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.

 

Ron Paul and Abortion " My thoughts" Please contribute

page: 23
9
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaborofLove
And yes, tell them they can have as many relationships as they want, they can indulge and experiment, but no glove no love must be the mantra you instil.

Promiscuity is the problem, NOT the solution.


Originally posted by LaborofLove
And Madam, that is me saying that women are thus idiots, because they can't take the proper precautions in the first place.

So it's all our responsibility now?

I agree that we have a larger stake in this, but pregnancy isn't something that happens solo. Two are involved. Both need to be responsible. Contraceptives aren't always effective, and that needs to be a serious consideration before you run off and openly celebrate your sexuality through irresponsible sexcapades.




posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


You "know" that God puts a soul in a body after five months of gestation? Wow!

Life itself is God-given, He doesn't start it and then give it a part of Himself at a certain period!!! We are all a portion of God and we start off that way. For that is what a soul is, it is a portion of God, of Love, of Light. Your comment is insane!



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaborofLove
reply to post by Maslo
 


You "know" that God puts a soul in a body after five months of gestation? Wow!

Life itself is God-given, He doesn't start it and then give it a part of Himself at a certain period!!! We are all a portion of God and we start off that way. For that is what a soul is, it is a portion of God, of Love, of Light. Your comment is insane!



Ironically...it's no more insane that professing to "know" that a soul is "...a portion of God, of Love, of Light".


It never ceases to amaze me how one "believer" can call another "believer" crazy whilst simultaneously professing equally nonsensical and unprovable "Truth".



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by yoyoyoyo
reply to post by Ilyich
 


Give it to a family that cares, Put up with that 8-9 months of temporary discomfort and give that life away, Don't end it.


Government hasn't the right to make women incubators because someone said it's murder. They need a legal reason to do so.

Anti-abortionists' moral objection to abortion relies on the belief that the z/e/f is a person and should be offered legal protection.

This position has consistently failed to win support and undermine the legal provision of abortion. The right to privacy trumps any imaginary right to life. It seems that opponents to abortion have turned to other means to further their cause. So they attempt to claim alleged mental illness / harm to women into a legal strategy to undermine the provision of abortion.


Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by igor_ats
 


How is late term abortion used to save a woman's life?
Oh yeah, it's an arbitrary argument that she will suffer mental trauma if she delivers the child.
Partial birth abortion is extremely dangerous for the woman, more than natural delivery in that the child has to be turned "breach" to come out and allow the instruments into its brain!


I don't think you know when you can have a late term abortion. If you're late term you can't "change your mind" as the basis for an abortion.


Originally posted by yoyoyoyo
No chance. Give them a chance... You we're given a chance, Why don't they deserve a chance?

Government forcing women to bear unwanted children should be compensated, at least a million US dollars. Oh wait it's only a "temporary discomfort".

The risk of death associated with childbirth is about 12 times as high as that associated with abortion.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Achey
 


reply to post by milominderbinder
 


I am an atheist and dont believe in souls, I used "soul" only as a metaphor (hence the smilie) for the mind.

In my opinion, its not immoral to kill a life that does not possess a mind, irregardless of its DNA sequence or species. Since the mind cannot exist before 5th month of fetal development, its not immoral to kill embryo/fetuses before this time. No mind, no person, no victim, no crime.



These are facts, and from this the obvious conclusion is that a murder is occurring because there is a premeditated termination of a human life.


I dont define murder as premeditated termination of human life in the biological sense. What is wrong is in fact terminating a mind (hence why killing biologically alive but braindead people is accepted - why are you not protesting at hospitals?). If someone transferred his mind into a computer, deleting it would still be murder, even if no biological life is killed. The mind is what gives us value and rights (the source of value), not the fact that we are simply biologically alive and have certain order of nucleotides in the DNA. We are our minds.

Why should I care about mindless human life? Especially at the expense of causing suffering to already sentient people (the women)? I simply dont see any reason to.

Life with mind >>> mindless life. Period.
edit on 11/4/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by LaborofLove
reply to post by Maslo
 


You "know" that God puts a soul in a body after five months of gestation? Wow!

