Is Abortion Better Than the Alternative?
I just wanted to offer my regard and appreciation to those that took chase on my Blog entry. I am anti-abortion. I am pro-woman and pro-life. In an attempt to debate something asymmetrically I have offended and angered many of you. In doing so I also feel misrepresented the most important One of all. Thanks for your attentiveness and candor.
If the issue at hand was explicitly abortion...
OK... I will rebuff your limp statement for you. I didn't want to because I thought it was too simple but ok. When you remove tonsils or gall bladders or toes, etc. you are not ending a human life. When you have an ABORTION you do. Big difference. Limp statement.
Is Abortion Better Than the Alternative?
Youthpastornoel, read my blog on "Abortion Meat". I have found that the pro-abortionists are as entrenched in there beliefs as we are. My "Abortion Meat" blog proved to be very revealing to me about how some of these people think. Comments began to fly out of left field like "GOD IS DEAD!" and "your God is flawed".
I know I am going to start another liberal fire-frenzy when I say this but... I think that to be pro-abortion you must be either devoid of soul or demonically possessed of some sort. One person said in my blog or the other popular one that despite seeing pictures of chopped up babies he was still all for our "choice" to do that.
I think I will, as someone suggested, try bringing my "proposal" to the national level.
If the issue at hand was explicitly abortion...
Ronald, how interesting that you consider a pregnancy with a married woman a problem. That said a lot whether you knew it or not. And as for sadistic sick puppies, that would be the abortion doctors who like to chop up and vacuum the most innocent and defenseless humans to exist.
Hellodolly - read what I said a little closer, a woman's egg holds the POTENTIAL if fertilized. It isn't the other way around. Your statement about ALL human tissue is limp. You are trying to make arguments where there are none.
Abortion Meat - A Viable Option For Feeding the Homeless
No, of course I would not eat it. I really don't think you guys are missing the point this badly. DIVERT, DIVERT, DIVERT!
If the issue at hand was explicitly abortion...
If it was an intentionally induced miscarriage, yes. Or are you asking which one? Then that would depend on the circumstance. Murder is a criminal charge, wrongful death is civil.
Hate crimes should be determined by common sense
The double jeopardy rule arises from the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the relevant clause of which reads “ nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb ”
Not the same CHARGE... the same offence meaning the same crime. Well then you could say that with Hate Laws on the books there WOULD be different crimes committed in the same moment in time.
My argument is that the hate laws usurp the Constitution by placing the Federal government in a position to punish somebody whose crime were under state jurisdiction.
James Madison said: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined." The hate crime laws are just one more of many things that have turned our Government into an all-too-powerful Big Brother.
If the issue at hand was explicitly abortion...
The definition makes no mention of a host be allowed or not. A virus does not metabolize or grow. It does multiply - but the definition requires ALL charictaristics. "an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, AND reproduction".
Abortion Meat - A Viable Option For Feeding the Homeless
HopeNation - this will be my last response to this stalemate between your belief on when life begins and mine.
My original question (which was completely non-theological and admittedly disgusting) was not a check mate question to those who truly believe in their pro-choice stance. However, why do you refuse to answer a question because it is implausible? People ask and answer hypothetical questions all the time. Furthermore, you can not say your beliefs come from the truth as in another related blog you expressed how ambiguous you felt the definition of life was and I had to respond with Websters dictionary. How can you be secure in a truth you feel is ambiguous? Or is your definition of life different than Websters?
Secondly, do not confuse catholosism with Chrisianity. I know they have their beliefs about contraception but I do not share them and that dogmatic issue is not even related to this.
At anyrate, I have enjoyed our back and forth (even though you dissapointed me by refusing even an attempt to justify a legality or illegality of my proposal). You at least saw where I was going with it.
Hate crimes should be determined by common sense
HopeNation says:
"its not double jeopardy. go to law school."
I dont have to. The lawyers for the Libertarian and Constitutional Party support my view. Or rather I support thiers.
If the issue at hand was explicitly abortion...
life [lahyf] 'noun 1 a: the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body b: a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings c: an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction.
This was taken from The Webster Dictionary
The CAPACITY for METABOLISM, GROWTH REACTION TO STIMULI and REPRODUCTION
Does this clear things up for your "inferior liberal brain"?
Abortion Meat - A Viable Option For Feeding the Homeless
HAHA! I cant believe you are pulling out your humanities and philosophy texts to avoid answering a question! Thats classic. Your comments are no longer even directed at the question - rather they have become attacks on me and my Christianity! Typical liberal baby. Muddies up a discussion to bury the original question he was afraid to answer. And as always - liberals are allowed to quote the "philosophers" they hold so dear, but when I wish to share mine with the liberal, I am a "BIBLE THUMPER".
Admit it Hopenation - you refuse to answer the question at hand because it does what it was intended to do. It makes you uncomfortable.
If the issue at hand was explicitly abortion...
It is not the intent of (most) rapists to impregnate their victims. Your argument does not stand. I feel deeply for victims of these crimes. But I truly believe that the unborn should not be punished for the crimes of their fathers. There is adoption, there is acceptance, there is mercy and love. I have struggled with the notion of abortion for rape situations. But I have come out of it with the conviction that it is still murder. How the baby was concieved does not make it any more or any less a life.
Abortion Meat - A Viable Option For Feeding the Homeless
AvengingTiki - OK let's take this to it's base. It is indeed an inconceivable idea. You didn't even need to expain the whole shipping and freezing problem - it was "silly" that you did. Everyone in this discussion knows that my "proposal" is what I have explained above. An attempt to make pro-choicers look deep at how they really feel about the legality of vacuuming fetuses out of mothers.
Your concern for the feelings of the mothers is a meaningless speck to me and others who adore and embrace new life. I am concerned for the feelings of the new babies those mothers created. Feelings can be healed. Butchered babies can not be.
Maybe I should have gone about this different from the beginning and simply asked:
Should it be LEGAL (impractical or not) to create food/medicine/topical creams etc. out of aborted fetus meat? Should it be legal? Can you answer that? Whether or not it can be answered - I have not met one pro choice person who would answer that. Are they really offended at the question itself? And if so why?
Abortion Meat - A Viable Option For Feeding the Homeless
Montana - this wasn't about feeding the homeless. You know that. I explained that is was about trying to get people to take a good look at the meat of the issue (pardon the pun) and hopefully cause some prochoicers to maybe reconsider how they really feel about "fetuses".
