It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Vatican attacks US abortion move

page: 20
9
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 





It amazes me that even after the rampant pedofile priest scandal, the Vatican can still try to assume the moral highground. perhaps one should keep ones house clean before commenting on others

Ah, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
Are you claiming to be sinless, "Super Moderator", or are you merely saying that anyone or any organization that has members that have ever done anything wrong, have given up the right to say anything? If so, then Protestants must refrain from speaking out because of Pastor Ted Haggard or Jimmy Swaggart or Jim and Tammy Baker. Muslims must not speak out because of a few suicide bombers, Jews must not speak out because of Madoff, and the list goes on.
I would have hoped that a "Super Moderator" would have known enough to "Deny Ignorance" when it comes to bigotry, but I guess that was expecting too much.

Quite bluntly, I am sick of the anti-Catholic bigotry that is rampant on ATS. It seems that Catholics are open season when it comes to bigotry.
Bigotry shows ignorance, and if it is tolerated in any form on ATS, then ATS is not worth the bandwidth it uses.




posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by OhZone
I take it you are male therefore you don’t know what you are talking about. Tell you what. You get a sack large enough to hold 15 to 20 pounds - of something such as flour. Now you strap this sack onto your front side and at first you put in just one ounce of flour. Now then, over the next 9 months you keep adding flour every day until you have 20 pounds of it. Now you cannot ever put this sack down or take it off, but must carry it 24/7.

Christian voice, you too are getting off the trail also…..no one is talking about killing a 1 year old.
So, it takes a monster to do an abortion….how about the monster that would enforce pregnancy on an unwilling woman?
Your arguments are getting silly.
[edit on 30-1-2009 by OhZone]



Don't give me the "males wouldn't understand" crap because Ill tell you what YOU don't understand. The fact you aren't being forced to relinquish $500 or $800 a month of your monthly income for 18 years of your life on an expense YOU thought was just going to be a roll in the hay but lo n behold! She gets pregnant! and the man controls our bodies by proxy legalese into performing extra hours of work or relinquishing creature comforts he also expected to enjoy in a life that is about choices like having the new car he now can't afford because like most of this immorally bankrupt world we live in where liberals and their asinine ideas have brought about the creation of daytime TV shows where Circus acts like Jerry Springer and Maury Povich exploit this phenomena and yell " Mr Man,, YOU ARE the Father!

That while this "male" (you know, the one who is too far removed from reality to ever understand) may THINK it is cool because we have a culture where choice is a Government entitlement and this male chooses to abort this unwanted consequence of his sexual indiscretion, when he makes that known,

what happens!

NOOOOO Homey da girl clown, she don't play dat.

You see that thing about choice,, well dat only counts for da GIRL!

Yeah BUNK and i ain't buyin it

The fact is this is a problem in this day and age and one their is no excuse for but I have every intention of voicing my indignation toward any male who doesn't seem to "get it" as any female.

This garbage about cramps and laxatives is so ridiculous a reason to justify murder and again, makes for one piss poor excuse to kill anyone much less an innocent child, MY GOD woman listen to yourself talk and then CRY ME A RIVER and get a damn epidural


Their are also males out there that have a RIGHT to choices too if we are to be fair but if we go there then we need to be fair for one more person in this scenario and all too often is the one who survives an abortion and left for as many as 11 hours cold hungry and alone in a broom closet "progressive" people like BimboObama has made a Government mandate to support and subsidize like the GOOD CHRISTIAN he is all about and the one that for twenty years listened to some nut case ranting about how bad white people are.

The Bible's morality base is black and white it is fixed like that so when we get as lost as you are, we have a beacon that we KNOW never changes to find our way back because this is NOT subjective, and like I said several times before,

IT IS NOT ONLY ABOUT YOU!



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 03:10 AM
link   
The problem with this issue is that there is no objective truth to what defines life. There are reasons to argue for and against the abortion issue. I find religion as being a bad reason why any government should try and render something illegal. From a religious stance, any aborted life forms will end up reborn or in a heaven. If one believes that aborted children are denied either of these, then the God they follow is a monster and far worse than anyone involved with abortion.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   
The abortion debate is like playing a game of football with a team that never allows the ball on the field. A team that hacks into the other team to point out its weaknesses. A team that holds up placards saying "your coach is a hypocrite". A team that shouts "your team is supported by millionaires and pedophinles!" A team that declares "we're the only ones allowed to decide what to do with the ball!" But they never let the ball on the pitch, they've left it in the dressing room bin and said thats ok because they chose to.

