Vatican attacks US abortion move

page: 34
9
<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


I'm fully aware that babies are made through the act of sex. That is not, however, the ONLY function of the act. As far as facts go, you're right, men don't; but if they did, there wouldn't be some big damn argument about this, they would just have their choice.

A fetus isn't a person until it is born=FACT

It's a potential life, and if the person that would have to GROW that potential life into being a new existing life decides that they want an abortion, they should be free to do so.




posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Interesting article: RIGHTS: Poll Finds Scant Support for Criminalising Abortion
By Ali Gharib

WASHINGTON, Jun 18, 2008 (IPS) - A new poll reveals that three-quarters of respondents in 18 geographically and culturally diverse countries reject the use of criminal penalties to discourage abortions.

"While it does appear that many people around the world are uncomfortable with abortion, few think that the government should use punitive means to try to prevent it," said WorldPublicOpinion.org director Steven Kull.

ipsnews.net...

IMO - the Vatican needs to keep its politics addressed to its flock - - not the president of the United States.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 




nteresting article: RIGHTS: Poll Finds Scant Support for Criminalising Abortion
By Ali Gharib

WASHINGTON, Jun 18, 2008 (IPS) - A new poll reveals that three-quarters of respondents in 18 geographically and culturally diverse countries reject the use of criminal penalties to discourage abortions.



How did this guy get his name, Ali Gharib which is so close to Abu Ghraib? Is he for real?



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by profemeritus
 




Bigotry against Catholicism and Right to Life people has become rampant on ATS, and I will not let bigots have free reign, without answering their slanderous remarks.



From and earlier post:
“Answer me two questions
Herr Professor. 1) Was Peter, who the RCC claims was the First bishop of Rome, married or not? 2) When did the RCC First pronounce celibacy for its priests?”




Perhaps I overlooked an earlier response to my TWO questions?


[edit on 2/18/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite

How did this guy get his name, Ali Gharib which is so close to Abu Ghraib? Is he for real?


I don't know - maybe it is the John Smith of the Egyptian world


I am very conscious not to make assumptions based on ethnicity.

Actually: Ali Gharib is a Washington, DC-based journalist whose work regularly appears on Inter Press Service, Alternet, and Right Web. He has a master’s degree in Philosophy and Public Policy from the London School of Economics.


[edit on 18-2-2009 by Annee]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick


A fetus isn't a person until it is born=FACT

It's a potential life, and if the person that would have to GROW that potential life into being a new existing life decides that they want an abortion, they should be free to do so.


Well no, it is not FACT. It is a view only. To say potential life then you are suggesting it is not alive yet, and that is also false. It is the first few stages of human life and so it is alive. Also, are you suggesting that a baby 1 minute from birth is not alive, and so is it just a growth seconds before it pops out?

So let’s say that is not what you are suggesting, and let’s say you mean it is a human when it is capable of life outside the womb. So give me a date there when it magically goes from tumor to human. Also, since science keeps backing up that date to almost the test tube do we keep backing up the “when it comes human” date too?

Your problem is you pick a point for life that just happens to be convenient to your views or maybe it provides you the least amount of guilt when a child is killed.

Your views are not fact, and if you really wanted to pick a point when it becomes a separate living life from the mother than that could easily be at about the 30 day point when the heart is formed. After that it is growing and functioning and using the mother for food and oxygen.

I for one am not willing to pick a point in its growth and do the Cesar thumbs up or down on whether a living being can continue to live or die.

BTW: I do have religious motives here, but ethical ones.



[edit on 18-2-2009 by Xtrozero]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 






Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
A fetus isn't a person until it is born=FACT




Your problem is you pick a point for life that just happens to be convenient to your views or maybe it provides you the least amount of guilt when a child is killed. Your views are not fact, and if you really wanted to pick a point when it becomes a separate living life from the mother than that could easily be at about the 30 day point when the heart is formed. After that it is growing and functioning and using the mother for food and oxygen. BTW: I do have religious motives here, but ethical ones.



