Catholic Nun Perfectly Explains the Hypocrisy of the "Pro-Life" Argument

Didn't read the thread, so if I'm repeating my apologies.

Don't forget meat eating. Every time someone new I meet says they're pro-life I always ask "Congratulations, how long have you been a vegetarian?" Pro-lifers even have Pro-Life banquets where meat is served. Can't see any other way to be pro-life other than the way the nun describes it at the same time eating the feasts that vegetarians eat (when meat and cheese and such are not eaten the taste buds heal up or at least change into things which make every meal a feast. Seriously, ask a few of them).

a reply to: Aleister

Plants are alive too.

a reply to: Annee

You want me to make your argument for you? Priceless!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

You want me to make your argument for you? Priceless!

I'm serious.

Give me ONE unselfish reason to bring a child into this world.

originally posted by: JHumm
You could probably bet that if some lawmakers daughter or wife got raped and pregnant that would be OK to have an abortion.

Sure. But would it take them into months 7-9 to figure out whether or not to have the rape baby?

a reply to: Annee

How about too lazy (selfish) to live methodically in regards to pull out / not have sex during ovulation.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Where do you get your information that healthy 7-8 month old fetuses are being ripped from their mother's wombs?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Grambler
Annee do you disagree with laws that say a woman can't abort a nine months? Can you clarify this for windword and me?

Not your business.

Some of the comments I have read on ats lately have disturbed me.

Its not just that annee here is saying she and all women should have the right to abort the fetus at any time for any reason, but its that so many people are starring her post, or deflecting for her.

I am stunned.

People have beliefs. Here's mine:

I believe everything is energy, that energy consciousness (soul) is eternal, but physical is a manifestation. That you enter physical realms like it's a virtual reality game. The reason behind a decision is more important then the decision itself.

Abortion can be one of the most unselfish decisions you ever make.

Any idiot can reproduce and plenty do without any thought or plan to the care and welfare of the result.

----------------------------------------------------

I consider the health of the soul more valuable then a physical body.

But, once that body takes its first breath - - - the energy consciousness enters it and becomes part of it. Not before. If the physical is terminated - - - it has no affect on the eternal energy consciousness. That eternal consciousness simply moves on to a new host.

Now, are you going to tell me my belief is wrong?

I do not believe in a God.

I am telling you that your belief that it should be legal for a mother to terminate a nine month term baby is wrong and disgusting, regardless of why you believe that.

I have the right to challenge you belief system when it results in the destruction of innocent life.

You have no medical or scientific reason for why "drawing breath" suddenly changes incorporates energy consciousness. It is just your belief.

Much as some religions or racists believe people that don't hold their beliefs don't have souls, or energy consciousness, or whatever you call it. Just like you, they justify genocide based on their belief systems, and feel you have no right to challenge it.

But somehow you can't see that.

I will be hoping that you reevaluate your beliefs system to not justify the urder of 9 month term babies.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Annee

How about too lazy (selfish) to live methodically in regards to pull out / not have sex during ovulation.

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

a reply to: windword

According to the pro-choice course of thread, mothers should get to decide to abort at up to 9 months. I mean everything in here really whether on topic or not is hypothetical.

originally posted by: Tsubaki
Rather someone agrees with the morality is irrelevant, in the end a woman should be able to do whatever she pleases with her body.

Morals are like my cock, it's okay to have it; it becomes a problem if I decided I wanted to go around and shove it down others people's throat.

So just to clarify, you too agree that a woman should be able to have an abortion at 9 months for whatever reason?

originally posted by: Grambler

I am telling you that your belief that it should be legal for a mother to terminate a nine month term baby is wrong and disgusting, regardless of why you believe that.

I'm telling you that no one has the right to legislate a woman's body. Period!

It's no different then slavery. "I own you and your reproductive system".

So, ANYONE?

Give me ONE unselfish reason to bring a child into this world.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: windword

According to the pro-choice course of thread, mothers should get to decide to abort at up to 9 months. I mean everything in here really whether on topic or not is hypothetical.

Straw man! Learn the argument and stop putting words in peoples mouth with your imaginary hypothetical immorality! Nobody is arguing that a women pregnant with a 9 month healthy fetus can go and get an abortion because she's having second thoughts about being a parent.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

She is misrepresenting the argument by assuming tax dollars is the only way to feed and clothe poor children. She's wrong. Paying more taxes is neither charity nor compassion. Rather it is an excuse to avoid charity and compassion.

originally posted by: Grambler

You have no medical or scientific reason for why "drawing breath" suddenly changes incorporates energy consciousness. It is just your belief.

So?

Most Pro Lifers use God as their reason.

And NO, I am not changing my belief to accommodate anything or anyone.

originally posted by: Aleister
Didn't read the thread, so if I'm repeating my apologies.

Don't forget meat eating. Every time someone new I meet says they're pro-life I always ask "Congratulations, how long have you been a vegetarian?" Pro-lifers even have Pro-Life banquets where meat is served. Can't see any other way to be pro-life other than the way the nun describes it at the same time eating the feasts that vegetarians eat (when meat and cheese and such are not eaten the taste buds heal up or at least change into things which make every meal a feast. Seriously, ask a few of them).

This is a tired line of reasoning.

Plants are as alive as animals.

According to this logic if you're pro life you can't eat anything that is or was alive despite whatever semantics you want to ascribe to it.

In essence being pro life for every life but your own which is a paradox in and of itself.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Grambler

I am telling you that your belief that it should be legal for a mother to terminate a nine month term baby is wrong and disgusting, regardless of why you believe that.

I'm telling you that no one has the right to legislate a woman's body. Period!

It's no different then slavery. "I own you and your reproductive system".

Does the mother own the child's body?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Grambler

You want to pit me against Annie by putting hypothetical words in her mouth.

If a 9 month old fetus dies in the womb, an abortion should be performed. If a woman goes into heart failure, septic shock, kidney failure or stroke, for example, because her non-viable fetus is in, and is causing her, distress, then an abortion should be performed.



No doctor would perform an abortion at 9 months because the woman lost her job or broke up with her baby daddy!

We are having a discussion about what the law should be, or at least what is ethical. Thats the entire point of this thread.

I am open to hearing all opinions, but saw a person seemingly make the claim that women should be allowed to have abortions at 9 months for any reason.

That shook me, so I commented. Then I saw the stars this post was getting. Then I asked if people would condemn this, and they wouldn't.

Your comments here about health of the baby or mother are not what some people on this thread are claiming, they are saying the woman can abort at 9 months for any reason. In fact, they made it quite clear that they meant ANY reason. These aren't hypotehtical words in her mouth, this is what at least two people have said.

And you can't say that is wrong?

And now people are making the cop out that no doctor would perform that abortion. How do you know this?

What about Kermit Gosnell, he not only did very late term abortions, but actually killed babies after they were born. According to those on this thread, this doctor should have every right to kill these babies at 9 months so long as thats what the mom agreed to.

en.wikipedia.org...

So there is at least one doctor that would have done it, and I am sure there would be more.

But even if its only one doctor, how many 9 month term babies could he kill in a year. 100? 200? But thats ok, because there should be no law against a womans right to chose according to these people.

So now that I have showed that there would be doctors that would do this, are you finally willing to admit that Annee suggestion that women should be allowed to abort at 9 months is disgusting?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope


Does she own her eggs?