|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2024 22:04:35 GMT
Yes, but why on earth would anyone want an abortion carried out just because the foetus is helpless? Because they can. Please link to any case when this has been proved as the primary cause for an abortion, i.e. that the subject was picked on just for being defenceless. Evasion will be noted.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2024 22:16:06 GMT
]It's always the whys. Funny how people generally don't have a problem with not speaking for another person, but demand that someone speak for God. Matthew 21:21 21 Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done. (Usually glossed as for faith to operate, it must be released through spoken words. What you speak is evidence of your faith.) 1 Peter 3:15 1 Peter 3:15 ... Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. (Believers should always be ready to provide a rationale for their faith.) Of course Christians have historically believed that God has already spoken, in the Bible. Which is precisely why, when their supposed deity admits to creating natural evil in Isiah, we can observe that miscarriages are natural evils. And now, entirely expectedly, we also observe the deafening silence from those who elsewhere condemn the loss of life through the abrupt termination of life in the womb. QED.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 5, 2024 23:19:08 GMT
Please link to any case when this has been proved as the primary cause for an abortion, i.e. that the subject was picked on just for being defenceless. Evasion will be noted. I didn't say anyone has. I said they can. And because you would object to someone having an abortion for that reason, then you support restrictions. Ipso facto, your answer to the OP's question is no.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jan 5, 2024 23:20:57 GMT
For the vast majority of human history, nobody knew you should wash your hands to prevent the spread of disease, and even once people figured this out, the majority didn't want to listen, and the doctor who made this discovery was murdered for his finding. So what you're really aiming at is what a lot of people angry at/don't believe in God ultimately ask, 'if God is real, why isn't life perfect?' none of whom can answer why *should* it be just because God is real? What does one have to do with the other? 'Oh if life were perfect, THEN we would believe in God'. Except no, even then people would have their excuses, because even back in Biblical times when people SAW God and *knew* He was real, they still didn't believe, they still didn't obey. So this little round and round is just going to go nowhere because you're not going to get the answers you want and even if you did you would just move the goalposts to another 'well why doesn't God blah blah blah?'
It's always the whys. Funny how people generally don't have a problem with not speaking for another person, but demand that someone speak for God.
And the same people who demand to know why God does something, never bother to consult the source.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 5, 2024 23:22:59 GMT
]It's always the whys. Funny how people generally don't have a problem with not speaking for another person, but demand that someone speak for God. Matthew 21:21 21 Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done. (Usually glossed as for faith to operate, it must be released through spoken words. What you speak is evidence of your faith.) 1 Peter 3:15 1 Peter 3:15 ... Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. (Believers should always be ready to provide a rationale for their faith.) Of course Christians have historically believed that God has already spoken, in the Bible. Which is why, when their supposed deity admits to creating natural evil in Isiah, we can then observe that miscarriages are natural evils. And now, entirely expectedly, we also observe the deafening silence from those who elsewhere condemn the loss of life through the abrupt termination of life in the womb. QED. I see. That's quite the dilemma you have there. Either know the mind of God, or know nothing about him (presumably because there's nothing to know, amirite). We've been through this before. It's reasonable and perfectly acceptable to say a woman works in mysterious ways when we don't know why she had an abortion, but when the same is said about God, it's a cop-out.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 5, 2024 23:24:23 GMT
It's always the whys. Funny how people generally don't have a problem with not speaking for another person, but demand that someone speak for God. And the same people who demand to know why God does something, never bother to consult the source.
That would require introspection from those who only look outside.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jan 5, 2024 23:26:28 GMT
Would you object if they were? Yes, but why on earth would anyone want an abortion carried out just because the foetus is helpless? Abortions are overwhelmingly predicated around the health and wellbeing of women.
"Waaaaaaah! I'm too lazy to work and I'll just KILL myself if I can't get an abortion" is NOT about the health and wellbeing of women. And being coerced by so called 'loved ones' who know better, is not about health or wellbeing either.