For 1,000 years the English language has used FETUS and PERSON and each is a descriptive term relating to a definable condition of existence. That is the basis of Roe v. Wade. The US Con protects "persons" but it does not protect a fetus. She did not PICK A POINT CONVENIENT to an argument but instead she uses the mother tongue, ENGLISH.


[edit on 2/18/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 





For 1,000 years the English language has used FETUS and PERSON and each is a descriptive term relating to a definable condition of existence.


Yes, words can be used to obfuscate.
For instance, in Nazi Germany, Christians were mensch, while Jews (Jude) were called Schweine.
Since, in the Nazis eyes, Jews weren't human beings, it was alright to kill them too. It's amazing how people can just destroy a LIFE by calling it a FETUS.
But then again, I guess you really believe that a FETUS is only a pet rock, and somehow magically becomes human when it leaves the womb.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
If you live in North Dakota:
NORTH Dakota has become the first US state to move towards passing a law that defines "personhood" as starting at the moment of conception, which would effectively outlaw abortion, pro-life groups said.

Lawmakers in the North Dakota lower house voted 51 to 41 on Tuesday to pass the Personhood of Children Act, which confers the same basic rights on "all human beings from the beginning of their biological development, including the pre-born, partially born."
www.news.com.au...


NORTH Dakota has become the first US state to move towards passing a law that defines "personhood" as starting at the moment of conception, which would effectively outlaw abortion, pro-life groups said. Lawmakers in the North Dakota lower house voted 51 to 41 on Tuesday to pass the Personhood of Children Act, which confers the same basic rights on "all human beings from the beginning of their biological development, including the pre-born, partially born."




[edit on 18-2-2009 by ProfEmeritus]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Nothing like going backwards in individual rights.

There is no way I would live in North Dakota or even step foot in it - with that kind of controlling mentality.

I can't even describe how fortunate I have always felt being born and raised in Los Angeles - of an open minded mother - - - who supported "Live and let Live".



[edit on 18-2-2009 by Annee]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 





Nothing like going backwards in individual rights.

Of course, that is your opinion. Mine is that at least one state house has come to its senses.
Perhaps if someone in Germany had stood up for Hitler, 20,000,000 that were killed, including Jews, Christians, Gypsies, and other "undesirables" would not have been sent to the gas chambers.
However, Hitler's actions pale compared to the 40,000,000 innocent babies that have been murdered in the US since the Supreme Court decided it was ok to murder innocent babies.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


“Answer me two questions Herr Professor. 1) Was Peter, who the RCC claims was the First bishop of Rome, married or not? 2) When did the RCC First pronounce celibacy for its priests?”



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 




Yes, words can be used to obfuscate. For instance, in Nazi Germany, Christians were mensch, while Jews (Jude) were called Schweine. Since, in the Nazis eyes, Jews weren't human beings, it was alright to kill them too. It's amazing how people can just destroy a LIFE by calling it a FETUS. But then again, I guess you really believe that a . . .



I will leave the NAZI stories to you as being more knowledge than I. As far as the English language goes, I cannot change it. Problem is, it does not suit the agenda of the fanatical fringe element who go crazy over a fetus but let 16,000 children die of starvation every day. I can't follow that dichotomy. How one can care SO much for a fetus and SO little for a cthild. It's plainly irrational. If not immoral.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 





“Answer me two questions Herr Professor. 1) Was Peter, who the RCC claims was the First bishop of Rome, married or not? 2) When did the RCC First pronounce celibacy for its priests?”


