:31 pm

Lily wrote:
Decrease wrote:Again, what I do not like about the pro-choice movement is that there is no logic to it. They just want choice... no questions asked. Yet, ultimately either they redefine life or your devalue life.


And what I don't like about the pro-life movement is they don't follow up. They figure that once the child is born, it's the parent's duty - not the society who forced it. They don't understand that support is more important that condemnation for someone in a very scary place, and they have no capacity to step into another's shoes. They figure that by making it illegal, it will stop it, when in reality is that the most of the women that do have abortions would still have one - in an unsafe environment.


That is not true. My family has both supported and worked with women who had children or who are post-abortive. One of the leaders in outreach to women after pregnancy and before is a relative of my wife, the one who shared the Gospel with my wife.

Get into the debate and answer my previous questions. Ultimately, you believe that all people are not equal and some do not have an intrinsic value to life and others do... based upon a popularity contest.


Debate? When you remove the references to Hitler, I will go back to your original questions. Until then, my answer is that I am pro-choice, because I do not have the capacity to make a choice for someone else without knowing their situation, and forcing them to conform to my own ideals.

This answer will be repeated ad nauseum until either a) the ludicrous references are removed so that a true debate is possible, or b) you accept my answer.[/quote]

All you have to do is logically show how it is different. Logically, that is all you have to do. The problem with people saying "I don't like that reference" is that this is not a logical rebuttal. All you have to do is show how the worldviews differ. I would be glad to correct my statements if you show how they differ.

Lily
User
Posts: 427
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 5:51 am

Postby Lily » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:32 pm

Decrease, you will not accept anything I say, and your unwillingness to remove such offensive statements halts this conversation.

Good day.
"The greatest sign of success for a teacher... is to be able to say, "The children are now working as if I did not exist."
- M. Montessori
Proud non-member of the HSLDA

Decrease
User
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Verona VA
Contact:

Postby Decrease » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:35 pm

Lily,

YOu know very little about me. I am sorry that you fail to distinguish yourself from such remarks. I will neither change them nor recant until a logical formula is shown. Why? I go where the logic goes... You go where your emotions go.

In that, there is no rational argument for the Pro-Choice position unless you hold to a pure anarchist viewpoint.

4given
User
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:50 am
Location: S.Indiana

Postby 4given » Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:55 am

Decrease, I have seen the rationale in your arguments. It it obvious that you are a seasoned debator, although extremely annoying in your approach.

Lily, why is it that you can make sweeping insults upon his stance and think nothing of it? I've seen you accuse another individual of packing up and running when things get hot...is that what you're doing? Sincerely, I don't think Decrease thinks you are like Hitler. He compared the lines of thinking and showed how they could arrive at the same conclusion. There's a difference.

User avatar
Theodore
Moderator
Posts: 2122
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:14 pm
Location: Missouri, US
Contact:

Postby Theodore » Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:55 am

sunnie_skys wrote:The last time I checked..none of us were God!! So why are we speaking for him. Its called free will and he gave it to us! Do you argue that??? Yes or NO? If he did not want us to make choices then he would have taken them away long ago!! I am certainly not God nor do I ever want to be and He gave me the choice to do what I want. Am I correct..yes or no? I dont need a long novel all i want is a yes or no. Im playing your card now decrease, yes or no, yes or no, yes or no? I agree with Lily you can not and should not make a choice for another person. If they do wrong they will have to answer for it in the end wont they? Yes or No?


We were all given free will, which means we all have the capability to do the wrong thing. That does not mean, however, that we aren't supposed to do our best to convince others that the wrong thing is the wrong thing.

Lily wrote:Here's what you are missing, Decrease. There are no abortionists on this thread.

There are simply those who believe they have the right to control all and those who believe that rights and choices belong to the individual person. Pro-choice is not the same as pro-abortion.


Pro-choice is the same as pro-abortion, you're just standing by and letting it happen rather than actively participating. If you see someone getting beat down in the street and do nothing to stop it, you're an accessory to murder, so if you believe abortion is wrong and do nothing, you're just as (morally) guilty.

And what I don't like about the pro-life movement is they don't follow up. They figure that once the child is born, it's the parent's duty - not the society who forced it. They don't understand that support is more important that condemnation for someone in a very scary place, and they have no capacity to step into another's shoes. They figure that by making it illegal, it will stop it, when in reality is that the most of the women that do have abortions would still have one - in an unsafe environment.


We've donated, we don't just sit around and talk.

Regarding the "they'll still do it and hurt themselves!" argument, we're right back to the question of whether everything should be legal just because someone might still do it. And what happened to personal responsibility? A fair number of people shoot themselves every year, should we ban all guns? People drive drunk every year, should we ban all cars? If people are going to injure themselves having abortions (for the most part, just to hide the fact that they got pregnant when they weren't supposed to), should abortions be made legal?

If a woman has an illegal abortion to kill her baby and gets hurt or killed in the process, that's just too bad. It's her own fault. There is enough involuntary suffering in the world that I'm not going to worry about voluntary suffering.

jkenney1973
User
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:18 pm

Postby jkenney1973 » Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:11 am

You know, this thread started out about Obama and homeschool. It's a shame that it's been degraded into this. A lot of people are out there looking for answers to the Obama question, and this is not helping them at all. In fact, it's making me want to vote Dem. for the first time in my life. But that's beside the point.