Answer this one. Why on earth would anyone want to rape, torture and murder another human being? It happens literally ALL the time, all over the world. Poor people do it, middle class people do it, rich and powerful people do it. But oh no woman could EVER be so evil, so petty, so spiteful, to kill her own baby, just because she can, even though several women make that explicit threat to their boyfriends as a warning not to do anything to piss them off, and no 'doctor' could ever be so evil to murder thousands of helpless little babies just because he can charge thousands of dollars a pop. Kermit Gosnell owned 17 properties performing illegal, late term, up to day of birth abortions for 40 years, charging teenage girls $2500 a pop for second trimester jobs, you think he got those with food stamps? You think those were all medically necessary? When the teenage girls on his staff had charts for how many women were only there because their boyfriends were forcing them to? And nobody ever said 'well take your money back, if you don't want it, we're not going to do it'. Instead they got told 'too late, the money's been paid, we're DOING this whether you changed your mind or not'. And that was just ONE abortionist, who all the legal ones sing his praises. So if they admire him so much, you know it wasn't just him operating like that.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2024 23:33:52 GMT
Please link to any case when this has been proved as the primary cause for an abortion, i.e. that the subject was picked on just for being defenceless. Evasion will be noted. I didn't say anyone has. I said they can.. I am not sure that anyone can get an abortion just on the basis that the foetus is helpless, although novastar was, typically more assertive in this claim than you. I can't check every jurisdiction, but I am confident that the acceptable reasons for an abortion being granted are not for hatred of the defenceless for being so. So perhaps you can link to anywhere where this can be a reason. Evasion will be noted this time, too. www.verywellhealth.com/reasons-for-abortion-906589It is no mystery btw that I support some sensible and reasonable restrictions on abortion, so none of this is controversial.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,329
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 5, 2024 23:35:34 GMT
So what you're really aiming at is what a lot of people angry at/don't believe in God ultimately ask, 'if God is real, why isn't life perfect?' none of whom can answer why *should* it be just because God is real? What does one have to do with the other? 'Oh if life were perfect, THEN we would believe in God'. I'm not saying life needs to be perfect for there to be a God. I'm saying that God made miscarriages possible yet you don't condemn him for it the way you condemn women who have abortions. What is the key difference?
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,329
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 5, 2024 23:40:29 GMT
It's reasonable and perfectly acceptable to say a woman works in mysterious ways when we don't know why she had an abortion, but when the same is said about God, it's a cop-out. But the opposite is happening here. Women are getting blamed for having abortions but God is getting let off for being the cause of miscarriages.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2024 23:52:06 GMT
I see. That's quite the dilemma you have there. Either know the mind of God, or know nothing about him (presumably because there's nothing to know, amirite). We've been through this before. Scripture tells us that only the Holy Spirit knows the mind of God while yes, I remember in a previous exchange you indeed use the God Works in Mysterious Ways defence though you put it off as long as possible. Since most abortions are done for known reasons, as already mentioned (and evidenced) it is not really likely to be a mystery. A woman may want confidentiality of course. In the case of the presumed deity it is a common cop out since it is often a cover to explain actions which on the face of it, or to a reasonable objective observer, are either contradictory, illogical or goes against the notion of a just and good God. Such as admitting to the deliberate creation of such a natural evil as miscarriages.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jan 5, 2024 23:53:21 GMT
It's reasonable and perfectly acceptable to say a woman works in mysterious ways when we don't know why she had an abortion, but when the same is said about God, it's a cop-out. But the opposite is happening here. Women are getting blamed for having abortions but God is getting let off for being the cause of miscarriages.
So murder shouldn't be illegal since people die from natural causes. Susan Smith shouldn't be in prison for driving her sons into the river and drowning them, because babies die in their sleep through no known cause.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jan 5, 2024 23:56:54 GMT
I see. That's quite the dilemma you have there. Either know the mind of God, or know nothing about him (presumably because there's nothing to know, amirite). We've been through this before. Scripture tells us that only the Holy Spirit knows the mind of God while yes, I remember in a previous exchange you indeed used the God Works in Mysterious Ways defence. Since most abortions are done for known reasons, as already mentioned (and evidenced) it is not really likely to be a mystery. A woman may want confidentiality of course. In the case of the presumed deity it is a common cop out since it is often a cover to explain actions which on the face of it, or to a reasonable objective observer, are either contradictory, illogical or goes against the notion of a just and good God. Such as admitting to the deliberate creation of such a natural evil as miscarriages.