Life itself is God-given, He doesn't start it and then give it a part of Himself at a certain period!!! We are all a portion of God and we start off that way. For that is what a soul is, it is a portion of God, of Love, of Light. Your comment is insane!



Ironically...it's no more insane that professing to "know" that a soul is "...a portion of God, of Love, of Light".


It never ceases to amaze me how one "believer" can call another "believer" crazy whilst simultaneously professing equally nonsensical and unprovable "Truth".


It's one of the charms of the abortion debate.

Funnily enough there hasn't been 1 recorded protest outside an IVF clinic when their philosophy of personhood from conception dictates there's no reason not to.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by yoyoyoyo
reply to post by Demigodly
 


So good and evil doesn't exist to you? And when I say satan don't think of the horned demon , just think evil.

The opposite of evil is good. Obviously.

Which should we pick?
edit on 10-4-2012 by yoyoyoyo because: (no reason given)


You realize that both are entirely subjective adjectives, correct? What more evidence for the nonexistence of "good" and "evil" could we possibly want other than the fact that there these two notions have existed solely in the realm of subjective opinion in every language on planet earth, throughout the totality of human history.

Think about it in simple terms.

How many Americans would say that the 9-11 terrorists are "evil" for killing 3,500-ish innocent civilians erstwhile simultaneously making excuses and justifications for the sound "morality" of killing HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Iraqi's and Afghans? ...and vice-versa for that matter.

The adage of "Treat others as you would wish to be treated" which has surfaced independently in not only every major religion/mythology...but also in Classical Philosophy, secular Confucianism, and almost all philosophical treatises on morality usually takes care of lion's share of the "good vs. evil" debate a hell of a lot more definitively, soundly, and irrefutably than using opinion based adjectives.

For the most part it's only when we come questions surrounding euthanasia and abortion that the old "Golden Rule" doesn't necessarily work. A lot of people are appalled at the idea of Dr. Assisted suicide based upon the idea that they themselves would not want a Dr. or family member encouraging or sanctioning suicide...however truth be told the vast majority of those in opposition aren't living in immense agony on a daily basis with a terminal illness and nothing whatsoever to look forward to.

Likewise, I have found that the vast majority of people who feel that abortion is inherently evil are white, middle and upper class Americans...especially the baby boomers. No surprise...this demographic of people are the wealthiest, most privileged, and most empowered, group of people that have ever lived on planet earth in the history of the human race their consumption of resources of all kinds dwarfing that of any other generation previously and presumably also dwarfing that of any future generations, save for an unexpected invention of a $1,000 dollar cold-fusion reactor for the home.

It's mighty easy to view life as being a "blessing" and "precious" when you are at or near the top of the pyramid. It certainly sounds nice to want to give innocent babies a "chance"...but you assume that they all will have a "chance" once they are born.

An unwanted child is several orders of magnitude more likely to suffer from lifetimes filled with extreme poverty, abuse, neglect, molestation, addiction, violence, hunger, poor or no medical care, and repeated incarceration...oftentimes for simply being a product of their environment.

Perhaps we should focus our attention on making the world a place worth living in before we try so hard to make sure all these kids have a "chance" to experience it.

It just blows me away that when there are too many unwanted puppies we call it a "puppy mill" and toss the person in charge in prison for cruelty to animals...yet producing unwanted humans is so often promoted as a moral ideal.

But then again, we also put our dogs down when they are old, suffering, in pain, and don't have any decent quality of life anymore so that they can die with at least some semblance of dignity. However...there is no end to the suffering we will force another human to endure...is there?

Anything for a vote. Anything for a buck. Who cares what brand of living hell we create for the young and the elderly? We have Jesus on our side, right?



