Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sanctity of Life (Abortion Megathread)

Options
12728303233124

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Delirium wrote: »
    Group releases videos making, as yet unproven, allegations about ilegal activities by Planned Parenthood.

    Do PP issue legal writs to censor the allegations? No, they welcome investigations to clear their name.

    PP also make (also possibly false) statements about those who released videos. Group behind video issue legal writ to attempt to censor PP from repeating the statements.

    That's some mighty fine irony :pac:

    Does it sit east with you when you avidly defending an organisation that massacred over 300,000 human lives in 2014?


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,516 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Does it sit east with you when you avidly defend an organisation that massacred over 300,000 human lives in 2014?

    More sensationalist clap trap :rolleyes:


  • Moderators Posts: 51,765 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Does it sit east with you when you avidly defend an organisation that massacred over 300,000 human lives in 2014?

    You show your lack of understanding regarding abortion and when the majority of them are carried out by refering to it as a massacre.

    a post of your own neatly sums up my feelings on your post.
    Seriously. Is this the level we can expect going forward in this thread? rolleyes.png

    so, how about you post as you would like others to post? :)

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    More sensationalist clap trap :rolleyes:

    Are my figure wrong?

    Was it less than 300,000?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Delirium wrote: »
    You show your lack of understanding regarding abortion and when the majority of them are carried out by refering to it as a massacre.

    a post of your own neatly sums up my feelings on your post.



    so, how about you post as you would like others to post? :)

    I post truth. Inconvenient truths for you as you have avoided my question completely. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,516 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Are my figure wrong?

    Was it less than 300,000?

    You use sensationalist language yet complain about others 0 credibility and skewed morals yet try to act as if you are better than others.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    You use sensationalist language yet complain about others 0 credibility and skewed morals yet try to act as if you are better than others.

    I view over 300,000 babies intentionally killed in the womb a tragic massacre.

    That will not change and nor will my expression of my disgust of it and those who defend such barbarians.


  • Moderators Posts: 51,765 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    I post truth. Inconvenient truths for you as you have avoided my question completely. :)
    well you see the problem with loaded questions is that people are generally unlikely to answer them ;)

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Moderators Posts: 51,765 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    I view over 300,000 babies intentionally killed in the womb a tragic massacre.

    That will not change and nor will my expression of my disgust of it and those who defend such barbarians.

    MOD NOTE

    Actually it should as there have been a couple of warnings issued to both sides of the discussion about needless hyperbole/ sensationalism.

    Please bear that in mind in any future postings.

    Thanks for your attention.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,158 ✭✭✭frag420




    Maybe your Lord might drop in here and answer a few questions then? Like if he/she is against abortion why does he/she not step in and stop all abortion? He/she is all powerful....right? Maybe you should take issue with your lords lazy attitude towards his/her children on earth?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,329 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    frag420 wrote: »
    Maybe your Lord might drop in here and answer a few questions then? Like if he/she is against abortion why does he/she not step in and stop all abortion? He/she is all powerful....right? Maybe you should take issue with your lords lazy attitude towards his/her children on earth?
    Well I'd love to know how his followers know which causes of children's deaths matter to him and which are acceptable?

    For instance, how do they know he is so against abortion that it appears to be an article of faith, but not so worried about children dying because their parents can't afford dental care? Why isn't providing free/affordable health care for children as important a principle to pro-life believers as preventing abortion?

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/health-science-technology/dollars-and-dentists/tragic-results-when-dental-care-is-out-of-reach/


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    frag420 wrote: »
    Maybe your Lord might drop in here and answer a few questions then? Like if he/she is against abortion why does he/she not step in and stop all abortion? He/she is all powerful....right? Maybe you should take issue with your lords lazy attitude towards his/her children on earth?

    The Lord works in mysterious ways.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Well I'd love to know how his followers know which causes of children's deaths matter to him and which are acceptable?

    For instance, how do they know he is so against abortion that it appears to be an article of faith, but not so worried about children dying because their parents can't afford dental care? Why isn't providing free/affordable health care for children as important a principle to pro-life believers as preventing abortion?

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/health-science-technology/dollars-and-dentists/tragic-results-when-dental-care-is-out-of-reach/

    The first 5 years free GP care is a start. :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,516 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    The Lord works in mysterious ways.

    LOL, The go to cop out line.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    LOL, The go to cop out line.

    This is the Christian section of Board. A little more respect of my faith would be welcome.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,329 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    The first 5 years free GP care is a start. :)

    That doesn't answer the question. Why is abortion so evil that anyone responsible is automatically excommunicated, even when it is because the pregnant "woman" is only a child herself who will be harmed by the pregnancy, but the question of supporting affordable health care for children (or being against it) is a matter left to each person's own opinion?

    How do you know God doesn't feel just as strongly about children dying for lack of health or dental care as you believe he does about abortion? Where did he say that the former was evil and the latter just a shame?
    .


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    This is the Christian section of Board. A little more respect of my faith would be welcome.