Funny, baby killers resort to so many doublethink semantics to dehumanize babies, 'they're tumors, 'they're parasites', 'they're just a clump of cells', we're simultaneously told abortion is the single hardest thing a woman will EVER do, but also told it's no big deal, it's just a medical procedure and women should be able to get one at any time for literally ANY reason whatsoever. Do women mourn the loss of a tumor, an ovarian cyst, a tapeworm? We're told it's literally no different than an unborn baby. if abortions should be CELEBRATED, and there are even party favors deeming them 'magical', then shouldn't women just celebrate naturally miscarrying that human tapeworm that they're told will ruin their lives? If it's JUST a clump of cells, what's the big deal? How come pro-choicers don't CONGRATULATE women who miscarry as they can get their life back again? Why don't they cheer on those women, 'yes! Flush that clump of cells!'?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 6, 2024 0:11:00 GMT
Funny, baby killers resort to so many doublethink semantics to dehumanize babies, 'they're tumors, 'they're parasites', 'they're just a clump of cells', we're simultaneously told abortion is the single hardest thing a woman will EVER do, but also told it's no big deal, it's just a medical procedure and women should be able to get one at any time for literally ANY reason whatsoever. Do women mourn the loss of a tumor, an ovarian cyst, a tapeworm? We're told it's literally no different than an unborn baby. if abortions should be CELEBRATED, and there are even party favors deeming them 'magical', then shouldn't women just celebrate naturally miscarrying that human tapeworm that they're told will ruin their lives? If it's JUST a clump of cells, That is because in the early stages of pregnancy, which is when the vast majority of abortions are carried out, they are literally that. Not a 'person' or a 'baby' just
www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/18/pregnancy-weeks-abortion-tissue Because we are not as inhumane as those who would deny women control over the own bodies, even down to when they are raped. Still waiting for you to address the specific point raised about your supposed deity creating (and indeed using for its own purposes on occasion) the natural evil of miscarriage. Is there a problem? I think there is since you are back on the hyperbole.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jan 6, 2024 0:32:08 GMT
Funny, baby killers resort to so many doublethink semantics to dehumanize babies, 'they're tumors, 'they're parasites', 'they're just a clump of cells', we're simultaneously told abortion is the single hardest thing a woman will EVER do, but also told it's no big deal, it's just a medical procedure and women should be able to get one at any time for literally ANY reason whatsoever. Do women mourn the loss of a tumor, an ovarian cyst, a tapeworm? We're told it's literally no different than an unborn baby. if abortions should be CELEBRATED, and there are even party favors deeming them 'magical', then shouldn't women just celebrate naturally miscarrying that human tapeworm that they're told will ruin their lives? If it's JUST a clump of cells, That is because in the early stages of pregnancy, which is when the vast majority of abortions are carried out, they are literally that. Not a 'person' or a 'baby' just
www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/18/pregnancy-weeks-abortion-tissue Because we are not as inhumane as those who would deny women control over the own bodies, even down to when they are raped. Still waiting for you to address the specific point raised about your supposed deity creating (and indeed using for its own purposes on occasion) the natural evil of miscarriage. Is there a problem? I think there is since you are back on the hyperbole.
You really think abortion clinics have a POC lab to put THOSE things together to ensure no BODY PARTS were left in the woman after the procedure?
And really? Not that inhumane? Well, just not enough to actually knowingly say it to a woman's face in public, but to spew it all over the internet for ALL the miscarriage sufferers to read and know the 'choice' people don't care about them or what they're going through, oh yeah, they actually are that inhumane, just like when the so called 'choice' people say being pregnant is worse than death and women NEED abortion because 'no man wants a loose vagina'. Sexist much? 'If you have kids you'll NEVER get a job with your body'. Like what, lady president? Surgeon? Teacher? Lawyer? Oh, and I gotta love this one argument, 'women need abortion because babies give you gestational diabetes'. However if you actually look it up, the risk factors for gestational diabetes are exactly the same for regular diabetes, including not exercising and poor diet. So once again, give a baby a death sentence for SOMEONE ELSE'S actions.
It's funny how the baby killers always claim to have science on their side, and then make the most anti-scientific arguments possible, like women should NOT be told the age of their baby, the sex, hear its heartbeat, because even though 'it's NOT human, it's NOT alive, it's an alien/parasite/tumor', those women will somehow be shamed and guilted into keeping it. Have you EVER heard of a woman being SHAMED into keeping a tapeworm because they suddenly decide it's a human with rights? No, you don't. And you see pictures of operating teams holding up a 30 pound tumor they removed from a woman to show it was a success and what a great job they did, but you'll never see a picture of doctors holding up a dead baby or its dismembered parts and parading it around to show 'look what we did!' Why not? We're told it's literally the same thing. SO scientific.