Keep the ball on the field, quit the gamesmanship.

Human life begins at conception, a scienetific, biological, genetic FACT. Let it on the field in front of the crowd and tell everyone why you want to advocate someone's right to destroy it.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by VicSage
 




The problem with this issue is that there is no objective truth to what defines life. There are reasons to argue for and against the abortion issue. I find religion as being a bad reason why any government should try and render something illegal.



The religious zealot is historically and notoriously short on the objective truth. That - truth - is the last thing the religious enthusiast wants to hear. Conformity is the mantra of those who pretend to converse with GOD. It has always been that way and as you can read on this thread, it remains that way today with the True Believer.

Contemporary Born Agains are the worst examples of spiritual malevolence today. Much like old time Jehovah’s Witnesses, they are self-righteously convinced they will be among the mythical 144,000 who will be admitted to Heaven. Religion now as then has proved to be the BLIGHT of humankind. The cause of wars and the sower of discord. But it looks like as Jesus was supposed to have remarked about the poor, we shall always have them with us.

Actually, I have to agree with Supercertari that human life - well, any life - begins at conception, a scientific, biological, genetic FACT. Past that fact and Mr S goes into his mad dog rant of his own theories of life and death.

But the point when any life form begins is the union of the male female cells even if it is an oak tree or the precursors of human life, the blue green algae. I doubt Mr S was happy to learn we humans share 10% of our DNA with the oak tree just mentioned. Me comfortable knowing that it was man who invented GOD and not the other way around, and Mr S in his AuH2O heart of hearts also knowing that but living in blissful denial.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Don't give me the "males wouldn't understand" crap because Ill tell you what YOU don't understand. The fact you aren't being forced to relinquish $500 or $800 a month of your monthly income for 18 years of your life on an expense YOU thought was just going to be a roll in the hay but lo n behold!


Oh Boo Hoo!

When men start taking it seriously - campaigning and legislating that ALL men are required to take Federal mandatory DNA tests to prove paternity and take 50% of the responsibility - - - then maybe I'll have some compassion.

My daughter met a boy in a Christian Bible camp when she was 17. They were together for 6 years. She had always had female problems - having a period only twice a year. Doctors told her it was impossible for her to become pregnant. They broke up - got back together for one night - she got pregnant. She DID NOT abort it - and today I have a wonderful 15 year old grandson.

However - the sperm donor refused to sign the birth certificate. Has never paid a cent in support - chose drugs over his son - but still wants visitation rights.

Did you know it is fully 100% the responsibility of the woman to prove paternity? Because he refused to sign the birth certificate - she has to prove paternity. She has to provide a DNA test to the courts - - which has to be voluntary on the sperm donor's part. Plus she has to pay for it - and the court costs.

My father abandoned me and my two brothers. I had to divorce my husband because he was jealous of his own children.

As much as I support men who really want to be hands on fathers and fight for their rights - - - until they jump on the band wagon supporting mandatory DNA testing for paternity - - - I have little sympathy.

So again - Boo Hoo

Even though my daughter chose to keep her baby - - I still fully 100% support Right of Choice.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


What an extraordinarily unsophisticated attempt at sleight of hand. Focusing the abortion question in the realm of religion v atheism, such a good way to distract attention from the basic fact of the destuction of a human life. Throw in a few ad hominems and who can hear the vacuums sucking?

Your contention that I have gone off in mad dog rants of my own theories of life and death belies the objective evidence. As may well be noted I have consistently spoken of that FACT which you dain to agree with.

I have absolutely no problem with an oak tree having DNA that is chemically ordered in 10% the same way as humans. I quite like oak trees, such a beautiful piece of the world around me. DNA causes me no difficulties at all, nor does science. Never has. As in all things its what people do with these discoveries which I occassionally have cause to speak about.

