I AM FOR ALL LIFE. That baby is important before it's born and after it's born. We can talk about the horror stories of abortions. But also we could talk about the born child not able to get affordable healthcare. YES I am FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE, and I don't care if a woman has to be on food stamps or welfare. IF this means it will be used to take care of that baby.
Imagine a famous violinist falls into a coma. The society of music lovers determines from medical records that you alone can save the violinist's life by being hooked up to him for nine months. The music lovers break into your home while you are asleep and hook the unconscious (and unknowing, hence innocent) violinist to you. You may want to unhook him, but the violinist is an innocent person with a right to life. Unhooking him will result in his death. Therefore, unhooking him is morally wrong.
Did you hear about the girl who was arrested for performing an abortion on her own baby while at prom? Why was performing an abortion on herrself illegal? It's her body, after all, isn't it? How was that different than paying a doctor to perform the abortion? Because the doctor wasn't paid.
It's her body most certainly. However, the pre-born baby is not her body, it is a life in and of itself that is totally dependent on her to live.
We've allowed the pro-abortion rhetoric to obscure the facts. In law, the extent of your rights end where they infringe on the basic rights of another person.
I have the right to free speech but I don't have the right to lie in a court of law, commit perjury or slander etc.
@danboone143 I think your argument caves in on itself a little bit. If, according to the law, rights end where they infringe upon the basic rights of another person, doesn't this almost guarantee the right to an abortion? Isn't the baby infringing on the basic rights of the person who is carrying it? If a frame of reference helps, I'm thinking of terms of Judith Jarvis Thomson's "famous violinist" thought experiment, which I will post subsequently.
The child inside the mother's body resides inside her body, yet it is *not* her body. It lives in her body for nine months, yes, but it is an individual with a body of its own. You cannot sweep life under the carpet out of convenience. If you're not ready to raise a child, don't have unprotected sex.
She would/should be charged with whatever a state legislation determines the punishment to be. I assume it would be a form of murder - and rightfully so. After all, a person can go to prison for assaulting a woman and killing her fetus, RIGHT? Idiotic child. Does not understand that many people see abortion as murder.
you damn right i would be ready to put them and the doctor away for murder. if i was to kill a pregnant woman and her unborn child, i would get 2 murder charges. it has happened b4. y should a mother who wants to take the easy way out and a p.o.s. doctor who just wants obscene amounts of money be any different? murder is murder. if the baby is "a part of the woman", then let me see the mother make it move. its a part of her right? make it kick. make it do w/e you want. its "a part of u". BS
The womb is a place of life, there is nothing but life in the womb. It is there that man's seed grows and God imprints His image & the bond of woman & child is foraged. It is there that the union of the two has become one flesh, one reflection of the two. What a powerful place, no wonder why it is bulging with life. For it carries the life of God, Man, Woman & Child, Flesh & Spirit.
This childish girl wouldn't understand that. Her question seems to be based on a presumption that no one would think a mother or doctor aborting a child should be punished. She's wrong. Utterly disgusting human being.
The message of the Torah is one of life. Abortion on demand is simply intolerable in the Jewish tradition. To sanction something so heinous as partial-birth abortion is proof of a culture of death standing in marked opposition to the Torah's ethic of life.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Man can make a human body in a lab with no conception. Cloning is possible and does not use conception as the start. It uses somatic cell nuclear transfer. An egg cell that has had its nucleus removed is then placed in close proximity to a somatic cell and both cells are shocked with an electrical pulse. The cells fuse and the egg is allow to develop into an embryo.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
(cont) The Honolulu cloning Technique was developed by Dr. Teruhiko Wakayama at the University of Hawaii. In this method, the nucleus from a somatic cell is removed and injected into an egg that has had its nucleus removed. The egg is bathed in a chemical solution and cultured. The developing embryo is then implanted into a surrogate and allowed to develop. (No Conception)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
(cont)The Roslin cloning technique was developed by researchers at the Roslin Institute. Somatic cells (with nuclei in tact) are allowed to grow and divide and are then deprived of nutrients to induce the cells into a suspended or dormant stage. An egg cell that has had its nucleus removed is then placed in close proximity to a somatic cell and both cells are shocked with an electrical pulse. The cells fuse and the egg is allow to develop into an embryo. (No conception)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
(cont)So, if man can create the development of a human being in a lab with no conception, then conception is not the beginning of life, and life is not just the fertilization of an egg...because the egg does not have to be fertilized.
It can be shocked into development or chemically induced into development.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
A conceptus can start out normal and deform into a mass of cells that will never sustain human life (No viable organs), but it will continue to grow for a while in the womb until it stops for whatever reason. Is that human life?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
It is amazing how arrogant people can get when they have no proof of their belief, but think so highly of it that they feel like they can impose that belief on others.
We should have no law for or against abortion because there is no proof when life begins...only theory. Everyone should be able to make up their own mind, based on their own belief.
Planned Parenthood's across the nation are strategically placed in low-income, highly African-American populated areas -- where poor women are more likely to have access. In fact, 62.5% of PP clinics are located in these communities and when you include Hispanic neighborhoods, the number increases to 70%.
Inhumane worldviews do not sleep or rest. They continue to unfold and impose their consequences, even if PR talking points distract and bait the hook with language of high self-esteem.
Safe" and "legal" choices abort the lives of millions red and yellow, black and white. Females are empowered by blood, their babies condemned to their freedom.
Abortion is already illegal by virtue of the fact that we have statutes against murder. As such, we don't need "anti-abortion" laws. Doctors who perform abortions and the women who obtain them should receive the same sentence as any other capital criminal.
"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term.
In 2001, Illinois state Sen. Patrick O'Malley introduced three bills to help such babies. One required a second physician to be present at the abortion to determine if a surviving baby was viable. Another gave the parents or a public guardian the right to sue to protect the baby's rights. A third, almost identical to the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act President Bush signed in 2002
Well the punishment would be varied as the situations dictated. Medical issues should be acceptable. Rapes/incest should be the mother's choice. Women who use abortion as a form of contraception should be held accountable. Some form of behavior modification and even sterilization if needed for those who are beyond social intervention. Thats just a generic conception that would need a lot of individual review. All the best
Absolutely Nothing! If your position is that the mother has nothing to say about anything. The tree dictates to the fruit, even if the fruit can become a tree someday. To remove the mother or the host of life from the equation is to deny that the mother is a form of life, not to mention an already existing form of life, a fact that shouldn't handicap here.
@paperserenade Right. You want to hold women accountable, but what about the men who had sex to make the woman pregnant? We get choice if we scream rape? Well guess what, the rape rate will suddenly go up in America.
I have a question of justice, what about the dead fetus, the nine month old in the partial birth abortion that gets an instrument stuck in the back of its head. What about the baby that survives an abortion and is left to die on a table?
Since when do pro abortion advocates care about justice? Justice according to Socrates' is the good owed to the other, where is the good for the baby. A baby's life shouldn't have to depend on sophists arguments for life. The baby is the one punished
Jill Stanek is a nurse who discovered babies were being aborted alive and shelved to die in soiled utility rooms while working at a hospital in Illinois and since has been a strong advocate against partial-birth and live-birth abortions.
"One night," she said in testimony entered into the Congressional Record, "a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down's Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have the time to hold him. I couldn't bear the thought of this suffering child lying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived."
Jill Stanek, who was a nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., testified in the U.S. Congress in 2000 and 2001 about how "induced labor abortions" were handled at her hospital.
I see that you've "learned" that you can "win" ANY debate if you just make stuff up. I strongly recommend that you not do this as a lawyer--or at least, try not to get caught.
If it never happens, then did Obama bring up that "fact" in his speeches against the Born-Alive Infants bill?
Some people try to justify abortion by claiming that the result of conception, at least up to a certain number of days, cannot yet be considered a personal human life. But in fact, "from the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor the mother; it is rather the life of a new human being with his own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already.
UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon, in his opening address to the UN's Commission on the Status of Women in New York, said: "Through the practice of prenatal sex selection, countless [women] are denied the right even to exist."
European Funding of Gender Selective Abortions Must End
Furthermore, according to the UNFPA's State of the World Population Report last year, there is a global deficit of 60 million women in the world -- that is the same as the total population of the UK -- and that these 'missing' females have been pre-natally sex-selected, aborted, and infanticized out of existence.
European Funding of Gender Selective Abortions Must End
How is it, that a report of the European Parliament on Gender Equality can be silent on the deliberate murder of unborn persons on the basis of gender? Where is the gender equality in that?
European Funding of Gender Selective Abortions Must End
Tet:"Susan B. Anthony, John Paul II, Gary Bauer, Alveda King, Margaret Sanger."
You sure do quote a lot of people. Do you do any thinking for yourself, or do they feed and dress you too?
None of these people know God any better than you or I do. Read the bible. We are not a body, we are a soul, and that soul does not get into the body until birth.
Authentic human life is dependent upon the confluence of a simultaneously generated body and soul.
If death is defined as the separation of body and soul, then life must be defined as the uniting of body and soul.
Furthermore, if death occurs at exactly the moment the body and soul separate, then genuine human existence must have its beginning at precisely the moment of conception when body and soul are united.
And if men fight and hit a pregnant woman and her child is born prematurely [ESV: her children come out], but there is no serious injury, he will surely be punished in accordance with what the womans husband will put on him, and he will pay what the court decides.
But if there is serious injury, then you will give a life for a life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.(Exodus 21)
The Bible knows nothing of humanity as a random-chance result of natural processes.
Humanity is the specific creation of God, and clearly the existence of a person can be traced from the very first stages of development prior to birth.
John the Baptist, for example, experienced the ministry of the Holy Spirit while yet unborn, for when Mary greeted Johns mother, Elizabeth, the child leaped in the womb at the sound of Marys voice (Luke 1:41).
For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mothers womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth; Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them.(Ps. 139)
"I deplore the horrible crime of child murder. No matter what the motive-love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent-the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed." Susan B. Anthony, 1869
To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom: "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin" (Jn 8:34).
The Advocate, a magazine published by students at UCLA, conducted an investigation in which an actor posing as a donor called Planned Parenthood centers in seven states and asked if his donation could be used for the abortion of black babies, or as he said, "to lower the number of black people." All seven Planned Parenthood centers agreed to process the donations, and none seemed concerned at the racist motivations behind the donations.
Four out of every five Planned Parenthood centers are located in minority neighborhoods, and about one-third of its abortions are performed on blacks, who constitute just 13 percent of the population. Overall, nearly as many black babies are aborted as are born.
PP provides many more services aside from abortion, so that many are located in such neighborhoods is not a plot. And unless they are calling up WoC forcing them to obtain abortions, the second part isn't Planned Parenthood's fault. I absolutely believe there should be options (economic, help raising, etc) for all women who want to keep their children, but blaming it on PP is silly.
Sanger knew blacks were religious people--and how useful ministers would be to her project. She wrote in the same letter:
The minister's work is also important and he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to Exterminate the Negro Population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members -M.S
Not looking it up would be silly. Go to Black genocide org. Youtube Alveda King. See Day Gardner who is president of the National Black Pro-Life Union.
I know about Sanger. Her philosophy on eugenics was pretty broad, actually, being just PoC, and it's as wrong as anyone else who supported eugenics. But she's dead, and her beliefs or the beliefs of someone else who happens to support abortion rights (I won't call them pro-choice if they support eugenics), doesn't have any effect on the legality of the abortion issue.
pap:"she's dead, and her beliefs or the beliefs of someone else who happens to support abortion rights (I won't call them pro-choice if they support eugenics), doesn't have any effect on the legality of the abortion issue."
Exactly. People want to somehow connect everyone who is pro-abortion to this one woman, but I do not harbor her views, and no one I know does.
He won't make one of his powerful speeches decrying the injustice of abortion providers as they plant killing centers firmly in black communities making it easier to kill black children. Instead, he actually applauds their efforts! These children are denied their most basic human right, which is the right to life, a right which our ancestors so proudly worked for, marched for and many of them died for."
Isn't that EXACTLY what you want to do with abortion?
No, there is no moral equivalency there, transplants don't take the life of a person (hopefully their dead first), and abortion is the murdering of an INNOCENT life.
I disagree. Transplants are not hurting anyone, they are saving someone. Abortion is not killing anyone, it is saving a soul from going to unwanted parents.
It is EXACTLY the same.
People have moral issues with both. Why do you want to stop one, but not the other?
But yea, I know he/she does not have a life until this or that time, he/she doesn't have soul till, what, when it comes out of the birth canal? Can't argue with logic like that. (Sarcasm) I guess we are all worried about rights rather then doing what is right.
"It is only if human life is respected from conception to death that the ethics of peace is also possible and credible," concluded the Pope. "It is only then that non-violence can express itself in every direction; only then that we truly welcome creation, and only then that we can arrive at true justice." Pope Benedict XVI
It is easy to see how murder fits into this category. The unjust termination of the life of another is a profound violation of "how things should be" precisely because our very nature compels us to regard our own lives as precious. To take a person's life is to terminate in another what we instinctively regard as our own highest good. Dr Mirus
One expert who spoke at the United Nations estimates that up to 200 million women and girls are missing worldwide because of sex-selective abortion and female infanticide.
"Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government," she said. "They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or sovereign. Mother Teresa
I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
Ah, the Euphemisms service us well as history has proven. Verbal reengineering worked on Slavery, Indians, Jews and now the most innocent and marginalized of them all, a baby in the womb.
Its funny how we say "never again" then we do it again. Different Rhetoric, different demographic, same outcome JPII was right we do live in a Culture of Death. And you don't have to be religious to see it. Just use reason
What about living with a bad conscience and judgment day?
One expert who spoke at the United Nations estimates that up to 200 million women and girls are missing worldwide because of sex-selective abortion and female infanticide.
Feminism's Triumph: Exterminating Girls
by Joseph A. D'Agostino (more by this author)
Posted 01/22/2007 ET
Abortion is its own punishment. We will always be accountable to Natrual Law.
Aristotle is interested in compounds that are alive. These - plants and animals - are the things that have souls Their souls are what make them living things
Since form is what makes matter a "this," the soul is the form of a living thing. (Not its shape but its actuality that in virtue of which it is the kind of living thing that it is
Even plants and animals have souls although not immortal So a baby in the womb has no soul?
Soul is defined by Aristotle as the perfect expression or realization of a natural body. From this definition it follows that there is a close connection between psychological states, and physiological processes. Body and soul are unified in the same way that wax and an impression stamped on it are unified.
Metaphysicians before Aristotle discussed the soul abstractly without any regard to the bodily environment; this, Aristotle believes, was a mistake. At the same time, Aristotle regards the soul or mind not as the product of the physiological conditions of the body, but as the truth of the body -- the substance in which only the bodily conditions gain their real meaning.
To Aristotle and St Thomas plus others believe in that all living things have souls, even plants and animals, it is the soul that informs them give them their "whatness/essence"
No Aristotle is not God, but he did give us the unmoved mover (GOD) showing us that through natural reason when can learn of the transcendent and the natural law. In philsosphy we learned that animals and plants don't have immortals as do humans, but as I said before it is the soul that give life to living matter.
All such beings, on Aristotle's view, have a nutritive SOUL which initiates and guides their most basic functions, the absorption of food, growth, and reproduction of its kind. All animals (and perhaps some plants) also have a sensitive soul by means of which they perceive features of their surroundings and move in response to the stimuli this provides. Human beings also possess (in addition to the rest) a rational soul that permits representation and thought. (On the Soul II 2)
The "expert" who spoke does not know God any better than you do.