I guess you weren't paying attention. your partner Annee, objected to going off topic when this discussion took place, since it had nothing to do with abortion, so we're only discussing abortion. Besides, someone else already answered that for you. All you do is divert from the topic at hand. You have expressed your bigotry against the Catholic Church quite clearly. I don't have to put up with bigotry. Furthermore, it is against the T & C of ATS to attack groups of people because of their religion, race, or creed, and certainly 1,000,000,000,000 people are a rather large group to be attacking.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 




I guess you weren't paying attention. your partner Annee, objected to going off topic when this discussion took place, since it had nothing to do with abortion, so we're only discussing abortion. Besides, someone else already answered that for you. All you do is divert from the topic at hand. You have expressed your bigotry against the Catholic Church quite clearly. I don't have to put up with bigotry. Furthermore, it is against the T & C of ATS to attack groups of people because of their religion, race, or creed, and certainly 1,000,000,000,000 people are a rather large group to be attacking.



Hmm? “Vatican” has everything to do with “abortion.” The two are inextricable. Intertwined. Old celibate men telling young women how to do it! Or not to do it. That itself ought to be a SIN. Presumptuousness.

You could have said “Yes” and “The 11th century” in a lot less strokes. But that would have left you with your pants down, so to speak? Which is to say, the RCC is NOT eternal after all.

Annee was not talking to me, but was talking to you.


[edit on 2/18/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Taliban North Dakota will never stop women from exercising their Rights to their body.

Being 62+ - I know how it was before Roe vs Wade. I'll just borrow two very important words.

NEVER AGAIN!

The Vatican and their crusty old men - - need to stay out of women's bodies.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 





I will leave the NAZI stories to you as being more knowledge than I. As far as the English language goes, I cannot change it. Problem is, it does not suit the agenda of the fanatical fringe element who go crazy over a fetus but let 16,000 children die of starvation every day. I can't follow that dichotomy. How one can care SO much for a fetus and SO little for a cthild. It's plainly irrational. If not immoral.

Well, I guess you don't bother to read my posts. My wife and I have adopted orphans, and raised them to adulthood. I put my money where my mouth is. I take the right to life seriously, not just for the unborn, but for the born.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 




Taliban North Dakota will never stop women from exercising their Rights to their body. Being 62+ - I know how it was before Roe vs Wade. I'll just borrow two very important words. NEVER AGAIN! The Vatican and their crusty old men - - need to stay out of women's bodies.



I know about Catholics. Everyone in my family but me is Catholic. We agree not to discuss religion. I was born "sideways" and I have never been religious. I have now exceeded the biblical "three score and ten" and I never felt better! Nor happier!

The irony is that the Catholic laity is aching to do good works. If the old men who make up the hierarchy - say hold the fat jobs - would turn loose the Catholic lay persons they would make a significant difference in this world. To those in power it is all about power and keeping it. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. See note 1. I predict that in 50 years the pope will be chosen by popular election held worldwide. I'm very serious. When all those OLD men die, the younger men will take over and FREE up the energy presently being HELD back in fear!

Q. To Herr ProfEmeritus if you read this, tell us what HIGH POST of great honor the Vatican bestowed on His Eminence Bernard Cardinal Law late of Boston.


Note 1. "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." This arose as a quotation by John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902).


[edit on 2/18/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 





I know about Catholics. Everyone in my family but me is Catholic. We agree not to discuss religion.

Too bad you didn't listen to their advice.



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 




Well, I guess you don't bother to read my posts. My wife and I have adopted orphans, and raised them to adulthood. I put my money where my mouth is. I take the right to life seriously, not just for the unborn, but for the born.



Been there, done that. Three times. Two are demonstrable failures and the third is hard at work to make it unanimous. Lesson: Adopt early, very early. In fact, I’d say, be there when the umbilical cord is cut and take the baby then. Otherwise you are more likely than not to have a big problem on your hands.

Now, Herr P/E, can you answer my question? Q. What HIGH POST of great honor did the Vatican bestow on His Eminence Bernard Cardinal Law late of Boston. I assume you know Cardinal Law had to cut a deal with the prosecutor to get out of the country to avoid prosecution for complicity he had with several sex offending priests? But JP2 took GOOD care of him! Will that be counted as one of his 2 obligatory miracles for saint-hood? Or would that be too much like serf-serving?


[edit on 2/18/2009 by donwhite]





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 31  32  33    35  36 >>

log in

join