But lets pull the curtain aside Don W., lets not get distracted by your prestidigitation, now that we agree that human life begins at conception lets talk about why certain people advocate the right to destroy another human life in the womb. Be so kind as to show us all the objective fact that that choice is a "right". Show us, objectively, this thing you call a right - be careful now, your opinion or anyone else's won't count, its not opinion we seek but knowledge. Enlighten us with your objective truth. Show us from first principles why the destruction of another human life should be permitted?



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Biology is cells. A creation of thought.

Life is consciousness.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I support a science beyond what is known - and scientists are beginning to search beyond the "concrete" - and into the unknown.

I support everything is energy - energy evolved into intelligent consciousness - everything is a creation of thought. The universe is like an extremely advanced sophisticated computer game. We are all individual thought energies. How you play the game advances you to new levels of understanding and new worlds/dimensions of learning.

What you do is not as important as why. The thought behind your action is what is important.

Biology is not life - its just stage props and play pieces needed to play the game - - consciousness is life.

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

I realize this may sound very far out science fiction to some. But - same goes for a mystical omnipotent god.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Oh Boo Hoo!


Boo Hoo?? Anne you do realize you prove my point with the story about your daughter no?



When men start taking it seriously - campaigning and legislating that ALL men are required to take Federal mandatory DNA tests to prove paternity and take 50% of the responsibility - - - then maybe I'll have some compassion.


Well this is exactly what I was talking about, and I agree with this kind of legislation but I have one caveat Ill get into later in this post.

I am pleased to hear however that she decided on life over abortion.



However - the sperm donor refused to sign the birth certificate. Has never paid a cent in support - chose drugs over his son - but still wants visitation rights.


Well, if the guy isn't willing to sign a document acknowledging his part in this, then I'd say "who the hell are you to tell me who my son sees and doesn't see, until you man up and prove you have some claim to him as a father, you got no rights to him. He may say verbally he is but if it's good enough to put into words, it's good enough to put into writing I always say.

This is however what I don't understand. Why would he want to have visitation when he doesn't want any part of the responsibility?



Did you know it is fully 100% the responsibility of the woman to prove paternity? Because he refused to sign the birth certificate - she has to prove paternity. She has to provide a DNA test to the courts - - which has to be voluntary on the sperm donor's part. Plus she has to pay for it - and the court costs.


This may seem like the onus is all on the woman but that is only because in most cases like this, it is the woman making the claim or accusing the male of not paying child support of child she claims is his.

It is callled "Burden of proof" and as unfair as it may seem, it is even worse for males in a case like this as he doesn't get a say in ANY of this what so ever.



My father abandoned me and my two brothers. I had to divorce my husband because he was jealous of his own children.


That's none of my business and he isn't here to tell his side of the story so if you don't mind I'll pass.



even though my daughter chose to keep her baby - - I still fully 100% support Right of Choice.


No, see this is what I am talking about, while you talk a good game about being tolerance, advocatiing choice and equal rights all that bru ha ha, the fact is, you are nothing of the sort.

Perhaps that sperm donor as you refer to him, had plans of his own that didn't include the child that was born.

Or as you say here in your last sentence claiming you are for choice, well you are not for choice,

YOU are for the choice that suits YOU and only you.

What if he told her he wasn't ready to have a child or the responsibility and gave you all the flimsy excuses I have heard here like he ends up being a slave to this child income support etc.

It is one thing to say you are about the right to choose but this kind of one sided ordeal can amount to emotional and financial extortion for those who get no say in the matter but are expected to tow the line nevertheless and the child,, whew that was a close one.

Maybe this is why you have to drag men into court because if it were the other way around, she kills the kid he wants to raise. I think he would trade his feelings for hers any day because either way, SHE gets to have it HER way and ONLY her way, whether he agrees or not.

Like I keep saying, it isn't just about YOU

Even if I am on the side of life,

The whole choice thing

is BUNK







[edit on 31-1-2009 by Aermacchi]



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi

No, see this is what I am talking about, while you talk a good game about being tolerance, advocating choice and equal rights all that bru ha ha, the fact is, you are nothing of the sort.