And how would you know that? Does caring about the Sanctity of INNOCENT human life in the womb automatically Predicate a lack of knowing God?
Please give us your insights into the Divine, does your god value life in the womb or can it be discarded for a Utilitarian Philosophy and Sophists arguments?
Jesus was not God. Jesus was a human being. A Jewish man who prayed to a Jewish God and taugh the Jewish religion. Funny how you worship the human, but not his God or his religion.
There is one God, put no God before him. Commandment 1.
If you are going to quote someone or something, how about quoting God, and his word. Then try to follow those rules he gave us.
Thou Shalt Not MURDER is the orginal Hebrew which means the taking of INNOCENT life, i.e. a baby in womb. My conscience is clear I don't support infanticide
WeedaPeople (Do not pray to a Jewish guy on a cross)
Matthew 10:32-33 he says, "Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before my Father who is in heaven."
No man knows God better than any other man. People like to say they know God betetr than you do, but they don't. They may have studied religion more, but they do not know God better.
One man knew God a little better, and his name was Moses. The only thing he knew better was the sound of the voice he heard.
jeremiah: Was a bullfrog (Had no soul), was a good friend of mine (Since I adopted him as a pet) I never understood a single word he said (Because I do not speak frog), but I helped him drink his wine (He always had a mighty fine wine).
There is no need to get into a debate about what the penalty for abortion should be.
Abortion is homicide, which, in plain and simple terms, is defined as one human being killing another.
Existing state laws already address homicide. District attorneys study homicide cases every day and present their findings to grand juries, which then consider specific charges in such cases.
I know. You were done long ago, when you ran out of BS to drop on us. You can't prove life before birth. No one can. You can not make laws prohibiting something when you can not prove you are right or wrong.
Let everyone figure it out for themselves. We do not need a law.
What I find funny ted, is that you can't define what life is. You know that if you try, you have to admit that we are more than biology. We are a spirit, and when that spirit enters a body is all religious belief.
tedted33: I see that weeda is still using the same argument: Ignore the scientific, observable fact that fetuses are living human beings. Instead, argue that they are NOT alive on the basis of something that can NOT be seen--the "absence" of a "soul." Weeda is implacably opposed to scientific data, and implacably committed to the utterly gratuitous assertion that fetuses are "not alive" according to his utterly gratuitous definition of "life."
bobparis:" I see that weeda is still using the same argument"
I see Bob is still afraid to talk to me directly, because I embarassed him when I asked what would happen if we reanimated a body that had been dead for a week with machines...would it be human life.
Bob answered in private, but would not answer here publically, because he would have to admit that it was not human life and there would be something missing. To admit that would expose his whole scientific argument as a farce.
Instead of bob being a man and debating the subject with logic and evidence, he would rather take the tact of a coward and drive by post, not addressing me directly. He knows when he is defeated, so he takes his ball and goes home.
wee, do we need a law that prevents robbery? Do we need a law that prevents rape? Absolutely! I'm not sure, but I hope you agree. Hence, we have laws to prevent homicide. Eventually, we will return to the days when killing any innocent human being was illegal. This of course includes abortion, where a child is a victim of murder. I hope you didn't think I was going to suddenly accept your hogwash. Your learning disability is really keeping you from understanding the issue.
I guess you need to go to school and get an edcuation. Especially if you have no idea why we need laws.
Maybe, if you DO go to school, you might learn what human life actually is.
I have no learning disability. I kept a perfect GPA in college. Something not everyone can do. I understand why you would be envious. Don't hate me because I am smarter and more educated than you are.
I do believe that human's are different in that the have a soul, But life on earth is defined in biological terms. If I was to Kill someone I would be taking thier life (On earth). If I was to kill a dog even though it may not have a soul. I still would be taken that dog's life. I do not get your thinking. As far as me thinking I am wright I do and you think you are wright or else you would be agreeing with me. One of us is wrong!!!!!!!
why does a fetus need an umbilical cord to recieve blood from the mother if is not living? what is your definition of life? Is a fetus no more alive than a rock until it is born?
Maybe I was asking to difficult of questions. I will try to simplify it. Are cells that function in the body living? Do the cells in your body help you to live biologicaly? Can you live without Blood cells? Could you live biologicaly if your heart tissue did not recieve living blood cells? Could you live if your lungs where not comprised of living cells?
ted:"Maybe I was asking to difficult of questions. I will try to simplify it."
Your being condescending is not making you any more right.
You do not have tio simplify things for me. I understand you. You think you are right and everyone else is worng, and your condescension makes that abundantly clear.
No more than a Dog. Dogs live, but they are not human life with a human spirit. The cells may fall under man's definition of living, but not in the sense that a soul is involved. That collection of cells still, although normal in every way, may not produce a living human being.
Cells in a recently dead body still possess the same characteristics of the cells you describe, but until the whole of the body completely shuts down, the cells still show the same "Living characteristics".
But the spirit is not there. The personhood is no longer present, yet the whole of the body takes time to stop showing all the characteristics of life as described in your questions. Is that not right?
That verse states nothing about the soul entering the body at birth. Yes, I believe in a soul. I just do not believe that I am born with a perfect soul. Does not the bible say through Adam man was born into sin. These are theological arguments. Please answer my original question. Where is your scientific proof a fetus is not alive. Quit side-stepping it only makes you look ignorant.
ted:"Where is your scientific proof a fetus is not alive. Quit side-stepping..."
I have never side stepped anything. I quote you back to you and answer; Something you refuse to do.
NO ONE HAS SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF LIFE. There is none. I have religious belief, protected by the Constitution. Where have I EVER said I had scientific proof or believe in man's science?
Not everyone believes in your Bible. Not everyone believes in your opinion of when life begins. There is no PROOF of life before birth. It is all conjecture, opinion, and subjective observation.
Since there is ONLY religious belief, you can not make laws prohibiting it. The Constitution says you can't make laws based on one religion over another.
The Government needs to back off, and let each person figure it out for themselves.
This is the part that seems to confuse Christians. You can't make a law that you can not enforce. The rules of reasonable doubt will always dismiss a legal case for murder based on abortion.
There is a reasonable doubt that life exists before the birth, so you could never convict.
Paper, I do understand your reasoning. I never said that someone who had an abortion should not recieve medical attention. My point is that by thier diliberate action of the abortion they should be imprisoned. Even those on death row recieve medical care. Your rebutal makes no sense!!!!
Abortion is a medical procedure, so I was saying that even if someone causes the "accident" (i.e., chooses to have [unprotected] sex or chooses to have an abortion) that does not mean they should be denied it.
But I guess you're seeing the fetus as the car hit, though? I thought about that afterwards, since I've never heard the car analogy used that way.
Second, have you followed the ten commandments? have you ever broke one? It is rediculous to purpose that anyone outside of Jesus has ever lived a sinless life. If you find someone let me know. You need to read God's word to understand it. Have you? There is no where in the Bible that states a fetus is not living. Your statments amaze me. Even the non-believers make more sense than you. They do not beleive in God and thier actions are consistant with that belief. Yours are not.
ted:"You need to read God's word to understand it. Have you?"
Yes! I have. Have you? God said he know a person before they were formed, before conception. How can he know them if they are a body? The body is not even formed yet, but somehow he knew this person.
How is THAT possible according to your view? He knew him...his soul...who and what he is. He is NOT a body. How can you NOT get that?
Are we just a body, we are born, we live we die? Like a Cat, or a Dog? There is nothing any more or less special about us than any other animal species? Or are we somehow more? Endowed with a certain spark that makes us more complex a construct than the Cat?
Do you think we are more than just animals or not? Do you believe in God? Do you believe in a soul? If so, what is it, and is it who we are?
ted:"have you followed the ten commandments? have you ever broke one?"
