31 Oct 05
3 edits
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio: "I'm not imposing my will upon you or anyone else.
I'm not imposing my will upon you or anyone else.
You are.
My stance affects no one but me.
Your stance, should it be instated, affects all women.
I have made no assertions.
You have.
So, my stances are not relevant.
Are you going to answer the question, or are you going to be your usual
pompous self, proclaiming the TRUTH from on high without being subject
to scrutiny?
Nemesio
You are."
Wrong. I am protecting the lives of innocent unborn children. I want to prevent people to impose their will on the unborn by infringing on their human rights, by killing them. People who do not object to killing the unborn are the ones who permit others to impose their will on others.
So Nemesio, you are the one supporting a stance that permits the infringing on rights of others.
Nemesio: "My stance affects no one but me."
Your stance affects the fate of thousands and thousands of human beings each year.
Nemesio: "I have made no assertions.
..... ."
Of course you haven't. That's why I am constantly asking for your stance on whether or not performing abortion is morally acceptable in your book. You constantly are hiding behind some flawed notions about the assumption that you do not want to impose your views. Discussing views is not equal to imposing views. In a democracy it is the usual way of expressing oneself and making use of the Freedom of Speech in order to reach agreements.
Nemesio: "Your stance, should it be instated, affects all women."
My stance affects not only women who are unwantedly pregnant, my stance also affects the fathers of these children ànd, last but not least, the fate of all those thousands and thousands of unwanted children that will be killed if we do not stop this immoral practise which abortion is.
Nemesio: Are you going to answer the question, or are you going to be your usual pompous self, proclaiming the TRUTH from on high without being subject to scrutiny?
YOU are the one who is constantly hiding your stance on the moral permissibility of the abortion practise. YOU, Nemesio, are dodging questions and not making yourself available for scrutiny. Accusing me of this is ridiculous because I have stated and defended my stance on the abortion issue many many times. You got nerve. I can tell you that.
If I am wrong then please present your views on the moral (im)permissibility of abortion and don't dodge the question.
31 Oct 05
2 edits
Originally posted by ivanhoeNemesio: "Your stance, should it be instated, affects all women."[b]
[b]Nemesio: "I'm not imposing my will upon you or anyone else.
You are."
Wrong. I am protecting the lives of innocent unborn children. I want to prevent people to impose their will on the unborn by infringing on their human rights, by killing them. People who do not object to killing the unborn are the ones who permit others to impose their will ...[text shortened]... se present your views on the moral (im)permissibility of abortion and don't dodge the question.[/b]
[b]My stance affects not only women who are unwantedly pregnant, my stance also affects the fathers of these children ànd, last but not least, the fate of all those thousands and thousands of unwanted children that will be killed if we do not stop this immoral practise which abortion is.
[/b][/b]Hmm, seems like you nailed this one. This is the bottom line as
I see it too.
Kelly
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by no1marauderI did not use the term murder, you may if you want. As I pointed out
What a pathetic dodge, Parrot! You know that murder is an unlawful killing, congratulations! But your own Bible says it isn't a killing at all! Pay a little fine to the husband and that's it! Explain that, my fanatical friend.
it is a legal term, which I suppose being unlawful presupposes a law is
in force. Do you acknowledge the authority of scripture? I didn't think
you did, but if you want to use that as our authority for US law we
may, I'd be happy to start this conversation using scripture as the
authority we all must yield too.
Kelly
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by The Chess ExpressNot only are you ignorant, but you are also a nasty, vindictive little piece of work aren't you?
And let me guess, this fine family of yours taught you to belittle those who have different views than you at every possible opportunity.
I’m guessing they probably abused you in this way as well. Like father like son.
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by KellyJayBut Parrot, you're the one who brought up God, remember this:
I did not use the term murder, you may if you want. As I pointed out
it is a legal term, which I suppose being unlawful presupposes a law is
in force. Do you acknowledge the authority of scripture? I didn't think
you did, but if you want to use that as our authority for US law we
may, I'd be happy to start this conversation using scripture as the
authority we all must yield too.
Kelly
I'd love to see how you justify the
abortions, when God says he is the one that forms us within our
mother's wombs.
Kelly
Apparently even your God knows that a fetus ain't a human being like someone who's been born according to your own Holy Book. Exodus 21:22-24. So obviously your OT God wouldn't have any problem with a woman having an abortion. I see he never bothered to put any ban on it in the Mosaic Law though the Egyptians and other ancient peoples had developed abortion techniques long before the writing of Exodus. Better start reading your own Bible, Parrot.
