[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
the Fifth Amendment, which provides that the government shall not deprive a person of life without due process of law. Only no amount of due process will remedy the situation so it is a substantive due process issue.[/quote]
…
I agree. We should wait to age of majority, put them on trial, and then execute them if they’re judged not to be deserving of life.
My wife had two miscarriages, was bleeding all over our bed wit the first one, and I was begging 9-1-1 to get there. She was fine but I never saw so much blood. Scared the living shit out of me.
So, I choose the life of the woman, the woman I love and cherish. If this dooms me to Hell or to be excommunicated…fuck it. Fuck it all. I choose my wife.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
the Fifth Amendment, which provides that the government shall not deprive a person of life without due process of law. Only no amount of due process will remedy the situation so it is a substantive due process issue.[/quote]
…
I agree. We should wait to age of majority, put them on trial, and then execute them if they’re judged not to be deserving of life.[/quote]
You don’t get it. What I’m saying is that the government should not be given the power to decide who lives and who dies, at least not in this context (war and capital punishment are completely different contexts). If a pregnant woman whose life is threatened by the pregnancy decides to go to term and dies, that is her choice and I respect that. In fact, I think such a decision is very laudable. But it was her decision. It was not a decision imposed upon her by a bunch of people who blindly follow the dictates of some old guy in Rome who was chosen to have the title of Pope not by a democratic election but by a secret conclave, who’s never been married, never had children, and wouldn’t have a clue about what it would be like to lose a wife or a daughter.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[You don’t get it. What I’m saying is that the government should not be given the power to decide who lives and who dies…[/quote]
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb. Killing you now is no different than if you had you been killed in the womb. And, vice versa. After all, the very same individual organism, you, would’ve been purposefully killed. Guys, there’s no big switcheroo in the womb. There’s not some placeholder that gets swapped out with baby MikeTheBear or baby Sloth. Or, as I’ve asked before, are pro-choicers actually holding out on when the human soul descends into a baby, if not immediately? 'Cause that’s exactly what the “Well, we don’t know when the quickening happens. When a human becomes a Human” stuff sounds like. And heck, if we’re just bio-chem machines in the first place, with no special spirit that makes us Human with a captial ‘H,’ then what the heck is this “well, we’re not sure when a human becomes a human, you know” even about?
I’m just saying, let’s not sugarcoat it folks. Look it square in the eye, admit it for what is, and then defend it.
Before I respond to your question, I’ll share a personal story since Headhunter shared one of his. My wife also went through a difficult pregnancy. We knew going in that it would be since she has health problems. But we did the responsible thing - we consulted with two of her doctors and then received care by an OB/GYN who specialized in high risk pregnancies. When things got dicey, this was by far the most stressful time in my life. Contrary to what you or others might think, I did not view my unborn child as simply a mass of tissue that could be terminated at will. I would have been distraught if she did not survive. But she did and is truly a great kid. I do not know what decision we would have made if things had gone wrong - I prefer not to think of it. But I do know one thing - I’ll be damned if I would have let this decision rest in the hands of some fucking government bureaucrat who could have cared less about us. That decision would have been between us and our doctor. Not you, the government, or a majority of so-called “concerned citizens” would have had any business intruding into that decision making process.
As far as I’m concerned, Headhunter and I are the only two people here who are qualified to render an opinion on the matter. We’ve lived through this. Unless you have gone through this experience, you just don’t know. I don’t care what you believe or how many religious scholars support you - you just don’t know.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[You don’t get it. What I’m saying is that the government should not be given the power to decide who lives and who dies…[/quote]
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb. Killing you now is no different than if you had you been killed in the womb. And, vice versa. After all, the very same individual organism, you, would’ve been purposefully killed. Guys, there’s no big switcheroo in the womb. There’s not some placeholder that gets swapped out with baby MikeTheBear or baby Sloth. Or, as I’ve asked before, are pro-choicers actually holding out on when the human soul descends into a baby, if not immediately? 'Cause that’s exactly what the “Well, we don’t know when the quickening happens. When a human becomes a Human” stuff sounds like. And heck, if we’re just bio-chem machines in the first place, with no special spirit that makes us Human with a captial ‘H,’ then what the heck is this “well, we’re not sure when a human becomes a human, you know” even about?[/quote]
I could argue here about brain waves and consciousness. But I won’t. Instead, I’ll make a distinction. The difference between me today and me in the womb is that I am no longer connected to another human by an umbilical cord, I no longer rely on another human to sustain my very life, and my existence can no longer directly harm another human whose life may be endangered in order to sustain my life. I cannot ignore this distinction as I think it’s important.