I did break the first 4 when I was convinced to follow Christianity. I realized my mistake and corrected it, going back to my birthright. When I was younger, I was suduced by fears of not going to heaven if I didn't buy into the Christian way. I learned later that I could not fool God and could not convince him my heart was in it when it wasn't. It never really made sense, but fear drove me to try.
You need to study logic and excape from your postmodern box. The soul has nothing to do with proving that a fetus is alive or not. It is a biological question not a supernatural question. For you to think a fetus is not alive is to deny that you are alive.
ted:"The soul has nothing to do with proving that a fetus is alive or not."
It has EVERYTHING to do with it. The soul IS life.
When the body dies, most people believe in some way or another that we "LIVE ON". Do you believe in an afterlife? If so, how can you not think that the soul is what we are? How can you live on if the body is dead and IT is life?
I am convinced that most people have never thought it through and know what they believe.
weedapeople You still have not adressed my question. where is you proof a fetus is not living. I still go with treating abortion as if it is murder. sterilization is not a bad idea though. A car accident is just that an accident. Abortion is thought out and planned. If someone purposely hit you with a car they would be imprisioned.
The best thing about the United States and it's Constitution, is that you do not need proof of your religious beliefs to have them protected from the ignorant, who wish to condemn people for doing something they can not prove is a crime.
Your freedom of religion is protected, and so is mine.
ted:"If someone purposely hit you with a car they would be imprisioned."
Because they could be convicted of a crime. No reasonable doubt would exist. However, a reasonable doubt exists as to whether or not a soul / life exists in a fetus. Since there is no proof of qualitive life before birth, no conviction could occur for a crime. There will always be a reasonable doubt, thwarting any attempt at conviction.
If someone purposely hit you but was injured in the process, they would still be treated. Whether or not it is thought out, or the person's "fault," is not, and never has been, a reason to deny someone medical treatment.
Great. So we're forcibly sterilizing people, just because at one point in someone's life they may not be prepared to have children or they may not be able to safely carry to term. We should be so proud.
I AM FOR ALL LIFE. That baby is important before it's born and after it's born. We can talk about the horror stories of abortions. But also we could talk about the born child not able to get affordable healthcare. YES I am FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE, and I don't care if a woman has to be on food stamps or welfare. IF this means it will be used to take care of that baby.
MegaELECTRICEYE 1 year ago
Imagine a famous violinist falls into a coma. The society of music lovers determines from medical records that you alone can save the violinist's life by being hooked up to him for nine months. The music lovers break into your home while you are asleep and hook the unconscious (and unknowing, hence innocent) violinist to you. You may want to unhook him, but the violinist is an innocent person with a right to life. Unhooking him will result in his death. Therefore, unhooking him is morally wrong.
FallenSparrow 1 year ago
Any woman getting an abortion should incur massive legal penalties.
Such penalties will prevent many other women from getting abortions because they won't want to incur those penalties.
NorthStar20121 1 year ago
I agree with Dan Boone, below.
I think you posed an intelligent question worth asking. You're smarter than most of the TV Talking Heads.
And you're cute, too!
KutWrite 2 years ago
Did you hear about the girl who was arrested for performing an abortion on her own baby while at prom? Why was performing an abortion on herrself illegal? It's her body, after all, isn't it? How was that different than paying a doctor to perform the abortion? Because the doctor wasn't paid.
TotalDeadEnd 3 years ago
It's her body most certainly. However, the pre-born baby is not her body, it is a life in and of itself that is totally dependent on her to live.
We've allowed the pro-abortion rhetoric to obscure the facts. In law, the extent of your rights end where they infringe on the basic rights of another person.
I have the right to free speech but I don't have the right to lie in a court of law, commit perjury or slander etc.
danboone143 2 years ago
@danboone143 I think your argument caves in on itself a little bit. If, according to the law, rights end where they infringe upon the basic rights of another person, doesn't this almost guarantee the right to an abortion? Isn't the baby infringing on the basic rights of the person who is carrying it? If a frame of reference helps, I'm thinking of terms of Judith Jarvis Thomson's "famous violinist" thought experiment, which I will post subsequently.
FallenSparrow 1 year ago
The child inside the mother's body resides inside her body, yet it is *not* her body. It lives in her body for nine months, yes, but it is an individual with a body of its own. You cannot sweep life under the carpet out of convenience. If you're not ready to raise a child, don't have unprotected sex.
TotalDeadEnd 3 years ago
She would/should be charged with whatever a state legislation determines the punishment to be. I assume it would be a form of murder - and rightfully so. After all, a person can go to prison for assaulting a woman and killing her fetus, RIGHT? Idiotic child. Does not understand that many people see abortion as murder.
Alfrunk 3 years ago
What should the punishment be if you have someone knocked off? What about the hitman who performs the murder?
baneyw 3 years ago
I would fuck her. Like chicks with glasses. Big tits don't hurt either :)
Zwartekaka 3 years ago
you damn right i would be ready to put them and the doctor away for murder. if i was to kill a pregnant woman and her unborn child, i would get 2 murder charges. it has happened b4. y should a mother who wants to take the easy way out and a p.o.s. doctor who just wants obscene amounts of money be any different? murder is murder. if the baby is "a part of the woman", then let me see the mother make it move. its a part of her right? make it kick. make it do w/e you want. its "a part of u". BS
pnut3844 3 years ago 2
The womb is a place of life, there is nothing but life in the womb. It is there that man's seed grows and God imprints His image & the bond of woman & child is foraged. It is there that the union of the two has become one flesh, one reflection of the two. What a powerful place, no wonder why it is bulging with life. For it carries the life of God, Man, Woman & Child, Flesh & Spirit.
Teton99
teton99 3 years ago
This childish girl wouldn't understand that. Her question seems to be based on a presumption that no one would think a mother or doctor aborting a child should be punished. She's wrong. Utterly disgusting human being.
Alfrunk 3 years ago
The message of the Torah is one of life. Abortion on demand is simply intolerable in the Jewish tradition. To sanction something so heinous as partial-birth abortion is proof of a culture of death standing in marked opposition to the Torah's ethic of life.
Rabbi Daniel Lapin
President, Toward Tradition
teton99 3 years ago 2
good Q
noneofyerbiznezz 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Man can make a human body in a lab with no conception. Cloning is possible and does not use conception as the start. It uses somatic cell nuclear transfer. An egg cell that has had its nucleus removed is then placed in close proximity to a somatic cell and both cells are shocked with an electrical pulse. The cells fuse and the egg is allow to develop into an embryo.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
(cont) The Honolulu cloning Technique was developed by Dr. Teruhiko Wakayama at the University of Hawaii. In this method, the nucleus from a somatic cell is removed and injected into an egg that has had its nucleus removed. The egg is bathed in a chemical solution and cultured. The developing embryo is then implanted into a surrogate and allowed to develop. (No Conception)
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
(cont)The Roslin cloning technique was developed by researchers at the Roslin Institute. Somatic cells (with nuclei in tact) are allowed to grow and divide and are then deprived of nutrients to induce the cells into a suspended or dormant stage. An egg cell that has had its nucleus removed is then placed in close proximity to a somatic cell and both cells are shocked with an electrical pulse. The cells fuse and the egg is allow to develop into an embryo. (No conception)
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
(cont)So, if man can create the development of a human being in a lab with no conception, then conception is not the beginning of life, and life is not just the fertilization of an egg...because the egg does not have to be fertilized.
It can be shocked into development or chemically induced into development.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A conceptus can start out normal and deform into a mass of cells that will never sustain human life (No viable organs), but it will continue to grow for a while in the womb until it stops for whatever reason. Is that human life?
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It is amazing how arrogant people can get when they have no proof of their belief, but think so highly of it that they feel like they can impose that belief on others.
We should have no law for or against abortion because there is no proof when life begins...only theory. Everyone should be able to make up their own mind, based on their own belief.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
Planned Parenthood's across the nation are strategically placed in low-income, highly African-American populated areas -- where poor women are more likely to have access. In fact, 62.5% of PP clinics are located in these communities and when you include Hispanic neighborhoods, the number increases to 70%.
