who supports right to choose

[rodriguezequal 3]

Is strapin herself in as she types

[BJean 16]

:smile::w00t::wink:

[pattygreen 5]

patty: "ALL humans are born sinners. That's what that means. When I say a baby is innocent, I mean he didn't do anything deserving of death. He's innocent of any crime. Not that he will never be a sinner in his life. We're all sinners. That's like a person who gets convicted of a crime and gets the death penalty. He's deserving of death. He did something wrong. (he's also a sinner) But a baby (even though he is born a sinner also) didn't do anything wrong , yet he gets killed."

Logically that makes no sense. How can a clump of fetal matter commit sin?

patty: "After thinking about it, I believe a "murderer" is someone who had an evil intent to get rid of another persons life. I think that 'most' pregnant women are not guilty of evil intent. I think they just don't contemplate that another human beings life is ending when they make that decision to abort. They are probably thinking about what they will endure if they continue with the pregnancy and don't think about the baby, because the baby isn't in the eyes view. So, they may not have the "intent" to murder, but that's what the end result of their decision was. A dead person."

In many cases, the baby is exactly what the woman is thinking about when she makes her decisions. Yes, she must consider the impact it will have on her life if she chooses to have a child, but most women are also thinking about what the consequences will be for a child that may possibly be handicapped or malformed in some way, or even just because of the dim future it is promised because it is so unwanted. The end result of an early abortion isn't the "murder" of a person, it is the termination of a possibly developing fertilized egg. I emphasize possibly because there are no guarantees with any pregnancy.

If you believe that taking another's life is murder, then don't you believe that those persons in the government who are charged with pulling the switch on a convicted killer, should be called murderers? When we condemn a person to death we do it as retribution for a person's crime. But we are not always absolutely certain that a mistake wasn't made in the process of his conviction. Yet even though those mistakes are made, our government still continues to put people to death. How can you approve of that process - when the convicted person could be innocent - and disapprove of the abortion process where you say that the baby is innocent?

First of all, as you know, we don't agree that the baby is a 'clump of fetal matter'. I believe it is a human life at the beginning stage.

I believe in the death penalty for those who have been proven without doubt to have committed mureder and for those who have confessed to it. To take anothers life is murder. But to take anothers life as a cosequence for that persons murdering someone is not murder, it is justice. God allows the killing of human beings as restitution for the act of murdering another. He doesn't allow the killing of a baby in the womb for any reason except, I believe, to save the life of the mother. (self defense)

[rodriguezequal 3]

when you say life of the mother you mean the physicality of it and not her life as in what she must live...I think she has the right to protect her life wether it be protecting herself from dying or protecting herself for changing physically, emotionally, and her life from changing...Also on the death penalty but if the murderer asks for forgiveness shouldn't his sins be forgiven? Should he be given another chance according to the "Lord"?

[pattygreen 5]

You've made some excellent points rodriguez. How can an unborn baby be innocent and yet a sinner? It is one of the puzzlements of certain religious orders who believe that a baby who hasn't been christened is destined for hell because the act of christening washes away the sin they are born with. They don't use those words to explain it, of course.

There are many christian denominations that practice infant baptism for that reason, but they are wrong in their reason for it and their view on baptism. The bible teaches that baptism is a public, outward, act of obedience to God. It is something that God asked those who have made a choice to believe in Him to do as a 'symbolic' act of faith. It symbolizes a believers acceptance of Jesus as their Savior and it symbolizes how Jesus died (going under the water) and rose again (coming up out of the water). It doesn't 'save' anyone and is not a requirement for Heaven. It doesn't wash away anyones sin, either. Only Jesus can do that when someone decides to be his. Some denominations just never read the bible. They make up their own doctrine and rules as they feel fit. This is another reason for my disdain for organized 'religion'.

[pattygreen 5]

So if we make abortions illegal then we will also have to do so with the majority of birth controls....that seems like a horrible idea!!!

Not to me. What's better? Killing babies or getting rid of some forms of birth control? Gee, that's a hard one to answer.

[rodriguezequal 3]

Hmm I pretty sure a lot of forms of birth control make it difficult for a fertilized egg to implant so then the egg just washes out...that sounds like the makings of an abortion to me...? I was just saying that if abortion is made illegal then some...a lot...of birth control methods would be made illegal as well

[BJean 16]

rodriguez that has always been one of the sore points for me about capital punishment. I do not believe that you can have it both ways. If you believe that any sinner can be forgiven and go to heaven, and that all they have to do is accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior, then how can any man/woman pull the switch on them and take away that God given right? Even a killer should have his entire life to be able to experience being born again and none of us should have the right to take that from him.

What I am hearing from patty is that it is up to her (and people who believe as she does) to decide who gets to live and die and not only through state mandated executions, but also when an abortion might save a woman's life it is immaterial because to them there are no allowable circumstances that will have a bearing on the decision. They and only they, know when killing someone is permissible and acceptable to God.

Edited June 1, 2009 by BJean

[rodriguezequal 3]

Not to me. What's better? Killing babies or getting rid of some forms of birth control? Gee, that's a hard one to answer.