    My god is logic, but you've pissed all over that


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    volchitsa wrote: »
    That doesn't answer the question. Why is abortion so evil that anyone responsible is automatically excommunicated, even when it is because the pregnant "woman" is only a child herself who will be harmed by the pregnancy, but the question of supporting affordable health care for children (or being against it) is a matter left to each person's own opinion?

    How do you know God doesn't feel just as strongly about children dying for lack of health or dental care as you believe he does about abortion? Where did he say that the former was evil and the latter just a shame?
    .

    Intention. The intentional killing of unborn life is the greater crime


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Overheal wrote: »
    My god is logic, but you've pissed all over that

    This is the Christianity section.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,080 ✭✭✭EoghanIRL


    This is the Christianity section.

    It doesn't say to abandon all logic in the forum charter though.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,329 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Intention. The intentional killing of unborn life is the greater crime

    Where does God say that?
    If a 10 year old child is pregnant and likely to be harmed by the pregnancy (but is not likely to die) why is it worse to save that child from harm by ending the pregnancy (the intention is to protect the ten year old child) than to deliberately vote against affordable health care in the US, when the intention is to save money, knowing that this will cause children to die?

    Just to be clear, my question is about how one can ascertain what God would want in these cases, rather than a discussion about the relative morality of each.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,330 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    If we're getting biblical, do you not remember how many people die in the bible?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Intention. The intentional killing of unborn life is the greater crime

    The intention is to kill the foetus. Your whole cop out of double effect is rubbish. When an abortion is carried out to save the life of a woman the foetus is directly targeted and is killed to save the mother.

    As you are so keen on legal doctrines, double effect is a legal doctrine, I will give you another one. Oblique Intention. The doctrine of Oblique Intention states that when you carry out a particular act, and as a result of carrying out that act a particular thing is virtually certain happen, even where this thing was not your primary intention, you intended it to happen. So if we apply this to your 'abortions are ok when the mother's life is a risk as long as the doctor doesn't intend to kill the poor little baby', we get this: the woman need an abortion to survive. The direct intention is to save the mother. By carrying out the abortion it is virtually certain the foetus will die. Doctor carries out the abortion, he intended for the baby to die. It is all pretty sensible and logical. I appreciate that logic doesn't feature much on your world view, but there is a.ways hope.

    MrP


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    EoghanIRL wrote: »
    It doesn't say to abandon all logic in the forum charter though.

    I never said otherwise, but one shouldn't be surprised when Christian folk defer to God every once in a while. It kind of comes with the territory and people should respectfully accept this as a reality in this section. :)


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Where does God say that?
    If a 10 year old child is pregnant and likely to be harmed by the pregnancy (but is not likely to die) why is it worse to save that child from harm by ending the pregnancy (the intention is to protect the ten year old child) than to deliberately vote against affordable health care in the US, when the intention is to save money, knowing that this will cause children to die?

    Just to be clear, my question is about how one can ascertain what God would want in these cases, rather than a discussion about the relative morality of each.

    "Thou Shalt not kill."


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    MrPudding wrote: »
    The intention is to kill the foetus. Your whole cop out of double effect is rubbish. When an abortion is carried out to save the life of a woman the foetus is directly targeted and is killed to save the mother.

    As you are so keen on legal doctrines, double effect is a legal doctrine, I will give you another one. Oblique Intention. The doctrine of Oblique Intention states that when you carry out a particular act, and as a result of carrying out that act a particular thing is virtually certain happen, even where this thing was not your primary intention, you intended it to happen. So if we apply this to your 'abortions are ok when the mother's life is a risk as long as the doctor doesn't intend to kill the poor little baby', we get this: the woman need an abortion to survive. The direct intention is to save the mother. By carrying out the abortion it is virtually certain the foetus will die. Doctor carries out the abortion, he intended for the baby to die. It is all pretty sensible and logical. I appreciate that logic doesn't feature much on your world view, but there is a.ways hope.

    MrP

    You have no understanding of intent.


  • Moderators Posts: 51,765 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    You have no understanding of intent.

    I suggest re-reading the quoted post, because your response would indicate that it didn't sink in.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,329 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    "Thou Shalt not kill."

    But it doesn't say "unless you intend to save someone else's life", does it? So how do you know God is ok with killing the fetus to save the woman?

    Do you think he won't notice that the death of the fetus will be an inevitable consequence or something? :roll eyes:


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    Delirium wrote: »
    I suggest re-reading the quoted post, because your response would indicate that it didn't sink in.

    No need to judge my ability to comprehend. Please refrain in future.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭Black Menorca


    volchitsa wrote: »
    But it doesn't say "unless you intend to save someone else's life", does it? So how do you know God is ok with killing the fetus to save the woman?

    Do you think he won't notice that the death of the fetus will be an inevitable consequence or something? :roll eyes:

    You clearly don't like it when your request is answered and it doesn't suit your agenda. :)

    Intent to save life is Prime in justified terminations to save someone's life.


Advertisement