Does anyone at all have any answers to the Obama question?

Decrease
User
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Verona VA
Contact:

Postby Decrease » Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:34 am

4given,

I am sorry it is annoying. I do try to outline it logically and in a Post-Modern era, the soft side is lacking :)

4given
User
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:50 am
Location: S.Indiana

Postby 4given » Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:46 am

jkenney1973 wrote:You know, this thread started out about Obama and homeschool. It's a shame that it's been degraded into this. A lot of people are out there looking for answers to the Obama question, and this is not helping them at all. In fact, it's making me want to vote Dem. for the first time in my life. But that's beside the point.

Does anyone at all have any answers to the Obama question?


There is an Obama thread now. You've mistakenly entered into the Twilight Zone...nunununu...I mean pro-choice/pro-life debate. :)

4given
User
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:50 am
Location: S.Indiana

Postby 4given » Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:49 am

Decrease wrote:4given,

I am sorry it is annoying. I do try to outline it logically and in a Post-Modern era, the soft side is lacking :)


I meant it in the most endearing way possible. :D

Ceili
User
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:28 am

Postby Ceili » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:35 am

Theodore wrote:We were all given free will, which means we all have the capability to do the wrong thing. That does not mean, however, that we aren't supposed to do our best to convince others that the wrong thing is the wrong thing.


Again...whether or not it's "wrong" is not agreed upon, so the secondary debate is non-existant.

Theodore wrote:Pro-choice is the same as pro-abortion, you're just standing by and letting it happen rather than actively participating. If you see someone getting beat down in the street and do nothing to stop it, you're an accessory to murder, so if you believe abortion is wrong and do nothing, you're just as (morally) guilty.


Again...whether or not it's "wrong" is not agreed upon. If you don't think it's "wrong" (I won't repeat myself--see my previous post if you're interested), there's nothing for which you should be standing up and there's nothing for which you should feel guilty.

And pro-choice is not the same as pro-abortion. Those who are pro-life (of a zygote or embryo) like to use that argument, but it's inaccurate. I've never known anyone who is pro-choice to rejoice when they hear of an abortion, I've not seen anyone lobby to increase the number of abortions, nor have I seen anyone counsel, advise, or encourage women to have abortions. Again...it's about a different starting point. For someone who is pro-choice, it's simply about choice (and allowing others to make their own choices). But it makes for a more inflammatory and emotional argument when you skew that point (similar to throwing in the Hitler and slavery references). Yes, inflammatory and emotional, but not rational or relevant.

Decrease
User
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Verona VA
Contact:

Postby Decrease » Tue Jan 29, 2008 11:05 am

Ceili,

Yet, according to my two points of contention between the issue, that is the issue of when life begins and the intrinsic value of life, Pro-choice and Pro-Abortionists agree with their disagreement. The issue is not the difference between being Pro-choice and being Pro-abortion... that actually is a debate among those two.

The issue here is about when life begins or the intrinsic worth of human life. To that, there is no distinction from pro-abortionists and pro-choice.

That is why I keep going back to those two points. These two issues are the crux of the entire debate. You either say it is not a human life or that some human life has no intrinsic worth so to protect from harm.

Simple. I think that is always where the debate rages (you can correct me if I am wrong).

Ceili
User
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:28 am

Postby Ceili » Tue Jan 29, 2008 11:48 am

Sorry...I find your posts very hard to decipher--they're a bit convoluted and I often struggle to see your point.

The only thing I could write in response to your last reply is to try to paraphrase my last two replies—but I can't think of a way to make them any more compendious.

Being "for abortion" and "for individuals making their own personal choices" are two totally different things. I understand that saying they are one in the same is an attempt for you to try to validate your point, but it's not working for you. They are not the same. It's simply not accurate. And all the analogies and inflammatory comparisons in the world won't change that.

Your trying to convince someone who is pro-choice that they need to feel guilty and stand up for an innocent human being when they do not view a zygote as a human being is pointless and very likely frustrating for you.

But I do admire your passion and conviction.

Decrease
User
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Verona VA
Contact:

Postby Decrease » Tue Jan 29, 2008 11:49 am

They are two different beliefs, but only when talking to one another. In the debate with Pro-Life, the debate centers on the same issues.

Ceili
User
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:28 am

Postby Ceili » Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:25 pm

Decrease wrote:They are two different beliefs, but only when talking to one another. ...


What are two different beliefs? Pro-choice and pro-abortion? There isn't even such a thing as pro-abortion. I've never met anyone who was pro-abortion. "Pro-abortion" is an inflammatory label created by those who are against abortion trying, in vain, to make a better argument.

And back we go to not being at the same starting point...

Decrease
User
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:39 am
Location: Verona VA
Contact:

Postby Decrease » Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:55 pm

Well, essentially, I think I was just citing you. You said that there is a distinction between being pro-abortion and pro-choice. That may be so, but in the debate about Pro-life, both the pro-abortionist and the pro-choice person would still have to argue the same arguments against the pro-life people. Namely, they would have to say the baby is not a human life or that there is no intrinsic human value in life that should be protected for all human beings.


Return to “Religious Discussion / Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 0 guests