If you compile all the arguments supporting abortion, you'll find they're actually VERY disrespectful to women, very sexist, very conceited, belittling, and really don't give a damn about their choice. And ohhhh, they're ALL about choice, as long as you make the RIGHT choice, THEIR choice. And then where are these same people when those women made the 'right' choice and then spend the rest of their lives in guilt and depression and regret for killing their babies? Well first of all we're denied that these women even exist, or oh they are SO few, most women LOVE killing their babies, best thing that ever happened to them. Then the only further thing baby killers have to say if they actually acknowledge these woman is 'meh, so she made the wrong choice, that's on her'. Wow, SO supportive.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,329
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 6, 2024 0:59:14 GMT
So murder shouldn't be illegal since people die from natural causes. Susan Smith shouldn't be in prison for driving her sons into the river and drowning them, because babies die in their sleep through no known cause. No, that's not what I'm saying. If God is good but creates the evil of miscarriages, it must be for a greater good, right? Basically that a world where miscarriages happen is, for some reason, better than one where they don't. Well, the pro-choice position is that a world where women have full bodily autonomy but where abortions may happen as a result is better than one where no abortions happen but women have zero bodily autonomy. You may disagree with that, but you seem to think there must be some good that warrants the death of foetuses to achieve since you don't condemn God.
|
|
jimmyboy
Sophomore
@jimmyboy
Posts: 251
Likes: 130
|
Post by jimmyboy on Jan 6, 2024 1:24:09 GMT
I think you gave me the answer I was looking for. You don't seem to have any sympathy anyone else. I hope you never experience any setbacks and have people blame you for it because they are "sinners".
Sounds like your sympathy lies with the rapists.
No, absolutely not. I'm not sure where you got this idea, but I imagine you thought it was a good response to divert attention to my remarks
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jan 6, 2024 5:15:50 GMT
So murder shouldn't be illegal since people die from natural causes. Susan Smith shouldn't be in prison for driving her sons into the river and drowning them, because babies die in their sleep through no known cause. No, that's not what I'm saying. If God is good but creates the evil of miscarriages, it must be for a greater good, right? Basically that a world where miscarriages happen is, for some reason, better than one where they don't. Well, the pro-choice position is that a world where women have full bodily autonomy but where abortions may happen as a result is better than one where no abortions happen but women have zero bodily autonomy. You may disagree with that, but you seem to think there must be some good that warrants the death of foetuses to achieve since you don't condemn God.
We're right back to 'why isn't life perfect if God is real?'
And who decreed miscarriages evil? Remember we've got one whole side who claims science and choice saying it's JUST a clump of cells, NOT alive, NOT human, NOT sentient, basically dead until it's born. SOOOOOO scientific.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jan 6, 2024 7:19:51 GMT
On a not entirely unrelated note...
Hmmmmm, wonder why we never hear arguments about bodily autonomy in these instances?
But sure, a baby is the absolute WORST thing that could ever come from having sex. Keep telling yourselves that. And remind us again what's the quick fix for STDs? Do you just abort herpes and forget about them too?
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,694
Likes: 1,329
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 6, 2024 10:34:31 GMT
And who decreed miscarriages evil? I'll try breaking down my argument and you can tell me where you disagree: Premise 1: An abortion is an evil event because it destroys an innocent human being in the womb Premise 2: God exists and created the universe and is therefore the ultimate source of all natural processes Premise 3: God is good Premise 4: A miscarriage is essentially an abortion caused partly or wholly by natural processes Sub-conclusion 1: From Premises 1 and 4, a miscarriage is an evil event Sub-conclusion 2: From Premises 2 and 4, God is the ultimate cause of miscarriages Premise 5: The only reason a good being would cause an evil event is if it served the purpose of a greater good Sub-conclusion 3: From Premise 3 and Sub-conclusion 1, God is a good being who causes an evil event (miscarriage) Sub-conclusion 4: From Premise 5 and Sub-conclusion 3, there is at least some greater good that is served by allowing the evil of miscarriage Premise 6: Bodily autonomy for women is a good thing Premise 7: A pro-choice society allows maximal bodily autonomy for women at the risk that some women will have abortions Conclusion: From Premises 1, 4, 6 and 7 and Sub-conclusion 4, it is possible that a pro-choice society might be considered good even though it allows the evil of abortions.
|
|