The Racism and Politics of Planned Parenthood
by Ericka Andersen
Posted: 06/30/2008
teton99 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Inhumane worldviews do not sleep or rest. They continue to unfold and impose their consequences, even if PR talking points distract and bait the hook with language of high self-esteem.
Safe" and "legal" choices abort the lives of millions red and yellow, black and white. Females are empowered by blood, their babies condemned to their freedom.
Rick Pearcey
teton99 3 years ago
Abortion is already illegal by virtue of the fact that we have statutes against murder. As such, we don't need "anti-abortion" laws. Doctors who perform abortions and the women who obtain them should receive the same sentence as any other capital criminal.
CPofVirginia 3 years ago
"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term.
Obama Is the Most Pro-Abortion Candidate Ever
By Terence P. Jeffrey
HOPE!?
teton99 3 years ago
In 2001, Illinois state Sen. Patrick O'Malley introduced three bills to help such babies. One required a second physician to be present at the abortion to determine if a surviving baby was viable. Another gave the parents or a public guardian the right to sue to protect the baby's rights. A third, almost identical to the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act President Bush signed in 2002
teton99 3 years ago
By the way I am a Republican.
AgouraMo 3 years ago
Well the punishment would be varied as the situations dictated. Medical issues should be acceptable. Rapes/incest should be the mother's choice. Women who use abortion as a form of contraception should be held accountable. Some form of behavior modification and even sterilization if needed for those who are beyond social intervention. Thats just a generic conception that would need a lot of individual review. All the best
AgouraMo 3 years ago
What is the difference between a fetus conceived by rape/incest and a fetus conceived by consensual sex?
paperserenade 3 years ago
Absolutely Nothing! If your position is that the mother has nothing to say about anything. The tree dictates to the fruit, even if the fruit can become a tree someday. To remove the mother or the host of life from the equation is to deny that the mother is a form of life, not to mention an already existing form of life, a fact that shouldn't handicap here.
AgouraMo 3 years ago
@paperserenade Right. You want to hold women accountable, but what about the men who had sex to make the woman pregnant? We get choice if we scream rape? Well guess what, the rape rate will suddenly go up in America.
MsFlattire 1 year ago
Democrats Have Aborted 3 Million Constituants Since 1973..
gtrgyro333 3 years ago
The doctor and mom should be sentenced to life in my opinion. You take life you pay for it with your own.
funnymommytrixr4kids 3 years ago
I have a question of justice, what about the dead fetus, the nine month old in the partial birth abortion that gets an instrument stuck in the back of its head. What about the baby that survives an abortion and is left to die on a table?
Since when do pro abortion advocates care about justice? Justice according to Socrates' is the good owed to the other, where is the good for the baby. A baby's life shouldn't have to depend on sophists arguments for life. The baby is the one punished
teton99 3 years ago
That does not happen. Nice try, though.
paperserenade 3 years ago
pap...
Yes it does.
Jill Stanek is a nurse who discovered babies were being aborted alive and shelved to die in soiled utility rooms while working at a hospital in Illinois and since has been a strong advocate against partial-birth and live-birth abortions.
Nurse says Obama supports infanticide (CNA)
teton99 3 years ago
"That does not happen. Nice try, though."
Yes it does...
"One night," she said in testimony entered into the Congressional Record, "a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down's Syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have the time to hold him. I couldn't bear the thought of this suffering child lying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived."
teton99 3 years ago
pap...
yes it does...
"That does not happen. Nice try, though."
Jill Stanek, who was a nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., testified in the U.S. Congress in 2000 and 2001 about how "induced labor abortions" were handled at her hospital.
teton99 3 years ago
I see that you've "learned" that you can "win" ANY debate if you just make stuff up. I strongly recommend that you not do this as a lawyer--or at least, try not to get caught.
If it never happens, then did Obama bring up that "fact" in his speeches against the Born-Alive Infants bill?
bobparis 3 years ago
Foolish liberal. Find somewhere else to rant, where people actually care what you have to say about legalizing murder.
beefy7777777 3 years ago
paper...
"That does not happen. Nice try, though."
YouTube:
Jill Stanek Talks About Her Experience With Live Birth Abortion
teton99 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Some people try to justify abortion by claiming that the result of conception, at least up to a certain number of days, cannot yet be considered a personal human life. But in fact, "from the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor the mother; it is rather the life of a new human being with his own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already.
John Paul II - Evangelium vitae
teton99 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon, in his opening address to the UN's Commission on the Status of Women in New York, said: "Through the practice of prenatal sex selection, countless [women] are denied the right even to exist."
European Funding of Gender Selective Abortions Must End
by Nirj Deva MEP
Posted: 04/01/2008
teton99 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Furthermore, according to the UNFPA's State of the World Population Report last year, there is a global deficit of 60 million women in the world -- that is the same as the total population of the UK -- and that these 'missing' females have been pre-natally sex-selected, aborted, and infanticized out of existence.
European Funding of Gender Selective Abortions Must End
by Nirj Deva MEP
Posted: 04/01/2008
teton99 3 years ago
How is it, that a report of the European Parliament on Gender Equality can be silent on the deliberate murder of unborn persons on the basis of gender? Where is the gender equality in that?
European Funding of Gender Selective Abortions Must End
by Nirj Deva MEP
Posted: 04/01/2008
teton99 3 years ago
Tet:"Susan B. Anthony, John Paul II, Gary Bauer, Alveda King, Margaret Sanger."
You sure do quote a lot of people. Do you do any thinking for yourself, or do they feed and dress you too?
None of these people know God any better than you or I do. Read the bible. We are not a body, we are a soul, and that soul does not get into the body until birth.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
Authentic human life is dependent upon the confluence of a simultaneously generated body and soul.
If death is defined as the separation of body and soul, then life must be defined as the uniting of body and soul.
Furthermore, if death occurs at exactly the moment the body and soul separate, then genuine human existence must have its beginning at precisely the moment of conception when body and soul are united.
MitSretniw2 3 years ago
mit:"Authentic human life is dependent upon the confluence of a simultaneously generated body and soul."
That is your opinion. You have nothing to back that up.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
And if men fight and hit a pregnant woman and her child is born prematurely [ESV: her children come out], but there is no serious injury, he will surely be punished in accordance with what the womans husband will put on him, and he will pay what the court decides.
But if there is serious injury, then you will give a life for a life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.(Exodus 21)
MitSretniw2 3 years ago
mit:"And if men fight and hit a pregnant woman and her child is born prematurely"
Biblical preemies did not survive.
The injury referred to is to the woman.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
The Bible knows nothing of humanity as a random-chance result of natural processes.
Humanity is the specific creation of God, and clearly the existence of a person can be traced from the very first stages of development prior to birth.
John the Baptist, for example, experienced the ministry of the Holy Spirit while yet unborn, for when Mary greeted Johns mother, Elizabeth, the child leaped in the womb at the sound of Marys voice (Luke 1:41).
MitSretniw2 3 years ago
mit:"John the Baptist"
John is a fictional character in a story book. "Luke" is not in the Real Bible.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
MitSretniw2 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
mit:"You wove me in my mothers womb."
You "covered" me...not "wove" me. Your translated translation of a translation is inaccurate.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
"I deplore the horrible crime of child murder. No matter what the motive-love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent-the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed." Susan B. Anthony, 1869
teton99 3 years ago
To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom: "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin" (Jn 8:34).
John Paul II
teton99 4 years ago
The Advocate, a magazine published by students at UCLA, conducted an investigation in which an actor posing as a donor called Planned Parenthood centers in seven states and asked if his donation could be used for the abortion of black babies, or as he said, "to lower the number of black people." All seven Planned Parenthood centers agreed to process the donations, and none seemed concerned at the racist motivations behind the donations.
