It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 01:02 AM
Women kill their own embryos...

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 03:20 AM

But for us to criticize and demonize the people, who choose to have abortions, were not helping solve anything. Simply furthering the lines that divide us for stupid reasons such as this.

Hate to remind you of that old Christian saying “hate the sin not the sinner” but I think it applies here there's a need for more than 7 Billion people on the planet?

If we use our brains and resources the earth can support much more people than this but if we allow evil men to control the very things that allow us to live and by saying we must depopulate (especially the west) is giving in to the NWO agenda

West Coast, are you willing to adopt a crack baby? Seriously.

Are you??? Im willing to take responsibility for my decisions and raise the life I give rise to on this earth, if the lord put a child’s life before me to raise I would raise it well in povety or wealth be it mine or anothers, but I would most assuredly raise it a Christian

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 03:49 AM
From the OP:

Originally posted by Mdv2
Nothing wrong with voicing your opinion, however, I think it goes too far when people try to force others to share their opinion through legislation. Especially when there is such a big pro and contra group, nor does it affect those who are against it.

Precisely, Obama has voiced his opinion and now he is using legislation to impose his views upon all american tax-payers who now find themselves having to buy into abortion. In the UK approximately 90% of the 200,000 abortions annually are paid for by the British tax-payer a total of over $200,000,000. There's some forced opinion sharing for you.


Originally posted by Terapin
Name ONE orphanage that is funded by the Vatican? The Vatican is quite wealthy after all.
I have worked with Orphans and have never seen the Pope do anything for them.

Do a google search for "Catholic Orphanages" and "Catholic Adoption Agencies" I think you'll be surprised.


posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 04:21 AM
One Vatican official warned against the "arrogance" of those in power who think they can decide between life and death.

But that's just exactly the same as the arrogance of someone who tells someone else what they can and cant do with there own body.
Its a contradiction.

On one hand you have people saying an individual can decide what they wish to do, they will decide themselves between life and death for the fetus inside themselves.They can decide either way.

And on the other you have people saying we will decide for them and the decision will be only life, which is of course deciding between life or death.

It really is the same thing on both sides, except one side is saying they will make the decision for individuals.
Who gives them that authority?

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 05:08 AM
okay, I've read through the first few pages...same as always...
am I wrong in assuming that the rule that obama just overturned denied public funding to any group that discussed abortion as a possible choice for an abortion under all circumstances?

I kind of think I am right here....and my assumption is being based on the fact that most of the abortion regulations that have been passed by the federal and state governments have been shot down for the very same reason!

weather you like it or not, if a women comes into one of these clinics and the workers discover that this growth inside of her is going to cause her severe physical problems....they have an obligation to discuss the alternatives with her...abortion being one of them!
If you're doctor had discovered a tumor growing inside you, would you prefer he sit down and discuss the various ways of getting rid of it, or would you be okay if he just sat there and said, well, you have a tumor, and it's growing, and well, it's gonna kill you, but well, the federal laws prohibit me from telling you what you can do about it......
as long as the people writing these stupid laws neglect the welfare of the mother's health, they will be shot down! They should be shot down!

just one case where the mother's right to good health was held as secondary to the baby's right to live. allow these stupid laws to remain on the books, and well.....we will have the same problems here. women will die, women will be unnecessarily handicapped, because society has pooh-poohed her health concerns!
you's might get further is you show a tad bit of concern for the mother and her wellbeing!

and, even with their laws, poland still has ships coming into ports, with the sole purpose of providing abortions to at least some of the women in the country.

[edit on 26-1-2009 by dawnstar]

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 05:15 AM
I have two things to say regarding this topic.

1) How can you argue or decide when the body becomes inhabited by the soul? Some believe it can happen right away, some believe months after the fetus is in the womb, some believe it does not happen until birth. If you can figure out a way to distinguish between the abolishing of the physical vessel as opposed to abolishing of the soul then maybe you will have a valid topic to argue?

2) Honestly, I agree with George Carlin on this one: 'All in favor of the unborn, once your born, YOUR ON YOUR OWN.'