I understand the Catholic position on this. Even if a fetus threatens the life of the mother, it is still innocent because it does not possess the intent to kill. I get that - I understand criminal intent very well. But at the end of the day, you have a situation where one life is threatened by the continued existence of another life. I think reasonable and ethical people would disagree as to what to do in a situation like this. I know what you would do. I’m not sure what I would do.
Here’s where we are and where we’re going. Abortion as fall back safety swtich for our self-interested, individualistic, restless pleasure (sex) seeking. And, as one member even points out, it makes economic sense when considering the poor. Thank you, Freakonomics! Then, there’s the increasing acceptance of euthanasia. I know, I know, “I’m just defending choice!” Oh please, it’s economic ‘sense’ driving acceptance, again. Those burdensome ill and old should choose, and be able to choose, to do the honorable thing. Who wants to be a burden, amiright? Which is why both the Democrat and the libertarian defend both movements. For the Democrat, near universal acceptance would mean more people making the right ‘economic’ choice. That is, less poor and elderly to burden their welfare state. For the libertarian, it means fewer to demand a welfare state. And, of course both support the creation of human life in the test tube for the vampiric purpose of extending their own lives, hoping science will deliver before being forced by the ravages of time to consider the ‘noble decision’ themselves.
We Catholics and other pro-lifers (including some atheists, I’m sure) have drawn a line in the sand. You do not purposefully target another human life to save another, or even yourself. We will not give an inch, because there is no inch to give. Besides, as above, pro-aborts would just take a mile.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Here’s where we are and where we’re going. Abortion as fall back safety swtich for our self-interested, individualistic, restless pleasure (sex) seeking. And, as one member even points out, it makes economic sense when considering the poor. Thank you, Freakonomics! Then, there’s the increasing acceptance of euthanasia. I know, I know, “I’m just defending choice!” Oh please, it’s economic ‘sense’ driving acceptance, again. Those burdensome ill and old should choose, and be able to choose, to do the honorable thing. Who wants to be a burden, amiright? Which is why both the Democrat and the libertarian defend both movements. For the Democrat, near universal acceptance would mean more people making the right ‘economic’ choice. That is, less poor and elderly to burden their welfare state. For the libertarian, it means fewer to demand a welfare state. And, of course both support the creation of human life in the test tube for the vampiric purpose of extending their own lives, hoping science will deliver before being forced by the ravages of time to consider the ‘noble decision’ themselves.
We Catholics and other pro-lifers (including some atheists, I’m sure) have drawn a line in the sand. You do not purposefully target another human life to save another, or even yourself. We will not give an inch, because there is no inch to give. Besides, as above, pro-aborts would just take a mile. [/quote]
You sound mad. Okay, I’ll get mad, too. I don’t know if you’re married or not. I am and I have a daughter. I would give my own life to save my daughter’s life. If the choice was between my daughter’s life and the life of another innocent life and my daughter asked me to save her life, I would personally kill the innocent life even if that meant the death penalty and subsequent damnation to hell. And if anyone got in my way I’d kill them, too. If the Pope doesn’t like this then fuck the Pope. And fuck the Catholic church. Tell the Pope and the cardinals to talk to me when they get married and have daughters. Until then, their opinion is complete bullshit. And as for you, I hope one day you have a daughter and that she develops a life-threatening pregnancy. I would then like to see you look her in the eye, and calmly and rationally tell her that she has to die. Do that, and your position has some credibility.
If God didn’t want me to think this way then he should not have given me the capacity to love my wife and daughter so much. To tell me that it is more moral to watch any member of my family die is mean and cruel. I’d rather spend eternity in hell than worship any god who would force that on me. Headhunter is right - fuck all this. We love our families too much. If that means going to hell, fine by me.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
You sound mad.[/quote]
Nope. Just reporting what I see.
Ok. I just hope if someone else was to make the same decision as you…well, I’d hope the innocent life they deliberately took wouldn’t be that of someone you loved.
Why, am I not suprised? I hope only the best for you and yours, though you might not believe it. I wouldn’t wish ill on you or your family, even if it would supposedly prove some point of mine. I’ve drawn that line in the sand, and all.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
You sound mad.[/quote]
Nope. Just reporting what I see.
Ok. I just hope if someone else was to make the same decision as you…well, I’d hope the innocent life they deliberately took wouldn’t be that of someone you loved.
Why, am I not suprised? I hope only the best for you and yours, though you might not believe it. I wouldn’t wish ill on you or your family, even if it would supposedly prove some point of mine. I’ve drawn that line in the sand, and all.