The Plague of Planned Parenthood
by Gary Bauer
teton99 4 years ago
Four out of every five Planned Parenthood centers are located in minority neighborhoods, and about one-third of its abortions are performed on blacks, who constitute just 13 percent of the population. Overall, nearly as many black babies are aborted as are born.
The Plague of Planned Parenthood
by Gary Bauer
teton99 4 years ago
PP provides many more services aside from abortion, so that many are located in such neighborhoods is not a plot. And unless they are calling up WoC forcing them to obtain abortions, the second part isn't Planned Parenthood's fault. I absolutely believe there should be options (economic, help raising, etc) for all women who want to keep their children, but blaming it on PP is silly.
paperserenade 4 years ago
paper...
Sanger knew blacks were religious people--and how useful ministers would be to her project. She wrote in the same letter:
The minister's work is also important and he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to Exterminate the Negro Population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members -M.S
BlackGenocide ORG
teton99 4 years ago
paper...
Not looking it up would be silly. Go to Black genocide org. Youtube Alveda King. See Day Gardner who is president of the National Black Pro-Life Union.
Look up Margaret Sanger and Eugenics
teton99 4 years ago
I know about Sanger. Her philosophy on eugenics was pretty broad, actually, being just PoC, and it's as wrong as anyone else who supported eugenics. But she's dead, and her beliefs or the beliefs of someone else who happens to support abortion rights (I won't call them pro-choice if they support eugenics), doesn't have any effect on the legality of the abortion issue.
paperserenade 4 years ago
pap:"she's dead, and her beliefs or the beliefs of someone else who happens to support abortion rights (I won't call them pro-choice if they support eugenics), doesn't have any effect on the legality of the abortion issue."
Exactly. People want to somehow connect everyone who is pro-abortion to this one woman, but I do not harbor her views, and no one I know does.
WeedaPeople 3 years ago
He won't make one of his powerful speeches decrying the injustice of abortion providers as they plant killing centers firmly in black communities making it easier to kill black children. Instead, he actually applauds their efforts! These children are denied their most basic human right, which is the right to life, a right which our ancestors so proudly worked for, marched for and many of them died for."
This is HOPE for EVERYONE?
Support a Culture of LIFE
teton99 4 years ago
Dr. Alveda King, Pastoral Associate
Youtube her she speaks of real hope.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:
Think about something for a moment: What does God think about heart transplants?
Some people think it is morally wrong to take parts form one person and put them into another.
Since a few people have a religious aversion to transplants, should we stop everyone from having them?
Isn't that EXACTLY what you want to do with abortion?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
Isn't that EXACTLY what you want to do with abortion?
No, there is no moral equivalency there, transplants don't take the life of a person (hopefully their dead first), and abortion is the murdering of an INNOCENT life.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"there is no moral equivalency there"
I disagree. Transplants are not hurting anyone, they are saving someone. Abortion is not killing anyone, it is saving a soul from going to unwanted parents.
It is EXACTLY the same.
People have moral issues with both. Why do you want to stop one, but not the other?
Because YOU BELIEVE there is a difference...
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople,
But yea, I know he/she does not have a life until this or that time, he/she doesn't have soul till, what, when it comes out of the birth canal? Can't argue with logic like that. (Sarcasm) I guess we are all worried about rights rather then doing what is right.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Can't argue with logic like that."
Exactly. YOU can't argue with logic like that...unless you have PROOF otherwise.
THAT is EXACTLY what I am saying.
When you can PROVE life exists before birth and a person is harmed, then you can make law prohibiting it. Not before.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
"It is only if human life is respected from conception to death that the ethics of peace is also possible and credible," concluded the Pope. "It is only then that non-violence can express itself in every direction; only then that we truly welcome creation, and only then that we can arrive at true justice." Pope Benedict XVI
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Pope Benedict XVI"
He is a human being who does not know God any better than you or I do. What he says means nothing to me.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
It is easy to see how murder fits into this category. The unjust termination of the life of another is a profound violation of "how things should be" precisely because our very nature compels us to regard our own lives as precious. To take a person's life is to terminate in another what we instinctively regard as our own highest good. Dr Mirus
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"To take a person's life is to terminate in another what we instinctively regard as our own highest good."
This has nothing to do with abortion since there is no life there.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
One expert who spoke at the United Nations estimates that up to 200 million women and girls are missing worldwide because of sex-selective abortion and female infanticide.
Feminism's Triumph: Exterminating Girls
by Joseph A. D'Agostino (more by this author)
Posted 01/22/2007 ET
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"One expert who spoke at the United Nations estimates that up to 200 million women and girls are missing"
"And now here is something we hope you will really like"...Rocket J. Squirrel.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
"Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government," she said. "They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or sovereign. Mother Teresa
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government...Mother Teresa"
"Let's watch these videos" - Bob Saggett
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.
Hippocratic Oath -- Classical Version
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Hippocratic Oath -- Classical Version"
"I guess dying is not much of a living boy."--Clint Eastwood, Outlaw Josey Wales.
So we can quote peoples words to one another...what is that supposed to prove?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Choice=Murder
Unwanted=Murder
My Body=Murder
Unplanned=Murder
Equality=Murder
Ah, the Euphemisms service us well as history has proven. Verbal reengineering worked on Slavery, Indians, Jews and now the most innocent and marginalized of them all, a baby in the womb.
Its funny how we say "never again" then we do it again. Different Rhetoric, different demographic, same outcome JPII was right we do live in a Culture of Death. And you don't have to be religious to see it. Just use reason
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Equality=Murder"
Dictionary: You need one.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
What about living with a bad conscience and judgment day?
One expert who spoke at the United Nations estimates that up to 200 million women and girls are missing worldwide because of sex-selective abortion and female infanticide.
Feminism's Triumph: Exterminating Girls
by Joseph A. D'Agostino (more by this author)
Posted 01/22/2007 ET
Abortion is its own punishment. We will always be accountable to Natrual Law.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"What about living with a bad conscience and judgment day?"
What about it?
There is no life, no human soul, before birth. The "expert" who spoke does not know God any better than you do.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople,
There is no life, no human soul, before birth
Aristotle is interested in compounds that are alive. These - plants and animals - are the things that have souls Their souls are what make them living things
Since form is what makes matter a "this," the soul is the form of a living thing. (Not its shape but its actuality that in virtue of which it is the kind of living thing that it is
Even plants and animals have souls although not immortal So a baby in the womb has no soul?
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Aristotle is interested in compounds that are alive."
Aristotle is not God.
Plants and animals do not have souls.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
tet:"Aristotle is interested in compounds that are alive."
Aristotle is not God.
Plants and animals do not have souls.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
Soul is defined by Aristotle as the perfect expression or realization of a natural body. From this definition it follows that there is a close connection between psychological states, and physiological processes. Body and soul are unified in the same way that wax and an impression stamped on it are unified.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Soul is defined by Aristotle as the perfect expression"
Aristotle is not God.
Aristotle said a soul entered a human body at 30 days for a male and 90 days for a female.
Do you believe that? If you take what aristotle said to such an extent, then you believe this?
You believe there is no soul at conception, as I have been saying?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Weedapeople
Do you believe that? If you take what aristotle said to such an extent, then you believe this?
So if he is wrong on one part is the whole wrong?
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Do you believe that?"
You have to be specific. If you quote back, I can answer. However, I would not say anything I do unless I truly and honestly believed what I said.