Either way, no matter what you believe is true and right, there is no reason to push it on anyone else's right to have an opinion, as was stated.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 06:11 AM
Being pro-life, still i have to say, the Vatican these days and their opinions are becoming more resented, due to their own history. On a personal and local level, i do know many catholics who are good people and do a lot for the community. I just feel the tide is really against the general organization now and more then ever. Anything they say now seems to enforce the opposite opinion from the non-catholic world. Then again, i do actually agree with them on their stance on abortion issue. But i do find it rather ironic that the leadership is telling anyone about arrogance. Yeah, well, that's just my take on the whole thing. I don't need any Vatican or other church or sect to tell me what my own logic tells me, and that my using half my brain can figure out on it's own.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 06:15 AM

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
reply to post by StevenDye

Once again: the fetus does not have a CHOICE, it is not a sentient being and can not have one. It is an undeveloped growth inside the mother. SHE is the only sentient being in the equation and the only one with a choice. A woman should be the only person allowed to dictate what goes on in her uterus.

Agreed. + 1

The easiest example is the one of a young girl who is raped and becomes pregnant.

Does that mean based on "religious" views of a a group of secluded, shadowy old men she must have this baby and therefore give up her life as an adolescent?

Of course not. It's the woman's right t decide as it's her body and her choice and no one elses.

I really don't see why other people feel the need to infringe their beliefs on someone else like that. People can offer their opinions and suggestions, sure -- but no group should tell a woman what she can/cannot do in regards to her unborn fetus.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 06:19 AM

Originally posted by BorgHoffen
Who gives them that authority?

And that's the problem -- no "one" does. They "assume" it.

And because you cannot publicly decry relgion without being labelled a religious hater or some other socially ostricising term, they will always be unchallenged in their assumed power of representing 'God' on Earth.

Very silly really.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 06:39 AM
This debate has been raging since I was in high school and that was 30 years ago. While it is a sensitive issue, people tend to loose their powers of reason when talking about abortion.

If you are against abortion......don't have one. No one has a right to force their religious views on another person, ever. The thing that I just do not understand about the Catholics and abortion is they frown on birth control, yet want to force women living in poverty to bring more babies into the world they can barely care for. Women have the god given right to determine the course of their lives. Ask any woman and she will tell you that the birth of a child forever alters their life.

A person that is pro choice nine out of ten times, is not PRO ABORTION. I am very pro choice but.......I feel abortion should be the absolute last and only choice available. Birth control is of course the best option to avoid being in the situation, but as many women know, it doesn't always work. 3 of my 5 children were conceived due to birth control failure, it happens. Adoption is IMHO the best choice, a hard and gut wrenching thing to do but it can be a answer to prayer for an infertile couple.

Most of the places these programs are located are poor nations where survival is the business of the day. How many times have we all read things where people deride these women for having more children than they can afford? How dare anyone tell a woman who is struggling to provide for her children to add another mouth to the situation?

And the ultimate issue I have with the anti abortion people is this: The vast majority of the people that would force a woman to carry her pregnancy to term are the same ones that scream bloody murder about programs for the needy. "Those damned social programs" I find this stance the ultimate in hypocrisy!

Bottom line, stay out of my uterus and the uterus' of my daughters. What a woman chooses to do with her body and her life is no ones business. If the Christians are so concerned about life, why not picket and protest war? Oh, I forgot, most of the right wingers that hate abortion seem to have no issue sending their sons and others sons off to die in war.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 07:21 AM
It's hilarious when anti-abortionists get all sentimental, without actually considering the position of women who have to make a decision as important as to wether they should abort a pregnancy.

No-one who chooses to do so is making that decision lightly.

It disgusts and angers me that they harp on about 'the right to life'. The mother has a right to life too. Before medical advances enabled women to have abortions - they had rights to live too, and to bring kids into the world in a stable family environment, not as mistakes.

A baby is no less a miracle than any other biological function. You run, you'll sweat. You eat food, you'll digest it. You have unprotected sex, you stand a very, very high chance of pregnancy or contracting sexually transmitted diseases.

As far as a lot of people are concerned, something that doesn't even breathe air or have a fully developed body, let alone an actual sex yet - doesn't have the same right to 'life' over someone who can do all of those things. And pays taxes.

The day you quit being all Hallmark over this the better.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 07:25 AM
To the example of a woman being raped, well there was a tragedy right there. The abortion, in my own opinion just adds another tragedy to an already tragic event. I guess therein lies the problem, do you think an abortion is a tragedy? Or is it just, you know, discarding some tissue mass.
Do i want the Govt to tell a woman, you have to raise and care for that child that was violently thrust into you by some rapist? No, but i do want someone, somewhere to maybe consider the feelings that developing person may have, before it is just terminated. At least consider it, even if it can't communicate it.

Look, the govt tells me i am not allowed to plant a seed of a certain nature provided plant, grow it, and roll it up into some paper and smoke it, by myself without hurting anyone once in a while. And it also says i can't enjoy a tasty beer at a certain age, but i can suit up, grab a gun, and kill another man for my country at the same age. But i CAN terminate a developing individual person who is completely innocent of anything, as long as it is still in it's "parasite" stage.

