Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses aren't people

page: 9
27
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 





The Bible is clear on this, but that is irrelevant.


This is NOT irrelevant?! The church stands behind the Bible. So show me where the Bible is clear on this. This is a very basic factual need, in order for your "godly" viewpoint to be meaningful.


This is part of the Natural Law written into us.


Apparently not, since women have been aborting since the beginning of time.


The statistics are not off, you just never looked into them. As far as biological slavery goes.... 50 million babies dead. No emotion?


I don't carry emotion for things that never were. Babies are not being aborted. Embryos and fetus'es are not babies.


Those statistics do not include contraception IUD etc... What is "Forced birth"? You can abstain from sex (gasp, what a concept). Just because we have allowed sexuality to prevail does not mean we should murder living babies via dismemberment (aka abortion). eta: explain to me how this is not murder and how the statistics are off.


What is forced birth? It's forcing a woman to carry her pregnancy to term, when she doesn't want to. It's taking away her right to her body and her decision as to id she wants to be a mother or not.

I already explained why your statistics are off, contraceptive abortions are excluded, but according the "life begins at conception" theory, these are also "murders." Read my post again if you still don't see it.

Abortion is not murder as defined by the law, the very law the church is using to fight this malpractice case.

Eliminating one biological urge, sex, through suppression and guilt is not the answer to the biological problem of reproduction. Sex is not a sin. Sex is not designed for the result of reproduction only. Sex is a necessary physical urge that expresses the human need for affection and physical love. It's healthy and fun. It's been a source of entertainment since the beginning of time.

Having children is a whole 'nother story. Not all sexually active humans need to or should have children. Until medical science can find another way to suppress the human reproductive cycle, birth control that causes abortion and clinical procedures for abortion must and need to be with us.




posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 


You have single-handedly transformed this thread from an interesting and intelligent discussion on a case in the news to a ill-informed, illogical and irrational anti-abortion rant. Congratulations, but your hypocritical religion and extremist opinions don't interest me.

If this thread turns around to intelligent discussion again, would someone please send me a U2U? I'm taking it off MyATS page. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 





eta: sorry you are right, it is more like 117 million www.lifenews.com... . The statistics were off. over 50 million is only correct if you count the direct abortions.


That's still not right. Consider how many sexually active woman who are using these types of contraception methods, that get pregnant every month. That's up to 12 abortions a year, per woman!


• There are 62 million U.S. women in their childbearing years (15–44). Those who are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant, but could become pregnant if they and their partners fail to use a contraceptive method, are at risk of unintended pregnancy.
www.guttmacher.org...


So instead of a little more than double your original stat, at 50 million to 117 million, considering and taking into account abortive birth control since Roe V Wade, your new stats are still way, way off. It should be in the billions.

edit on 26-1-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


So let me get this straight. You feel that we should have sex all the time, and it would be wrong to suppress this urge? And past that, when we don't like the consequences of sex, babies, we should just kill them before they are born?


If you had been aborted I would not have to argue this point with you. You do see what I am getting at right...you are only here because you were not aborted.

If a woman does not want a child - don't have sex. That is simple right? If it happens, you must raise the child. It is a life, and therefore precious.

When you were an embryo, if you had been murdered would this be justifiable? Or is it not murder at all, since you "never were". Foolish nonsense. You support this massacre for selfish reasons.


As for your Bible references, I would provide them but you would not care anyways. Those that want to know do.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NarrowGate
 





eta: sorry you are right, it is more like 117 million www.lifenews.com... . The statistics were off. over 50 million is only correct if you count the direct abortions.


That's still not right. Consider how many sexually active woman who are using these types of contraception methods, that get pregnant every month. That's up to 12 abortions a year, per woman!


• There are 62 million U.S. women in their childbearing years (15–44). Those who are sexually active and do not want to become pregnant, but could become pregnant if they and their partners fail to use a contraceptive method, are at risk of unintended pregnancy.
www.guttmacher.org...


So instead of a little more than double your original stat, at 50 million to 117 million, considering and taking into account abortive birth control since Roe V Wade, your new stats are still way, way off. It should be in the billions.

edit on 26-1-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)


Contraception and IUD's are not included. how many times have I said that?

Abortion (dismembering babies) is evil. gtfo with that "chose what to do with your body" crap. You choose to have a man in your body, you better be prepared to have a man come out of your body. No one makes you have sex.

Or do you prefer to have sex when you feel like it and just kill the baby if you don't want to raise a kid?
edit on 26-1-2013 by NarrowGate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by windword
 


So let me get this straight. You feel that we should have sex all the time, and it would be wrong to suppress this urge? And past that, when we don't like the consequences of sex, babies, we should just kill them before they are born?