I am not here to play games of semantics with you. I am here to defend American rights of religious freedom, and learn in the process.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
Metaphysicians before Aristotle discussed the soul abstractly without any regard to the bodily environment; this, Aristotle believes, was a mistake. At the same time, Aristotle regards the soul or mind not as the product of the physiological conditions of the body, but as the truth of the body -- the substance in which only the bodily conditions gain their real meaning.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Aristotle regards the soul"
Aristotle was a man, not God.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
To Aristotle and St Thomas plus others believe in that all living things have souls, even plants and animals, it is the soul that informs them give them their "whatness/essence"
No Aristotle is not God, but he did give us the unmoved mover (GOD) showing us that through natural reason when can learn of the transcendent and the natural law. In philsosphy we learned that animals and plants don't have immortals as do humans, but as I said before it is the soul that give life to living matter.
teton99 4 years ago
On teton99 7mins ago
In philsosphy we learned that animals and plants don't have immortals as do humans,
I meant to say as humans like humans do.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Aristotle and St Thomas plus others believe in that all living things have souls, even plants and animals"
They were wrong.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
All such beings, on Aristotle's view, have a nutritive SOUL which initiates and guides their most basic functions, the absorption of food, growth, and reproduction of its kind. All animals (and perhaps some plants) also have a sensitive soul by means of which they perceive features of their surroundings and move in response to the stimuli this provides. Human beings also possess (in addition to the rest) a rational soul that permits representation and thought. (On the Soul II 2)
teton99 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
The one below is for you.
Take Care, and I not being Sarcastic.
teton99 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
The "expert" who spoke does not know God any better than you do.
And how would you know that? Does caring about the Sanctity of INNOCENT human life in the womb automatically Predicate a lack of knowing God?
Please give us your insights into the Divine, does your god value life in the womb or can it be discarded for a Utilitarian Philosophy and Sophists arguments?
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"And how would you know that?"
No man knows God better than any other. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
No man knows God better than any other. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar.
Jesus was true God and True man, does that make Him a liar? The Gospel writers are they lairs? Apsotles?
Dictionary: You need one.
No you do, look up Euphemisms.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Jesus was true God"
Jesus was not God. Jesus was a human being. A Jewish man who prayed to a Jewish God and taugh the Jewish religion. Funny how you worship the human, but not his God or his religion.
There is one God, put no God before him. Commandment 1.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Do not create for your self a graven image to worship (Do not pray to a Jewish guy on a cross)
Cammandment 2.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Do not use the name of the lord falsely. (Do not call a Jewish human being "God")
Commandment 3
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Remember the sabbath, keep it holy (Saturday, the 7th day, the day God rested...not Sunday, the first day of the week).
Commandment 4.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
If you are going to quote someone or something, how about quoting God, and his word. Then try to follow those rules he gave us.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
If you are going to quote someone or something, how about quoting God, and his word. Then try to follow those rules he gave us.
Thou Shalt Not MURDER is the orginal Hebrew which means the taking of INNOCENT life, i.e. a baby in womb. My conscience is clear I don't support infanticide
teton99 4 years ago
WeedaPeople (Do not pray to a Jewish guy on a cross)
Matthew 10:32-33 he says, "Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before my Father who is in heaven."
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Matthew 10:32-33"
Man's word, not God's. God gave us one Bible one time. "Matthew" might as well be "Walt Disney" for all it means to me.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
tet:"And how would you know that?"
No man knows God better than any other man. People like to say they know God betetr than you do, but they don't. They may have studied religion more, but they do not know God better.
One man knew God a little better, and his name was Moses. The only thing he knew better was the sound of the voice he heard.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
Psalm 139:13-16: For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother's womb. I
praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are wonderful, I know that
full well. My frame was not hidden from You when I was made in the secret place.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"You knit me together in my mother's womb."
I heard a much different translation:"You covered me in my mother's womb." But remember this part too...
"When I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth."
What he was, was created in the lowest parts of earth, not in the womb.
It is amazing how you can take a centuries old translation out of context and think it means something it doesn't.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
WeedaPeople
Jeremiah 1:5: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart;
It seems that God values life in the womb very much.
teton99 4 years ago
tet:"Jeremiah 1:5: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you"
Yes...BEFORE the conception, God had your soul in heaven with him (Where he wrought you in the lowest parts of the earth).
Of course he knew you before your were conceived and well before the forming started...he had to since he held your soul in his kingdom.
Now if you do a good job and live a good life, you can return to him.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
jeremiah: Was a bullfrog (Had no soul), was a good friend of mine (Since I adopted him as a pet) I never understood a single word he said (Because I do not speak frog), but I helped him drink his wine (He always had a mighty fine wine).
Joy to the world.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
There is no need to get into a debate about what the penalty for abortion should be.
Abortion is homicide, which, in plain and simple terms, is defined as one human being killing another.
Existing state laws already address homicide. District attorneys study homicide cases every day and present their findings to grand juries, which then consider specific charges in such cases.
MitSretniw2 4 years ago
To have "Homicide", you have to be able to convict, or the person is innocent of the charge.
All a lawyer has to do is say, "There is a resonable doubt that life exists before birth". There is no proof beyond a resonable doubt.
"Case dismissed".
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
sweet Jesus you are beautiful!
fosterbt 4 years ago
terb:"sweet Jesus you are beautiful!"
Thank you.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Los Angeles police raid five abortion clinics, find horrific conditions:
l i f e s i t e . n e t / l d n / 2 0 0 8 / f e b / 0 8 0 2 0 8 0 7 . h t m l
Copy, paste, and delete spaces from this URL.
bobparis 4 years ago
I am done depating you weeda. If you want to defend the murder of children then so be it I can not stop you.
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"I am done depating you weeda."
I know. You were done long ago, when you ran out of BS to drop on us. You can't prove life before birth. No one can. You can not make laws prohibiting something when you can not prove you are right or wrong.
Let everyone figure it out for themselves. We do not need a law.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
What I find funny ted, is that you can't define what life is. You know that if you try, you have to admit that we are more than biology. We are a spirit, and when that spirit enters a body is all religious belief.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
tedted33: I see that weeda is still using the same argument: Ignore the scientific, observable fact that fetuses are living human beings. Instead, argue that they are NOT alive on the basis of something that can NOT be seen--the "absence" of a "soul." Weeda is implacably opposed to scientific data, and implacably committed to the utterly gratuitous assertion that fetuses are "not alive" according to his utterly gratuitous definition of "life."
bobparis 4 years ago
bobparis:" I see that weeda is still using the same argument"
I see Bob is still afraid to talk to me directly, because I embarassed him when I asked what would happen if we reanimated a body that had been dead for a week with machines...would it be human life.
Bob answered in private, but would not answer here publically, because he would have to admit that it was not human life and there would be something missing. To admit that would expose his whole scientific argument as a farce.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Instead of bob being a man and debating the subject with logic and evidence, he would rather take the tact of a coward and drive by post, not addressing me directly. He knows when he is defeated, so he takes his ball and goes home.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
wee, do we need a law that prevents robbery? Do we need a law that prevents rape? Absolutely! I'm not sure, but I hope you agree. Hence, we have laws to prevent homicide. Eventually, we will return to the days when killing any innocent human being was illegal. This of course includes abortion, where a child is a victim of murder. I hope you didn't think I was going to suddenly accept your hogwash. Your learning disability is really keeping you from understanding the issue.
MitSretniw2 4 years ago
mit:"do we need a law that prevents robbery?"
I guess you need to go to school and get an edcuation. Especially if you have no idea why we need laws.
Maybe, if you DO go to school, you might learn what human life actually is.
I have no learning disability. I kept a perfect GPA in college. Something not everyone can do. I understand why you would be envious. Don't hate me because I am smarter and more educated than you are.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
wee, I get it.
You don't have to know what you are talking about and no one is going to force you to get an education.
It is your right to be as uninformed as you want.
MitSretniw2 4 years ago
mit:"You don't have to know what you are talking about and no one is going to force you to get an education."
Prove life exists before birth...oh yeah, that's right...you can't.
I have plenty of education. Enough to know when you have nothing to argue with.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
The guilt that women feel is punishment enough. Truely.
Songbottle 4 years ago
You'right! We should not punish rape because the guilt that rapists feel is punishment enough.
bobparis 4 years ago
bobparis:"We should not punish rape because the guilt that rapists feel is punishment enough."