Perhaps that sperm donor as you refer to him, had plans of his own that didn't include the child that was born.

[edit on 31-1-2009 by Aermacchi]


I am in no way advocating tolerance or compassion for men in this situation. Absolutely NONE!

Right of Choice for women and control of their bodies if they become pregnant. Absolutely!

"Perhaps that sperm donor as you refer to him, had plans of his own that didn't include the child that was born." You can't be serious!



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Aermacchi

No, see this is what I am talking about, while you talk a good game about being tolerance, advocating choice and equal rights all that bru ha ha, the fact is, you are nothing of the sort.

Perhaps that sperm donor as you refer to him, had plans of his own that didn't include the child that was born.

[edit on 31-1-2009 by Aermacchi]




Right of Choice for women and control of their bodies if they become pregnant. Absolutely!

"Perhaps that sperm donor as you refer to him, had plans of his own that didn't include the child that was born." You can't be serious!




Hey LOOK you man hating pariah, if you are going to be THAT way about it, perhaps you should recuse yourself of what is obviously a dialogue you you have no intention of being objective about. And you called US self righteous? As long as the Grand President Barack, BimbOBama wants us to pay taxes on all these abortions, and YOU want all the control AND the money AND all the choice. No wonder the sperm donor is acting this way, he must have met YOU.

In any event you proved my point once again.



I am in no way advocating tolerance or compassion for men in this situation. Absolutely NONE!


And you will get none in return

Good Game



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


Hey, men shouldn't have a say in the matter. They don't have to grow something inside of them for 3/4 of a year. They run out on the women that have their children all the time.

The point of the matter is that it's not their body that has to go through a pregnancy. The right of choice applies ONLY to a woman because all of this is going on in HER uterus.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 03:47 PM
link   
If you think overpopulation is good for the human race and that the life of 1 human is worth everything else on this planet then you are retarded.

Whats the difference between an abortion and a miscarriage? Not that big, because most of the time human miscarriages are the fault of the mother.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Supercertari
 




I have absolutely no problem with an oak tree having DNA that is chemically ordered in 10% the same way as humans. I quite like oak trees, such a beautiful piece of the world around me. DNA causes me no difficulties at all, nor does science. Never has. As in all things it’s what people do with these discoveries which I occasionally have cause to speak about.



Mr S/C, I do not mean to attack you personally. You have every right to hold to the views you espouse. I do not know you so I hesitate to say this, but I’ll do so anyway. My problem with most people of faith is what I regard as a glaring inconsistency. I cannot understand their irrational fascination with a fetus and their total disregard for a child.

You know where I’m going. The 16,000 children who die every day from starvation or diseases exacerbated by malnutrition. That’s the UN number, The Christian Children’s Fund says 26,000 but I’m sure both are estimates.

We have spent $800 b. since 2001 chasing Osama bin Laden and his cohorts. All borrowed money so it will increase at the rate of 3-4% a year for 30 years. About $2 t. when paid out.

We use millions of bushels of corn for unnecessary ethanol that consumes more btu to make than the ethanol product contains. That corn could have fed a lot of hungry people. More in the US than anyone here cares to even discuss. If the anti-choice people had exerted all that limitless energy - or even half - on feeding living people, I’d feel a lot better about the argument. I have never heard a mega-church leader - Joel Ostein for example - speak about that. Starvation.




. . we agree that human life begins at conception lets talk about why certain people advocate the right to destroy another human life in the womb. Be so kind as to show us all the objective fact that choice is a "right."



Surely you learned in Polemics 101 not to let your opponent define the issue?

Let me summarize by saying I grant to myself no right to impose my POV on another person. The US Constitution guarantees the right of choice to pregnant women. Decent, rational and civil people would respect that. And move on to more rewarding endeavors. IMO.

[edit on 1/31/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Supercertari
Be so kind as to show us all the objective fact that that choice is a "right".


Choice is a right because it concerns something that is growing inside of a woman. Everything that is growing on or inside of you is YOURS. Therefore, you have the right to decide what happens to anything that is growing on or inside of you.

No one should be forced to play host to another organism. Even if that organism is of the same species. Until birth, a fetus is not a separate entity from the mother. It is still attached and growing in her uterus. It is not a fully developed person and belongs to the mother.