Sex isn't the problem. Fertility is.



If you had been aborted I would not have to argue this point with you. You do see what I am getting at right...you are only here because you were not aborted.


Empty, straw man argument. If I wasn't here, someone else would be arguing in my place.


If a woman does not want a child - don't have sex. That is simple right? If it happens, you must raise the child. It is a life, and therefore precious.


Nope, I disagree. It's not a viable solution to deny woman of sexual relationships because they don't want children.


When you were an embryo, if you had been murdered would this be justifiable? Or is it not murder at all, since you "never were". Foolish nonsense. You support this massacre for selfish reasons.


Empty argument! All reproduction is done for selfish reasons. There is no unselfish reason to have children.


As for your Bible references, I would provide them but you would not care anyways. Those that want to know do.


You can't provide them because there aren't any! There are, however, tons of examples of your God murdering and committing and condoning abortion in the Bible.
edit on 26-1-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by NarrowGate
 


You have single-handedly transformed this thread from an interesting and intelligent discussion on a case in the news to a ill-informed, illogical and irrational anti-abortion rant. Congratulations, but your hypocritical religion and extremist opinions don't interest me.

If this thread turns around to intelligent discussion again, would someone please send me a U2U? I'm taking it off MyATS page. Thanks.


Don't forget to dismember a few babies on your way out
.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Thank you for showing the hypocrisy of pro-choicers. Nice display, I must say.



Empty argument! All reproduction is done for selfish reasons. There is no unselfish reason to have children.


Sure, if you ask a pro-choicer
.
edit on 26-1-2013 by NarrowGate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 





Contraception and IUD's are not included. how many times have I said that?


But they should be. The pro-life community has proclaimed that life begins at conception, therefore, contraception that cause abortions, such as hormonal birth control and IUD;s murder the unborn zygote.


Abortion (dismembering babies) is evil.


Forcing a woman to give birth to an unwanted child is evil!


gtfo with that "chose what to do with your body" crap. You choose to have a man in your body, you better be prepared to have a man come out of your body. No one makes you have sex. Or do you prefer to have sex when you feel like it and just kill the baby if you don't want to raise a kid?


Sex is not a contract for procreation, especially if a woman uses contraception. She has clearly displayed her intent not to have a child by doing so, therefore, can not be legally forced to give birth because of an unwanted pregnancy due to contraceptive failure.

Biology is not holy or sacred and does not trump self determination and a woman's right to reproduce or not.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Religiousity is the epitome of hypocracy. The Catholic church is the pre-eminant evil institution, awash in oceans of blood, pain, misery and human suffering. Millions have died at the behest of the fecal encrusted, pedophillic clergy...my eyes water with ofactory halucinations of millenia of foul stench, rotting corpses, all slain at the direction of the papal pervert's dictate. I suffer from Post Catholic Traumatic Stress Syndrome and as a victim utter my distain as one foully wounded, scars still tender. May this evil institution fall into the very abyss that it professes to be the opposite of.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 

Dear windword,

This is a little different kind of post. I would like to thank you and others for the way they treat me in these discussions. I can count on you to take me seriously and put in the time needed to explain your thinking. I'm very grateful for that.

When I'm discussing things with you, BenevolentHeretic, or some others, it feels like an honest discussion. I never get the feeling I'm in a fight or that anyone is being "unfair." Thanks very much.

What you give me is a fuller understanding of the issues involved, a look at things I can't see from where I sit. I can't ask for anything better.

If I could switch back to your last response to me for a minute? I think I understand the importance of "right to choose." One place where I'm concerned about it is that it seems to even be superior to law itself. The law can't seem to logically say "The foetus is not a human" without running into the boyfriend killing the kid problem. Nor can it say "The foetus is a human" without having problems with right to abortion supporters.

This question, "Is the foetus a human or not?" is a major societal question with huge ramifications, yet we say "Meh, it's whatever each woman wants it to be in each situation, and she can change her mind whenever she wants." In my mind, that seems to be an unsatisfactory, and uncomfortable, dodging of the question.

Perhaps I'm obsessive, but it seems a little like saying "You can decide for yourself whether that's a stop sign, or merely a colorful decoration put up by the city." Or, "Two plus two? That's up to you, freedom of choice." I guess I just like having questions answered. It seems like most of the people posting agree with me. Notice that the people who claim "hypocrisy" are telling the Church, it can't have it both ways? It appears women can.

Anyway, I appreciate you a lot, thanks for responding to me.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NarrowGate
 



Abortion (dismembering babies) is evil.