So it's not a horribble idea? What about all the unwanted babies that would be born...all the young girls getting pregnant? What would we do then???

[pattygreen 5]

That is their goal, of course. It's no coincidence that a majority of anti-choicers are also conservatives/right-leaning religious/etc. Their anti-sex ed, anti-birth control - anti- everything that actually reduces the abortion rate.

Oh really? I think you have that wrong. We're not anti anything that reduces the abortion rate. We're ALL FOR anything that will reduce the abortion rate! I'm not against sex ed. Just against anyone but the parents teaching it to their own children. I'm also not against birth control. Only the kind that destroys the fetus immediately after conception.

Make no mistake - their desire has nothing to do with protecting babies.

Oh really? If it's not about protecting babies, then what's it about? Get real.

+++

I don't know if anyone addressed this (apologies for not doing it myself - i lost track of this thread for a while)

The organ donation thing refers to a hypothetical situation used to try and illustrate to faux-lifers exactly what they're advocating for when they make anti-choice statements/arguments.

Say, you're debating with a faux-lifer and they are taking the position that a woman has an obligation to the fetus she's carrying, that she has no right to remove it under any circumstances (or, as a variation, under only certain circumstances deemed okay by the faux-lifer), that all life is precious, etc. etc.

Basically, the organ donation thing goes something like this:

"I know a man who needs a kidney right now. You (the faux-lifer) are the only person whose organ is suitable. Since people don't have the right to refuse the use of their body to others, give it up."

Personally, I like to make the person needing a kidney a hypothetical 9-year-old child, as faux-lifers routinely prove that their interest in adult life is somewhat less than equal.

The idea being to point out that they themselves will not practice what they preach, i.e. they certainly don't agree to give this person a kidney and will come up with impressively convoluted reasons why they don't have to.

It also serves to air the slut-shaming misogynstic nature of faux-life arguments. Sometimes a faux-lifer will agree that rape and incest victims should be allowed abortions, but not women who just had unprotected sex, or sex with BC that failed. So, it becomes clear that the aim is to punish women for having sex willingly.

The case of Dr. Tiller is a good example because he specialized in late-term abortions. In other words, abortions performed on women who wanted to have a baby but whose pregnancy went wrong somehow, rendering the fetus inviable. He was still referred to as a "baby-killer". Nevermind that what he did literally saved women's lives. Women don't matter.

An organ is something TOTALLY different than a human being.

[pattygreen 5]

when you say life of the mother you mean the physicality of it and not her life as in what she must live...I think she has the right to protect her life wether it be protecting herself from dying or protecting herself for changing physically, emotionally, and her life from changing...Also on the death penalty but if the murderer asks for forgiveness shouldn't his sins be forgiven? Should he be given another chance according to the "Lord"?

God forgives anyone if they ask him to and are sincere, but that doesn't mean he takes away the consequenses.

[rodriguezequal 3]

So which bc methods are acceptable? Condoms and cevical caps? Get real! That is ridiculous! You are against sex ed...because when I say sex ed I mean taught at school...And where do you get off saying WE...again you thinking you speak for all pro lifers just like you speak for ALL christian like you speak for God...come on...not ALL pro lifers or christians share your point of view!!!

[luluc 6]

Perhaps we really do need to keep Guantanamo prison open and throw the likes of this dude in with the rest of the so-called terrorists.

only if castration is done first - so the SOB can't spew any more spawn of hate.....then send him to the prison system w/soap on a rope around his neck.

i still pop into this thread - but i have god's telemarketer on ignore, like every other thread she shows up and her dogma appears. i can handle gadgets' pictures & links - but i don't deal w/telemarketers IRL; nor here.

[rodriguezequal 3]

Nicely said about the telemarketing

[pattygreen 5]

rodriguez that has always been one of the sore points for me about capital punishment. I do not believe that you can have it both ways. If you believe that any sinner can be forgiven and go to heaven, and that all they have to do is accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior, then how can any man/woman pull the switch on them and take away that God given right? Even a killer should have his entire life to be able to experience being born again and none of us should have the right to take that from him.

What I am hearing from patty is that it is up to her (and people who believe as she does) to decide who gets to live and die and not only through state mandated executions, but also when an abortion might save a woman's life it is immaterial because to them there are no allowable circumstances that will have a bearing on the decision. They and only they, know when killing someone is permissible and acceptable to God.

Noone takes away a persons entire lifes chance to become born again except the person who chooses to murder someone and then gets the death penalty for it. The murderer took his own chance away. Not the christian who follows God's laws, and not God himself. The murderer did that to himself by commiting murder. So, it's not up to me, or others who believe as I do to decide who gets to live or die. When the death penalty is the consequence for murder, then it is up to the individual himself to decide. If he does what's right in life and keeps his hands to himself, he gets to LIVE. If he murders someone, he gets to DIE. Also, the medical professional is the one who decides if continuing a pregnancy is life threatening to a woman or not, not me or others who believe as I do.