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   
I've been arguing here against abortion, because I feel that if a woman has a right to her body then she should think far enough to be responsible for the potential lives that she can bring forth. She thinks about her diet and her beauty, her boob job, then she should very well think about the protection of her vuvuJ. But no, women are too shallow to think further than the pumps on their feet and the impression they are making in careers. Which is why I have a problem with them deciding the fate of mankind, and who gets to live and die, because they have chosen to be too stupid to protect OUR future offspring. I believe that an unborn soul will return to The Creator without any loss of anything at all, and yes natural abortion takes place all the time. But I do believe a child is a gift to not only its parents, but to mankind, and to itself as well, as it is gifted a life which is not someone else's "choice" to snuff out at any stage, only The Life Giver can make that choice. Abortion is taken for granted as a way out from the slips in judgement when the wine-goggles have lessened the scruples, that it is too, taken for granted that we can have the designer babies or the elimination of a gender we don't wish to have, is where we start resembling Mengele. And as important as the Jimmy Choo's on a woman's feet, is the education she needs to get at a young age towards the protection of what is life. We discard unneeded lives from petri dishes all the time, so how does it make it any different if we choose invasive procedures to discard the unneeded lives within us? As much as feminists want to taut the ownership of their bodies, so too must we as a society protect the child. The ones in petri dishes and the unborn ones! Because isn't it a violation of humanity to use an embryo to do stem-cell research on? So we need to look at how much of a violation it is as well to discard Our little ones so uncouthly. The child is not unneeded, the child is unloved, this is where mankind fails mankind. There are other ways of having sex if you feel you are inadequately protected at the time, yes passion overrules, but as much as raising a girl means she needs to take "care" not to fall pregnant, so should raising a boy be. Raising children is possibly the one thing that none of us are qualified to do. We are all damaged goods because of inadequate parents, and it is this whole breeding of a contemptible society that needs to be addressed. Sex education is inadequate, because it is not teaching our children how to take care for and to respect life. And thus, it is okay for them to maim and kill one another as they grow, as we teach them nothing but fear, hate and anger. Abortion is a disgusting thing to do if you are a caring individual, because it is only once you care that you can see that taking a life, any life, is murder.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Achey
 


reply to post by milominderbinder
 


I am an atheist and dont believe in souls, I used "soul" only as a metaphor (hence the smilie) for the mind.

In my opinion, its not immoral to kill a life that does not possess a mind, irregardless of its DNA sequence or species. Since the mind cannot exist before 5th month of fetal development, its not immoral to kill embryo/fetuses before this time. No mind, no person, no victim, no crime.



These are facts, and from this the obvious conclusion is that a murder is occurring because there is a premeditated termination of a human life.


I dont define murder as premeditated termination of human life in the biological sense. What is wrong is in fact terminating a mind (hence why killing biologically alive but braindead people is accepted - why are you not protesting at hospitals?). If someone transferred his mind into a computer, deleting it would still be murder, even if no biological life is killed. The mind is what gives us value and rights (the source of value), not the fact that we are simply biologically alive and have certain order of nucleotides in the DNA.

Why should I care about mindless human life? Especially at the expense of causing suffering to already sentient people (the women)? I simply dont see any reason to.

Life with mind >>> mindless life. Period.


Ahhh...good point. Thanks for clearing that up.

I do agree that sentience makes life more important. I am NOT one of those kooks who thinks dolphins are people too or whatever. It sure sounds nice...but hypothetically speaking,I know that if MY kid that needed some type of rare enzyme to stay alive which could only be produced by dolphins...I would be MIGHTY pissed at the PETA folks who might protest because dolphins should have equal rights or whatever. Likewise, I think the level intelligence/sentience makes dolphins more important than cockroaches. In short, People are more important than animals in my book.

However, I take a slightly different turn on your idea of "pulling the plug".

You are correct...not a whole lot of people have a problem with terminating life support systems on someone who is brain dead. However...there are a HELL of a lot of people who are just as opposed to euthanasia as they are abortion under the overall idea that life...even human life... is somehow inherently "precious".

I am all for euthanasia to prevent needless and mindless suffering. Likewise, being born as an unwanted child is one of the most horrible fates that can befall a person. The big difference between euthanasia and abortion in my estimation is largely the matter of choice, correct?

If Grandma is 90 yrs old, with terminal cancer but an unmercifully sound mind which allows her to experience every agonizing moment, I think it's A-OK to allow her to CHOOSE to take a shortcut to the ol' dirt nap if she wants to. Besides pain and agony the only thing she's going to accomplish is padding the quarterly reports of a few medical and pharmaceutical companies in her final days. I think that is just CRUEL.