Forcing a woman to give birth to an unwanted child is evil!


Anyone willing to listen to you after a statement like this is a fool. Dismember the baby or have an unwanted baby...decisions decisions...?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by windword
 



Empty argument! All reproduction is done for selfish reasons. There is no unselfish reason to have children.


Sure, if you ask a pro-choicer
.
edit on 26-1-2013 by NarrowGate because: (no reason given)



^^^to further show the stupidity of pro-choice argument.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by NarrowGate
 

Sex is not a contract for procreation, especially if a woman uses contraception. She has clearly displayed her intent not to have a child by doing so, therefore, can not be legally forced to give birth because of an unwanted pregnancy due to contraceptive failure.

Biology is not holy or sacred and does not trump self determination and a woman's right to reproduce or not.


Contraception itself is a sin in the first place, and therefore only shows intent to be disloyal to God, but that is completely irrelevant to the conversation.

Your argument is that women do not have a choice to not have sex. I disagree. You say that if a woman has sex, and unintentionally gets pregnant as a result, it is okay to dismember the baby. I disagree

Seems clear cut to me..



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Raist
 


Why do you need to watch patients if you can just trust god to look over them?

Obviously anyone in the medical field with religious beliefs is a problem waiting to happen.

If someone dies or a mistake kills them, oh well they were ment to die and they are in heaven now. God could have saved them if he wanted to.


edit on 26-1-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Seen a quote today and thought of this thread, written a long time before all the religious nonsense:



If God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able to
Then he is not omnipotent.
If he is able, but not willing
Then he is malevolent.
If he is both able and willing
Then whence cometh evil?
If he is neither able nor willing
Then why call him God?
Epicurus.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by Raist
 


Why do you need to watch patients if you can just trust god to look over them?

Obviously anyone in the medical field with religious beliefs is a problem waiting to happen.

If someone dies or a mistake kills them, oh well they were ment to die and they are in heaven now. God could have saved them if he wanted to.


edit on 26-1-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)


Exactly. Let's just ban guns and religion. Then no more problems right?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE
Religiousity is the epitome of hypocracy. The Catholic church is the pre-eminant evil institution, awash in oceans of blood, pain, misery and human suffering. Millions have died at the behest of the fecal encrusted, pedophillic clergy...my eyes water with ofactory halucinations of millenia of foul stench, rotting corpses, all slain at the direction of the papal pervert's dictate. I suffer from Post Catholic Traumatic Stress Syndrome and as a victim utter my distain as one foully wounded, scars still tender. May this evil institution fall into the very abyss that it professes to be the opposite of.


LOL. Are you going to include socialism and the communist party in this rant? THe democrats?


Meh, this has nothing to do with the Catholic Church. It is lawyers being lawyers. You could turn around the same argument about the state who allows abortion but now wants to claim that the fetuses were people when a lawsuit is on the line. Hypocrisy on both sides.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zcustosmorum
Seen a quote today and thought of this thread, written a long time before all the religious nonsense:



If God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able to
Then he is not omnipotent.
If he is able, but not willing
Then he is malevolent.
If he is both able and willing
Then whence cometh evil?
If he is neither able nor willing
Then why call him God?
Epicurus.



This world is a training ground not a playground. I suggest you be loyal to the hand that feeds you, for He is worthy of your love. You are to be made perfect like your Father in Heaven, like a god. Not like God though, for "who is like God?"
edit on 26-1-2013 by NarrowGate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE
Religiousity is the epitome of hypocracy. The Catholic church is the pre-eminant evil institution, awash in oceans of blood, pain, misery and human suffering. Millions have died at the behest of the fecal encrusted, pedophillic clergy...my eyes water with ofactory halucinations of millenia of foul stench, rotting corpses, all slain at the direction of the papal pervert's dictate. I suffer from Post Catholic Traumatic Stress Syndrome and as a victim utter my distain as one foully wounded, scars still tender. May this evil institution fall into the very abyss that it professes to be the opposite of.


LOL. Are you going to include socialism and the communist party in this rant? THe democrats?


Meh, this has nothing to do with the Catholic Church. It is lawyers being lawyers. You could turn around the same argument about the state who allows abortion but now wants to claim that the fetuses were people when a lawsuit is on the line. Hypocrisy on both sides.


Indeed, why not rant against the whole corrupt manifestations of fear. Where were you going with your question? I feel as if I am being rather poorly baited into a position that would enable you to call me a pinko, commie? Not so. I voted for Bushie twice and was a card carrying Republicrat. Was is the optimal word for I feel that both sides are but opposite ends of the same fecalith. You hang in there. Peace be upon you and your kin.






top topics



 
27
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join