• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Abortion

Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
yellowfang said:
Let's not lose sight of one thing: for most of this country's history, the laws related to family, sex, et cetera were based on *what was most beneficial for the children involved*. In all other cases, your conscription argument would be well founded. Until recently, The Law presumed that the welfare of the child superseded the welfare of the parents.
Click to expand...
No they weren't. They were based on the expenses involved in trying to support more than one person (that would be a wife) off of one income. Because women were not expected to work and bring in income. Nada to do with kids.

Obviously, this doesn't mean that protecting children isn't important. But it's not "the reason" those laws were created.
 
Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
yellowfang said:
A baby born at 36 weeks can survive, with assistance. Between this unborn baby, one born at 40 weeks, and a baby born at 40 weeks who is nursed for two weeks: which is "not viable"?

Our legal and medical definitions are absurd. They are designed or chosen for the convenience of man. If someone wants to kill the life within a womb, he has only to use legal and medical jargon to relieve himself of as much guilt as possible.
Click to expand...
Medical viability is between 22 and 24 weeks last I checked. Please update your knowledge bank with this information. Anything before that time is considered non-viable. Viable means that the fetus can survive being extracted from the uterus where it's living off the mother's body. I don't find that absurd myself.

Once that baby has been born, it no longer requires the mother's body to live. Have you ever heard of adoption? It's this new thing where sometimes babies are taken straight from their biological mother's womb to a woman who's not biologically related to the infant. I know this happens because I am one. My biological mother never laid eyes on me, yet here I am. Alive and well. That's kind of what "viable" mean. Yes, an infant requires care. But it does not require a person's organs to live.
 
Last edited:
Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
BenTheBeliever said:
All I can say about abortion is this not everything has a right or wrong answer I am pro life. But if a woman is raped I can't just stand by and make her keep the baby.
Click to expand...
I respect both your opinion, and what appears to be your reticence to force it on anyone who has a different opinion than you.
 
BenTheBeliever

BenTheBeliever

Active Member
Marisa said:
I respect both your opinion, and what appears to be your reticence to force it on anyone who has a different opinion than you.
Click to expand...
How I'm I forcing anything on anyone? I don't walk up to people and demand they do things. That is forcing. Saying I am pro life is not forcing. I am just staring what I believe like the rest of you guys
 
Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
BenTheBeliever said:
How I'm I forcing anything on anyone? I don't walk up to people and demand they do things. That is forcing. Saying I am pro life is not forcing. I am just staring what I believe like the rest of you guys
Click to expand...
So you now assume that if I spoke to you at all, I challenged you? You might try re-reading what I said. I'll await your apology for having misunderstood. Because I know, it happens.

ETA:

reticent
adjective ret·i·cent \ˈre-tə-sənt\
: not willing to tell people about things
Full Definition of RETICENT
1: inclined to be silent or uncommunicative in speech : reserved
2: restrained in expression, presentation, or appearance <the room has an aspect of reticentdignity — A. N. Whitehead>
3: reluctant
 
Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
BenTheBeliever said:
And I am not the self righteous jerk people assume I am
Click to expand...
I never assumed you were. I disagree that what you believe in has any intrinsic value, but I have all but set myself on fire trying to convince you that I respect you as a person despite my complete lack of respect for your religion, and you nonetheless seem determined to make that mean that I have no respect for you. My initial comment to you here, in this thread, was quite respectful to YOU, the person. Maybe someday you'll be able to give me points for that, at least.
 
Y

yellowfang

Member
Marisa said:
How about the presumption that women's purpose is to breed? That's where your opinion is actually coming from. Are you honest enough to admit that?


I wonder how this applies to people who feel free to impose their morality on others? Are those people "incredibly self centered" or "painfully selfish"?


I'm not a rape survivor myself, but statistically speaking more than one has read this incredibly offensive statement of yours.


So, a woman does exist without a man. That's quite a misogynistic opinion. For your edification, my daughter's purpose is not to breed the next generation of misogynists, and I've taught her as much.


I would be willing to bet money that few people are actually interested in your opinion.
Click to expand...
I've neither stated nor implied that women's purpose is to breed. My assertion is that the men and women of this generation are the most selfish in the history of this country.

I grieve for the fact that we are broken, both men and women.

The cases mentioned are not the "norm." I can't imagine the betrayal and violation of being raped and impregnated by a family member. It certainly explains the militancy and bitterness in the posts. It also supports my claim that people seek only to gratify themselves, without any concern for the well being of others.