Well if you were not cionvinced of Bob's stupidity before, this should do it.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
I do believe that human's are different in that the have a soul, But life on earth is defined in biological terms. If I was to Kill someone I would be taking thier life (On earth). If I was to kill a dog even though it may not have a soul. I still would be taken that dog's life. I do not get your thinking. As far as me thinking I am wright I do and you think you are wright or else you would be agreeing with me. One of us is wrong!!!!!!!
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"But life on earth is defined in biological terms."
Okay...so, in biological terms, define human life. When human life leaves a body as the body dies, what exactly leaves?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
why does a fetus need an umbilical cord to recieve blood from the mother if is not living? what is your definition of life? Is a fetus no more alive than a rock until it is born?
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"why does a fetus need an umbilical cord to recieve blood from the mother if is not living?"
To develop. The body can not develop without it.
Do not confuse necessary functions of development with life.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Maybe I was asking to difficult of questions. I will try to simplify it. Are cells that function in the body living? Do the cells in your body help you to live biologicaly? Can you live without Blood cells? Could you live biologicaly if your heart tissue did not recieve living blood cells? Could you live if your lungs where not comprised of living cells?
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"Maybe I was asking to difficult of questions. I will try to simplify it."
Your being condescending is not making you any more right.
You do not have tio simplify things for me. I understand you. You think you are right and everyone else is worng, and your condescension makes that abundantly clear.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
ted:"Are cells that function in the body living?"
No more than a Dog. Dogs live, but they are not human life with a human spirit. The cells may fall under man's definition of living, but not in the sense that a soul is involved. That collection of cells still, although normal in every way, may not produce a living human being.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Cells in a recently dead body still possess the same characteristics of the cells you describe, but until the whole of the body completely shuts down, the cells still show the same "Living characteristics".
But the spirit is not there. The personhood is no longer present, yet the whole of the body takes time to stop showing all the characteristics of life as described in your questions. Is that not right?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
You have to distinguish between "characteristics of living cells", and "life itself".
What is life? I have asked and you have asked, but only "I" have answered: Life is a soul (Spirit) in a body.
Life ends abruptly, but the body takes a while to stop moving, and showing the "characteristics of life".
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
That verse states nothing about the soul entering the body at birth. Yes, I believe in a soul. I just do not believe that I am born with a perfect soul. Does not the bible say through Adam man was born into sin. These are theological arguments. Please answer my original question. Where is your scientific proof a fetus is not alive. Quit side-stepping it only makes you look ignorant.
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"Where is your scientific proof a fetus is not alive. Quit side-stepping..."
I have never side stepped anything. I quote you back to you and answer; Something you refuse to do.
NO ONE HAS SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF LIFE. There is none. I have religious belief, protected by the Constitution. Where have I EVER said I had scientific proof or believe in man's science?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Not everyone believes in your Bible. Not everyone believes in your opinion of when life begins. There is no PROOF of life before birth. It is all conjecture, opinion, and subjective observation.
Since there is ONLY religious belief, you can not make laws prohibiting it. The Constitution says you can't make laws based on one religion over another.
The Government needs to back off, and let each person figure it out for themselves.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
This is the part that seems to confuse Christians. You can't make a law that you can not enforce. The rules of reasonable doubt will always dismiss a legal case for murder based on abortion.
There is a reasonable doubt that life exists before the birth, so you could never convict.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
I am sorry if you did not understand what I was trying to convey. I am not realy good at analogies. I was just commenting on what someone else wrote.
Thanks for the response
tedted33 4 years ago
I meant to say I do not understand your reasoning. sorry
tedted33 4 years ago
Paper, I do understand your reasoning. I never said that someone who had an abortion should not recieve medical attention. My point is that by thier diliberate action of the abortion they should be imprisoned. Even those on death row recieve medical care. Your rebutal makes no sense!!!!
tedted33 4 years ago
Abortion is a medical procedure, so I was saying that even if someone causes the "accident" (i.e., chooses to have [unprotected] sex or chooses to have an abortion) that does not mean they should be denied it.
But I guess you're seeing the fetus as the car hit, though? I thought about that afterwards, since I've never heard the car analogy used that way.
paperserenade 4 years ago
Second, have you followed the ten commandments? have you ever broke one? It is rediculous to purpose that anyone outside of Jesus has ever lived a sinless life. If you find someone let me know. You need to read God's word to understand it. Have you? There is no where in the Bible that states a fetus is not living. Your statments amaze me. Even the non-believers make more sense than you. They do not beleive in God and thier actions are consistant with that belief. Yours are not.
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"You need to read God's word to understand it. Have you?"
Yes! I have. Have you? God said he know a person before they were formed, before conception. How can he know them if they are a body? The body is not even formed yet, but somehow he knew this person.
How is THAT possible according to your view? He knew him...his soul...who and what he is. He is NOT a body. How can you NOT get that?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
Ted: What IS life (In your opinion)?
Are we just a body, we are born, we live we die? Like a Cat, or a Dog? There is nothing any more or less special about us than any other animal species? Or are we somehow more? Endowed with a certain spark that makes us more complex a construct than the Cat?
Do you think we are more than just animals or not? Do you believe in God? Do you believe in a soul? If so, what is it, and is it who we are?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
ted:"have you followed the ten commandments? have you ever broke one?"
I did break the first 4 when I was convinced to follow Christianity. I realized my mistake and corrected it, going back to my birthright. When I was younger, I was suduced by fears of not going to heaven if I didn't buy into the Christian way. I learned later that I could not fool God and could not convince him my heart was in it when it wasn't. It never really made sense, but fear drove me to try.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
You need to study logic and excape from your postmodern box. The soul has nothing to do with proving that a fetus is alive or not. It is a biological question not a supernatural question. For you to think a fetus is not alive is to deny that you are alive.
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"The soul has nothing to do with proving that a fetus is alive or not."
It has EVERYTHING to do with it. The soul IS life.
When the body dies, most people believe in some way or another that we "LIVE ON". Do you believe in an afterlife? If so, how can you not think that the soul is what we are? How can you live on if the body is dead and IT is life?
I am convinced that most people have never thought it through and know what they believe.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
weedapeople You still have not adressed my question. where is you proof a fetus is not living. I still go with treating abortion as if it is murder. sterilization is not a bad idea though. A car accident is just that an accident. Abortion is thought out and planned. If someone purposely hit you with a car they would be imprisioned.
tedted33 4 years ago
ted:"where is you proof a fetus is not living."
I have exactly as much proof that it is not living, as you do that it is. None.
It is not provable. It is religious belief. I believe in the word of God. It is too bad you forsake the word of God and follow the word of man.
If a perfect God that you claim to believe in gave you 10 commandments, what makes you think you can not follow them?
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
The best thing about the United States and it's Constitution, is that you do not need proof of your religious beliefs to have them protected from the ignorant, who wish to condemn people for doing something they can not prove is a crime.
Your freedom of religion is protected, and so is mine.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
ted:"If someone purposely hit you with a car they would be imprisioned."
Because they could be convicted of a crime. No reasonable doubt would exist. However, a reasonable doubt exists as to whether or not a soul / life exists in a fetus. Since there is no proof of qualitive life before birth, no conviction could occur for a crime. There will always be a reasonable doubt, thwarting any attempt at conviction.
WeedaPeople 4 years ago
If someone purposely hit you but was injured in the process, they would still be treated. Whether or not it is thought out, or the person's "fault," is not, and never has been, a reason to deny someone medical treatment.
paperserenade 4 years ago
What should happen to her is that her womb should be taken out or her tubes tide so she can never have children.
bubblecharts 4 years ago
Great. So we're forcibly sterilizing people, just because at one point in someone's life they may not be prepared to have children or they may not be able to safely carry to term. We should be so proud.
paperserenade 4 years ago