If the mother KNOWS that she can not provide a good life for the child: she can not clothe it, she can not feed it, she doesn't have the money to maintain it, she knows that it will suffer it's entire life, she does not have the means or ability to raise a child. She shouldn't be forced to have the child.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


It seems you are more offended by the Republican Party than Christian Pro-Life advocates. Let me assure you I do have an equal concern for the number of children who are kept in poverty by a western world which is more concerned with protecting its own rapacious apettites than lifting them from poverty by a fair sharing of the world's resources. I have alluded on several occasions on this thread to Kissinger's NSSA 200, which I again recommend be read in light of President Obama's recent memoranda.

The conversion of crop production from feeding people to feeding cars appals me. The world is certainly full of such gross (an apt word) injustices I do not think they are ameliorated by permitting the further injustice of abortion. In the current consumerist world abortion is a prime example of human lives being commodified.

I also learnt in Polemics 101 to press one's opponent to demonstrate the consistency of their POV. Where your's accuse Christianity, or pro-life advocates, of lacking objectivity I present you with the opportunity to demonstrate your own on this issue. I can understand, though, why you have instead chosen to throw up another smoke screen instead of showing the lack of objectivity in advocating choice in regard to the destruction of human life.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I cannot believe that some people just do not understand what an important issue this is. I myself am only 16 years old and yet I fully understand this -> "a life, is alife, is a life" it does not matter how old, how young, what race, where they are from or even how the child was concieved or why. The point is that a human being is simply that; a human being. NO ONE can dispute this.

Now; what is a life, when does it start? Do some research. It is not when distinguishable body parts are formed. It is not 2 weeks before the date the child (make no mistake, it is a child, a human being) is proposed to be "born". It is the moment of conception and is an irrefutable scientific fact. Look it up. Also check out some interviews with ex-abortionists if you still aren't convinced.

I find many peoples ignorance on this website truly heartbreaking
. Which is why I am writing this in the first place. Words like "moron" and grouping people together (im looking at whoever said they dislike catholics) is rediculous. That is like saying I dislike asians, or blacks, or whites, or arabs. The word "prejudice" comes to mind.

And to those who said it doesn't affect you so dont wory about it and that people have the right to make their own choices about this; i have this to say to you: Do you believe that it is MY choice to murder my sister, brother, neighbour, if I deem them to be an inconvenience to me? And are you suggesting that I should ignore what travesty's go on around me? Are you suggesting that because it is not me who is aborting this child that I should just let it be and not speak out against it. If so I find great controversy in the fact that so many on this website say that they are against ignorance and that the "sheeple" need to "wake up" and see what the gov't is doin because it is these (presumably) same people who are telling us to ignore abortion... strange
. - Mike



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Supercertari
In the current consumerist world abortion is a prime example of human lives being commodified.


How is this an example of a human life becoming a commodity? That makes absolutely no sense. Abortions are an example of women being able to have control over their own organs.

You're in favor of fascism and overpopulation.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TasteTheMagick
 





Choice is a right because it concerns something that is growing inside of a woman.

You also have the right to decide whether to engage in acts that will lead to conception, and you have the DUTY to learn about the consequences of not taking the proper actions. Once you abrogate those duties, you introduce a SECOND life, which relies on you to protect it.
Abortion is no different from what Casey Anthony allegedly did to Caylee Anthony, that is, commit murder.
You can sugar coat it any way you wish, it doesn't change the fact that abortion takes away the life of a child. I'm sure Caylee was not able to stop her murder either, even though she was fully dependent upon her mother.

In Nazi Germany, the Nazis justified the killing of Jews, Gypsies, the mentally disabled, and other unfortunate souls by claiming that THOSE people weren't really human either.

Abortion is no different. You can claim all you want that once conceived, what you call a fetus is not a human being, but that is just a false justification, and denying the truth.

If you don't want a baby, take measures to prevent conceiving. If you fail, then put the baby up for adoption. There are plenty of loving people who are willing to adopt such children. We know, because WE did adoption children who were not "wanted" by their birth mothers.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join