31 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeUntil you demonstrate that Bbarr's perspective that personhood
Wrong. I am protecting the lives of innocent unborn children. I want to prevent people to impose their will on the unborn by infringing on their human rights, by killing them. People who do not object to killing the unborn are the ones who permit others to impose their will on others.
comes long after 'bodyhood,' this statement is false, and, as the
rest of your argument predicated on it, it makes no sense.
Nemesio
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou have never defended anything. You have asserted your position
YOU are the one who is constantly hiding your stance on the moral permissibility of the abortion practise. YOU, Nemesio, are dodging questions and not making yourself available for scrutiny. Accusing me of this is ridiculous because I have stated and defended my stance on the abortion issue many many times. You got nerve. I can tell you that.
If I am wro ...[text shortened]... se present your views on the moral (im)permissibility of abortion and don't dodge the question.
without defense.
The reason I have not expressed a point of view on this topic is, as
I have said, I am very confused as to which way to turn on this issue,
which I believe is very critical. My spiritual life indicates one way while
my legal life indicates the other. As such, my requests here are
wholly genuine.
On this issue, I hide nothing. I am thoroughly confused and firmly
desire resolution.
Provide and argument and compel me. I swear by Almighty God, if
you can provide a rational argument for the legal impermissibility of
abortion, I will adhere to it.
Nemesio
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeThis is not true. No one is forcing people to have abortions. They
My stance affects not only women who are unwantedly pregnant, my stance also affects the fathers of these children ànd, last but not least, the fate of all those thousands and thousands of unwanted children that will be killed if we do not stop this immoral practise which abortion is.
choose to. If mothers and fathers are the only ones worthy of moral
consideration, then their decision is their right.
If the fetus is worthy of consideration, then, you are correct, the
unborn are being violated.
When you demonstrate that a fetus is worthy of moral consideration,
you will knock me off of the fence firmly into your camp. If your
argument is going to rest on the notion of a soul (which I believe in,
but only irrationally by a matter of faith), then you have no legal
foundation on which to stand.
Nemesio
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by NemesioPlease don't make Bbarr and his opinions the measure of all things.
Until you demonstrate that Bbarr's perspective that personhood
comes long after 'bodyhood,' this statement is false, and, as the
rest of your argument predicated on it, it makes no sense.
Nemesio
It is just a shield you use to be able not to discuss your own ideas.
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio: "You have never defended anything."
You have never defended anything. You have asserted your position
without defense.
The reason I have not expressed a point of view on this topic is, as
I have said, I am very confused as to which way to turn on this issue,
which I believe is very critical. My spiritual life indicates one way while
my legal life indicates the other. As such, my requ ...[text shortened]... a rational argument for the legal impermissibility of
abortion, I will adhere to it.
Nemesio
C'mon .... c'mon ....
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by ivanhoe
Please don't make Bbarr and his opinions the measure of all things.
Demonstrate to me that they don't make sense, and I will reject them
outright.
It is just a shield you use to be able not to discuss your own ideas.
I've expressed them, Ivanhoe. Are you going to do me the same
courtesy?
Nemesio
31 Oct 05
Originally posted by NemesioNemesio: "The reason I have not expressed a point of view on this topic is, as
You have never defended anything. You have asserted your position
without defense.
The reason I have not expressed a point of view on this topic is, as
I have said, I am very confused as to which way to turn on this issue,
which I believe is very critical. My spiritual life indicates one way while
my legal life indicates the other. As such, my requ ...[text shortened]... a rational argument for the legal impermissibility of
abortion, I will adhere to it.
Nemesio
I have said, I am very confused as to which way to turn on this issue,
which I believe is very critical."
If you are so confused and undecided then why do you so vehemently defend Bbarr's ideas ?
You come across as a fanatic pro-choicer. No implicite doubts can be traced in your posts.
31 Oct 05
This reply to
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Every sperm is sacred.
was posted in the forum on today's celebrations. Perhaps it fits better in this thread.
Originally posted by Wulebgr
Yep. As we were driving back from the junkyard where we had picked up some parts for my Dodge, my father explained the implications of the so-called pro-life position by elucidating its extremes.
Sperm is alive, so it must be given a chance to come full term. Why else would God strike Onan dead for spilling his seed on the ground. But, if you never ejaculate, the sperm that remains in your body also dies. So, your responsibility is clear: if you are pro-life, you must plant your seed in fertile soil. Failure to copulate with a fertile mate is as much a sin as masturbation in the eyes of God.