So...the argument then becomes..."Yeah...but the fetus never had the CHOICE", correct? Again, this certainly sounds valid...until we realize that a newborn infant doesn't have ANY choices available to it whatsoever. In a euthanasia example...the kid would have to be 18 to make that call for themselves.

However...let's say a fetus DID have choices. I'm pretty sure the fetus ALSO wouldn't choose to be born a parent(s) that were too poor to care for it or would resent it for the balance of their lives. Likewise, I'm guessing not many fetuses would CHOOSE to bounced around to a smattering of foster homes and orphanages and be raised by "The System".

Quite conversely...I bet there would be a HELL of a long waiting list of fetuses who signed up to be trust-fund babies, oddly monikered offspring of hollywood celebrities, and children of powerful political dynasties. Similarly NOBODY would be signing up for being born to a family of impoverished, undereducated addicts since it almost guarantees that you will live a life filled with physical and emotional pain, suffering, and want.

Thus, given the hell-hole that we have turned planet earth into...I think it's far more ethical to allow, and even fund, abortions than force the decision to be born upon an innocent individual who has no choice in the matter.

I gotta say...if I was sentient fetus and had that choice...sign me up for an abortion PRONTO and let's get this sh^t over with.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by LaborofLove
 


You are clearly blind to the results of unwanted pregnancy. It's obvious you've never been a victim of a child-hating parent.

Preach life all you like. Fortunately, women have a legal choice now.

There are 50 million fewer unhappy people around. Those of us who remain cope with survival daily. It's an ugly process.

I vote for abortion over misery.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by LaborofLove
 





Because isn't it a violation of humanity to use an embryo to do stem-cell research on?


Do you also oppose organ donations? If an embryo is to be aborted anyway, why is it a "violation of humanity" that it's remains might be used to benefit humanity, in the long run.

I actually have a great deal of experience with abortion. During the '60's, my older sister was forced to have an abortion by our church deacons, who my parents called upon for judgment, because she became pregnant with a black man's child, while away at college.

During the '70, when I became pregnant with my daughter, they tried the same thing on me. I refused, so, at 17, I was disowned from my "Christian" family. I was fired from my job for being pregnant, legal in those days, and denied unemployment, because pregnancy was a choice. I was forced into public housing and welfare. My welfare worker hounded me to get an abortion all the way, until the 120 day mark had passed, as late term abortions banned.

Later, I had another bout with pregnancy, and having learned my "lesson," I acquiesced, to the State of California, and had the abortion that they wanted.

I put all my efforts into raising the daughter I wanted, and fought so hard to keep, enduring being judged by every facet of society, as a single, non-Christian, welfare grabbing "ho-bag" on food stamps.

My daughter now is 37 years old, holds 3 PHD's and is a professor at UCLA. She also holds a major position in a world renown lab doing..............

wait for it..........................STEM CELL RESEARCH!

Thus, I believe in "quality not quantity" of life.

edit on 11-4-2012 by windword because: grammar and easy of reading



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by disgustingfatbody
reply to post by LaborofLove
 


You are clearly blind to the results of unwanted pregnancy. It's obvious you've never been a victim of a child-hating parent.

Preach life all you like. Fortunately, women have a legal choice now.

There are 50 million fewer unhappy people around. Those of us who remain cope with survival daily. It's an ugly process.

I vote for abortion over misery.


EXACTLY!!!
....It's the humane and righteous thing to do.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Let me put my ludicrous statement to you this way; Mary was conceived without sin/Jesus was God incarnate, conceived by the Holy Spirit. Conceived! Not Christian? How about this; Buddhist belief - When the body dies, the incorporeal mental processes continue and are reborn in a new body. Because the mental processes are constantly changing, the being that is reborn is neither entirely different than, nor exactly the same as, the being that died. However, the new being is continuous with the being that died – in the same way that the "you" of this moment is continuous with the "you" of a moment before, despite the fact that you are constantly changing - still not your cup of religion? How about Aristotle? He defined the soul or psyche as the first actuality of a naturally organized body. Five months indeed!



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by LaborofLove
 


I think the soul is infinite whether it is contained in a body or not.

I had a sort of near-death experience which is why I believe this. I was dead but still sentient.

We are not murdering souls. I believe they simply await another vessel.