My issue is the impunity with which women abort their babies due to the inconvenience of the pregnancy or not being "ready" to have children. Not to mention the juvenile impulses of men who refuse to take responsibility for their actions. A man gets violently indignant if another man "checks out" his girlfriend, then leaves her when she gets pregnant.

What have we come to?
 
Marisa

Marisa

Well-Known Member
yellowfang said:
I've neither stated nor implied that women's purpose is to breed. My assertion is that the men and women of this generation are the most selfish in the history of this country.

I grieve for the fact that we are broken, both men and women.

The cases mentioned are not the "norm." I can't imagine the betrayal and violation of being raped and impregnated by a family member. It certainly explains the militancy and bitterness in the posts. It also supports my claim that people seek only to gratify themselves, without any concern for the well being of others.

My issue is the impunity with which women abort their babies due to the inconvenience of the pregnancy or not being "ready" to have children. Not to mention the juvenile impulses of men who refuse to take responsibility for their actions. A man gets violently indignant if another man "checks out" his girlfriend, then leaves her when she gets pregnant.

What have we come to?
Click to expand...
My concern is for the impunity with which some foist their morals on others for what appears to be the express purpose of boosting their own sense of piety. It's with no personal requirement to appreciate another person's circumstances that such judgment is meted out, and with such callous disregard for others that they are dismissed while crying "have you no empathy?"
 
SomeRandom

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
yellowfang said:
I've neither stated nor implied that women's purpose is to breed. My assertion is that the men and women of this generation are the most selfish in the history of this country.
Click to expand...
You did imply it when you stated "why would a woman have sex if she doesn't want a baby?"
This ignores the mans role in sex, it implies that this is the only reason anyone has sex (it isn't) and basically implies that it's all the woman's fault.

yellowfang said:
The cases mentioned are not the "norm." I can't imagine the betrayal and violation of being raped and impregnated by a family member. It certainly explains the militancy and bitterness in the posts. It also supports my claim that people seek only to gratify themselves, without any concern for the well being of others.
Click to expand...
Yes that is truly despicable. Like people trying to force rape victims to bring a baby to terms against their will simply to appease their own sense of moral superiority. I agree with you, people these days are sometimes disgusting.

yellowfang said:
My issue is the impunity with which women abort their babies due to the inconvenience of the pregnancy or not being "ready" to have children. Not to mention the juvenile impulses of men who refuse to take responsibility for their actions. A man gets violently indignant if another man "checks out" his girlfriend, then leaves her when she gets pregnant.

What have we come to?
Click to expand...

Life is more complicated than people saying to themselves hmm I'm not ready for a kid so I'll abort. More often than not poverty, spousal abuse, concerns for a means to provide for a child that tends to make people consider abortion as an option. Of course it's easy to be against abortion if you fail to take into account nuances found in everyday life, I find.

I agree the men you describe are juvenile hypocritical asshats.

What have we become? A society which refuses to be Siths by acknowledging the grey areas in life. Oh the horror!!! /sarcasm
 
Last edited:
Y

yellowfang

Member
SomeRandom said:
You did imply it when you stated "why would a woman have sex if she doesn't want a baby?"
This ignores the mans role in sex, it implies that this is the only reason anyone has sex (it isn't) and basically implies that it's all the woman's fault.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your mostly respectful reply.

Just because you infer it does not mean I implied it. My argument is based on cause and effect. I do not ignore the man's role; he is the only one of the two who can walk away with no physical consequence, unless she has a vindictive father with a shotgun.

I understand wanting sex for pleasure. However, I am acutely aware that I can't be pregnant. Aside from STD or emotional backlash, I have no consequences to face.

How about the woman? She wonders whether the birth control worked. She discovers she's pregnant, then realizes her entire life will change whether she keeps the baby or not. If she aborts her baby, she has a lower probability of carrying a baby to delivery when she decides to have children.

I state for clarification: if a woman knows there is a risk of pregnancy, why would she have sex? The same reason a man will love her and leave her. It's all about selfish gratification.
 
Y

yellowfang

Member
Marisa said:
Respect is earned. There is no difference between the tenor of my replies to you and the tenor with which you deliver your opinions. If you want respect, be respectful.
Click to expand...
You're a bit high strung. My thanks were sincere. "Mostly" was just to account for the sarcasm, which is passive aggressive for "insulting. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top