Don't get me wrong though, i do feel that the rapist bears the blame for the abortion in that case, and i wouldn't want to just simply throw that woman in jail and ruin her life further. Let's just not be so quick to discard the innocent ones, is all i am saying. Does anyone even consider, that as a whole, the more innocents we discard, the more guilty we become?

Just some thoughts. Don't worry i won't impose any of this on anyone through legislation, i promise.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 07:34 AM
I must say I am like the many that has no love for the catholic religion, especially when they do the perv shuffle! Makes me sick that they get away with what they do!!!.. They still have an opinion and though that opinion has lost much credability; in this case I agree...
Thanks to the misguided we have a choice; sadly way too many people think this choice is birth control instead of murder. Thing is, it Isn't a Free choice; I am having to pay for this sh!t and Now I get to pay for it globaly.
this turns my stomach and barry you are a kenyan kreep ...

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 07:36 AM

Originally posted by redhead57

And the ultimate issue I have with the anti abortion people is this: The vast majority of the people that would force a woman to carry her pregnancy to term are the same ones that scream bloody murder about programs for the needy. "Those damned social programs" I find this stance the ultimate in hypocrisy!

If we could end hypocrisy then we could probably solve this issue to most people's satisfaction. I won't hold my breath on that though. But i think that is an excellent point. And i do wish more pro-lifers would think about that more also. I am pro-life and do often consider that also, so as to the OP, sure i guess the people would take the Vatican more seriously when calling others arrogant, if they themselves did not have so much hypocrisy in them for so long.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 07:36 AM
even though i believe abortion is wrong, it is murder. i have no reason to speak strongly about it to anyone.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 09:19 AM
well main reason i think the vatican wants to 'force' this on people is cause the bottom line = abortion is murder, end of story.

this is ultimately WHY i dont think people should have to much of a choice on this issue.

cause if we cant respect human life, then what else is there left to respect?

p.s. cause in general im for freedom of choice etc etc and all but im 110percent against abortion.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 09:28 AM
i like how no one responded my point in this topic because my point would end all abortion debates

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 11:35 AM
So abortion is wrong but allowing a child to be born into a family of unfit parents who will neglect and abuse them is ok? Putting thousands of unwanted kids up for adoption after birth is fine?

Many billions of dollars are spent to house, feed, and clothe children who are living in foster homes or are in custody of child services. Many more billions are spent on social services for families and single parents who cant succeed or refuse to succeed in life because they either had children too young or had children they could not afford.

Many children who grow up in foster care and never get adopted dont receive the kind of love and support that they wold get in a traditional family, not to mention the lack of opportunity to grow as an individual. Once they turn 18 they are dumped off in a rat infested hole of an apartment and immediately placed on welfare. Many of them never finish high school. They arent taught the kind of skills that you would learn from your father or mother and most of the time they still face abuse and neglect in foster care.

Is this the kind of system you would like to support? At least the parents who choose abortion are making an informed decision, they are saying that they are are not ready to have children, are unfit, or simply cannot provide the tools necessary to properly raise a child. They are potentially saving the child from, many years of abuse, neglect, poverty, drug abuse, and the list goes on.

So whats more cruel? If you ask me i think noone under the age of 18 should be having a child in north america. It simply doesnt work. The system just isnt set up to support this sort of thing. I have only met a handful of individuals who were under 18 when they had a child that actually became proper parents, and even then they still lived in poverty.

Let people make their own choices.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 11:39 AM
Okay, here's the real skinny on the abortion issue.

Obama is pro-abortion. That is just one of the reasons I did not vote for him.

Up until a few days ago, I was anti-abortion. Then I had a conversation with 'someone higher up' who spelled it all out for me.

The reason Democrats want to fund abortions is strictly for population control. Most abortions (80%) are for non-whites, so that helps to limit growth in the colored sector which in turn reduces welfare, crime and associated health care issues. Candidly speaking whites will be offered adoption services as an alternative, but not so much for coloreds.

This is a racist policy and Obama was duped into believing he was doing the right thing.

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 11:40 AM
Good for the Vatican!

Your an idiot for thinking its "right" to mash a baby embryo into paste and have it shop-vac'd out.

But hey its your decision. And God gave us the right to hey your right. Your right. Your right. Your that what you wanted to hear?

You choose to sin. I choose to forgive you.

[edit on 12/18/84 by Alferd Packer]

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in