[/quote]
I should know better than to get upset over the Internet. I don’t wish you ill will. The thing is, being the cynic that I am, I believe that your line in the sand would not be so well-defined if you had dealt with a difficult pregnancy as I have. I didn’t arrive at my position simply by reading some libertarian propaganda and thinking, “yeah, that sounds good.” My views were formed by experience. And in the real world, experience counts. The Catholic Church is the only institution I know where persons can make authoritative pronouncements on issues of marriage, family, and pregnancy with absolutely no practical experience. I believe if priests could marry and have families, the Catholic teachings on birth control, divorce, and abortions involving the life of the mother would change completely and overnight. I’m just cynical that way.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
I should know better than to get upset over the Internet.[/quote]
No worries, I understand. I try not to get angry on the forum, but I’m no innocent either. I’m sure someone around here would attest to that. So, who am I to hold a grudge? I’d rather put it aside.
Nah, I don’t think the Eastern Orthodox holds a different view from us on these teachings, and they have married priests. But, really, what would be the point of being a Christian if your faith was based on moral belief derived solely from a priest’s marriage? It would cease to be Christian. The problem you have isn’t with celibacy of the Priesthood. That’s not a knock on you, really. If christianity isn’t for you, then it isn’t for you. I’d like to note that my posts have been made from a secular position, though. I’ve purposefully avoided making this a christian argument. Even an atheist could arrive at the same conclusions.
Break time!
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
Before I respond to your question, I’ll share a personal story since Headhunter shared one of his. My wife also went through a difficult pregnancy. We knew going in that it would be since she has health problems. But we did the responsible thing - we consulted with two of her doctors and then received care by an OB/GYN who specialized in high risk pregnancies. When things got dicey, this was by far the most stressful time in my life. Contrary to what you or others might think, I did not view my unborn child as simply a mass of tissue that could be terminated at will. I would have been distraught if she did not survive. But she did and is truly a great kid. I do not know what decision we would have made if things had gone wrong - I prefer not to think of it. But I do know one thing - I’ll be damned if I would have let this decision rest in the hands of some fucking government bureaucrat who could have cared less about us. That decision would have been between us and our doctor. Not you, the government, or a majority of so-called “concerned citizens” would have had any business intruding into that decision making process.
As far as I’m concerned, Headhunter and I are the only two people here who are qualified to render an opinion on the matter. We’ve lived through this. Unless you have gone through this experience, you just don’t know. I don’t care what you believe or how many religious scholars support you - you just don’t know.
[/quote]
I want to thank both of you for your stories. It personally means a lot to me.
I have been on the opposite side of this. My girlfriend/ future wife, decided to take the decision in our own hands. Not a day goes by, 13 years ago and on Valentines Day, do I not think what if. If I was Catholic I would have been excommunicated. I am not trying to rant on the Catholics, but it is not the church that determines my faith. If you kick me out then I will go to another denomination. I have repented of my sin, and God has forgiven me. My wife and I have paid our price for our disobedience. We have had a miscarriage, and my wife has been having complications from the abortion since it took place. God has blessed us with 3 beautiful children. Do not put your faith in a church or denomination. Put your faith in the One True God.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb.[/quote]
Really?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Here’s where we are and where we’re going. Abortion as fall back safety swtich for our self-interested, individualistic, restless pleasure (sex) seeking.[/quote]
Wrong again.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Here’s where we are and where we’re going. Abortion as fall back safety swtich for our self-interested, individualistic, restless pleasure (sex) seeking.[/quote]
Wrong again.[/quote]
Nope.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb.[/quote]
Really?[/quote]
Yep.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb.[/quote]
Really?[/quote]
nope - you’re right - it’s not true in your individual case. You are, after all, the accidental mating of a Duvaucei’s Gecko and a Morepork wasted on meth returning from a weekend party in Dargaville where they drank too much and spent way too much time in the back of the Grey Duck’s convertible . . . but you can understand our confusion in your case . . .
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb.[/quote]
Really?[/quote]
Yep.[/quote]
Even the turnover of cells in our bodies… nope.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb.[/quote]
Really?[/quote]
Yep.[/quote]
Even the turnover of cells in our bodies… nope.[/quote]
Let’s play. Mak, is the embryo an organism?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Look, let’s not beat around the bush here. You are the same individual organism that once resided in the womb.[/quote]
Really?[/quote]
Yep.[/quote]
Even the turnover of cells in our bodies… nope.[/quote]
right . . . because those replacement cells are in no connected with the cells that they replaced and do not function the same with the same system based on the same genetic coding - I mean after all, no one could ever get convicted of a crime committed a few years ago based on DNA evidence, because our bodies are completely different because those cells alive at the time have all been replaced by new cells - so even apart from a genetic POV, I’m techically not the same person who killed all those people and buried them Mak’s backyard . . .
yep, I really starting to like where Mak’s going with this one . . .
and look - no typos!