I wish I could share that experience with all of you. Then you would understand the beauty of the system that nurtures us.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by LaborofLove
 





Because isn't it a violation of humanity to use an embryo to do stem-cell research on?


Do you also oppose organ donations? If an embryo is to be aborted anyway, why is it a "violation of humanity" that it's remains might be used to benefit humanity, in the long run.

I actually have a great deal of experience with abortion. During the '60's, my older sister was forced to have an abortion by our church deacons, who my parents called upon for judgment, because she became pregnant with a black man's child, while away at college.

During the '70, when I became pregnant with my daughter, they tried the same thing on me. I refused, so, at 17, I was disowned from my "Christian" family. I was fired from my job for being pregnant, legal in those days, and denied unemployment, because pregnancy was a choice. I was forced into public housing and welfare. My welfare worker hounded me to get an abortion all the way, until the 120 day mark had passed, as late term abortions banned.

Later, I had another bout with pregnancy, and having learned my "lesson," I acquiesced, to the State of California, and had the abortion that they wanted.

I put all my efforts into raising the daughter I wanted, and fought so hard to keep, enduring being judged by every facet of society, as a single, non-Christian, welfare grabbing "ho-bag" on food stamps.

My daughter now is 37 years old, holds 3 PHD's and is a professor at UCLA. She also holds a major position in a world renown lab doing..............

wait for it..........................STEM CELL RESEARCH!

Thus, I believe in "quality not quantity" of life.

edit on 11-4-2012 by windword because: grammar and easy of reading


Good for you. You should be very, very, proud of both yourself and your daughter for overcoming the odds.

However...isn't being hounded or coerced into HAVING an abortion just the same as been hounded or coerced into NOT having one? Irregardless of the success which you had in raising your daughter, you stand as the exception...not the rule.

Thus, is it not plausible to ALSO think that there are many, many, women out there who were TALKED OUT OF having an abortion and have regretted that decision every single day of their lives...much to the detriment and chagrin of the child in question and society as a whole?

Perhaps the answer then is that we all would do well do let women do whatever they wish to with their fetuses. I believe that is called "pro-choice" if I'm not mistaken.

Also...please remember that you gave birth to and raised this child during the most prosperous decades, of the most prosperous state, in the most prosperous country, as part of the most affluent generation, with the highest potential for upward socio-economic mobility, that the world as ever seen since the dawn of time.

This isn't to make light of your OR your daughters accomplishments. They are admirable to say the least. However...change the time period and geographic location of your story and the happy ending turns into a nightmare for child, parent, and society alike.

When you and your daughter were born it would have been utter madness for someone to claim in public that educating children and providing them with medical care was a poor use of tax dollars or that the richest man in the world "deserves" to pay a lower percentage in income taxes than his secretary.

Today...these are mainstream "beliefs".

My point is only that even for kids born into middle-class, loving families, who WANT THEM stand little to no chance of experiencing the same QUALITY OF LIFE that you and your daughter have had thus far...if for no other reason than the basic supply and demand issues of having an exponentially increasing global population that is roughly 2.25 TIMES MORE POPULATED than it was in 1970.

Again...before we are so eager to make it mandatory that all these new babies have their "chance"...perhaps we ought to work on making the world something other than a resource strapped, war torn, authoritarian hell-hole in which only the privileged few will ever know a life in which basic things like education, clean water, medical care, and the ability to have a decent job without being a debt-slave until the day you die.

I agree...
It's about QUALITY of life...not QUANTITY.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   
What if it was wanted by the dad and not the mom? It's the mom's choice because she's carrying the baby? Or should it be a choice between the two of them since they both had a part in the creation of a new human life. A lot of women think it's only their choice because they carry the "parasite".

Parasite the only parasite is the one labeling their unborn as a parasite.


=======
Preach life all you like. Fortunately, women have a legal choice now.

There are 50 million fewer unhappy people around. Those of us who remain cope with survival daily. It's an ugly process.

I vote for abortion over misery.
==============
Unwanted by who the mom? I wouldn't say it's unwanted to all.

50 million fewer unhappy people around. I was almost aborted, Would I have been unhappy then if I was aborted? So dumb...I'm happy to speak up for those that are being mercilessly murdered.

Cope to survive daily, we all do that. That's being human. People that get abortions... obviously don't give their babies a chance.

And that's the bottom line... a chance at happiness, we all deserve it and I don't think these mothers would be so keen to abortion if it wasn't in every neighborhood in America and we didn't have the purposeful war or class's which is meant to divide us and conquer us while our population control agenda is in full effect.

We can't even agree on saving human life. One thing we should be able to agree on. What a dumbed down world we live in. Many have been fooled to not even place value on human life.

Evil is thriving on this planet.... Go watch green lantern, Maybe there is a evil monster out there that feeds off hate and corrupts those weak. It's like we live on the "devil's" planet.


edit on 11-4-2012 by yoyoyoyo because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-4-2012 by yoyoyoyo because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-4-2012 by yoyoyoyo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Where's the quality of life when the life is ended in the mother??

That's real double standards and that's where I see these women that accept abortion as an acceptable method of birth control as misguided and maybe even possessed at least by evil...

There is no good in it. None.
edit on 11-4-2012 by yoyoyoyo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by disgustingfatbody
reply to post by LaborofLove
 


I think the soul is infinite whether it is contained in a body or not.

I had a sort of near-death experience which is why I believe this. I was dead but still sentient.

We are not murdering souls. I believe they simply await another vessel.

I wish I could share that experience with all of you. Then you would understand the beauty of the system that nurtures us.


Thank you for the wish to let me see the other side. I have never seen the other side (at least not since my last amnesia), but I think somebody have given me hints about it thru synchronicity. The story I am being told make very much sense. I really like playing hide and seek. It is so fun when you find something. Have fun playing around with duality and ego with the persons here. We will probably not play around with that on the otherside. But then we will all have the bliss on the other side. Have fun soulsister and enjoy the ride if you want to. Namaste



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaborofLove
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Let me put my ludicrous statement to you this way; Mary was conceived without sin/Jesus was God incarnate, conceived by the Holy Spirit. Conceived! Not Christian? How about this; Buddhist belief - When the body dies, the incorporeal mental processes continue and are reborn in a new body. Because the mental processes are constantly changing, the being that is reborn is neither entirely different than, nor exactly the same as, the being that died. However, the new being is continuous with the being that died – in the same way that the "you" of this moment is continuous with the "you" of a moment before, despite the fact that you are constantly changing - still not your cup of religion? How about Aristotle? He defined the soul or psyche as the first actuality of a naturally organized body. Five months indeed!


I've got a better idea.

Why don't we, as a species, stop taking all of our queues for the basis of morality solely from ideas that were all conceived (pun intended) by people who were so naive about the world around them that they did not understand the mechanics of such simple things as how rain falls to the ground or why the puddles disappear later in day as the sun climbs.

It might prevent us from so horribly misunderstanding that the greek word "psyche" is translated as "consciousness" and that Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle alike were all Atheists who did not believe in gods, eternal souls, or an afterlife of any kind.

Socrates being the most vocal and boisterous was actually EXECUTED for simply thinking differently than way the political and religious structure of the day did.

The irony that Aristotle winds up being invoked as evidentiary of the existence of a "soul" in a pro-life debate is astounding.

You should probably read more books.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 

=======
Thus, is it not plausible to ALSO think that there are many, many, women out there who were TALKED OUT OF having an abortion and have regretted that decision every single day of their lives...much to the detriment and chagrin of the child in question and society as a whole?
=======

Regretted that decision every single day of their lives? Why don't they give their kids to a loving home? Why don't they go do what they want and get away from their kids as quickly as possible??? If they regret their decision so much??

You know why, Obviously the parent you used as an example doesn't hate their life, And they would be doing the most to make it work. To say that parent hate's their life, I can't see it.

Maybe if that parent had a child gave it up, then I can understand them regretting their decision. As they would have a daily reminder almost, thinking about what that child is doing, if he's ok...

And the other example of a mother that's had an abortion could be just to go sleep around 100 more times and maybe get X more abortions...

Maybe one of these mothers will find true love, but I would think most of these woman don't want to be with one guy. They just want that temporary satisfaction. And that's exactly what abortion is...

Temporary satisfaction.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join