You keep saying the woman must have the final say. Why? The child comes from the joining of two sets of DNA. Not just hers.
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
The issue that led to the Right becoming Pro-Life
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostWhat is your working definition of a human person?
Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
I, and other here hold that abortion destroys an actual human being. There are no good reasons for qualifying it as 'potential'.
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostThe latter argument you make, that a woman's right to control her body supercedes the right of the fetus to life, is a more respectable and far less problematic line of argument. It is also the one I see advanced lately by those moral philosophers who seriously grapple with moral nature of abortion.
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostThey have a right to live as much as you do.
Clearly newborns can survive without their mothers because the babies of women who die in childbirth survive and in previous centuries wealthy women handed their newborn babies over to wet nurses."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by DesertBerean View PostYou keep saying the woman must have the final say. Why? The child comes from the joining of two sets of DNA. Not just hers."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by DesertBerean View PostYou keep saying the woman must have the final say. Why? The child comes from the joining of two sets of DNA. Not just hers.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostWhen the first man gets pregnant he can have the final say.
She has in her womb her DNA combined with somebody else's DNA. Perhaps we should study the question of what rights the source of the different DNA has over the fate of that DNA.
You see, in today's world, in the USA any way, the father has no say over it. If the mother wants him to pay for a child, chances are very good he ends up paying for the child whether he wants to or not. Unfortunately if she decides she doesn't want the child, and it happens HE wants the child, it doesn't matter. She gets to decide the fate of the child and he can't stop it, at least until it is born and he can take the matter to court. Wow. What hypocrisy.
Past politics doesn't matter...the morality and ethics of today does. In the past, fathers held the power over the fate of the child. That created many bad situations just as today's anti-father practices does.Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostNo one is denying that an embryo or foetus is an organism with the potential to become a human being. The matter is whether the mother wants to carry that pregnancy to term. If she does not she has the right to terminate it via a medically safe and legal abortion or by an abortifacient.
We are never going agree on this issue so we may as well stop here.
You consider abortion to be wrong because it destroys a potential human being.
I consider that a woman has absolute control over determining her own fertility and what happens to her body.
I might ask if you have ever seen a botched illegal abortion?
Oh look an ad hominem.
Really?
What do you suppose happens to children whose mothers die in childbirth? What do you suppose the role of a “wet nurse” was in previous centuries?
Your observation that my remark was an ad hominem was incorrect. My comment was a supposition. However, you have demonstrated your own weakness when it comes to making unwarranted personal remarks.
The phrase was not coined by the Nazis.
Godwin's Law.
There was no ”church” prior to the fourth century.
There were physical buildings and religious communities but there was no overarching “Church” as in an organised authority.
That was merely Irenaeus expressing his views towards various other Christians, including the Gnostics, with whose theology he did not agree. He was a bishop but the title carried no authority outside his own community at that period. The term episkipos from which it derives simply meant an overseer. Irenaeas had no authority over Christians across the empire. No one did.
Pope Clement I
“Through countryside and city [the apostles] preached, and they appointed their earliest converts, testing them by the Spirit, to be the bishops and deacons of future believers. Nor was this a novelty, for bishops and deacons had been written about a long time earlier. . . . Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry” (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3 [A.D. 80]).
Purely in order to inform you on the issues surrounding a homoousion deity.
Briggmann writes in reference to Irenaeus' comments in Prf 10 [Proof of the Apostolic Reading]
“The ascription of equal divinity to the Three prevents a subordinationist reading, insofar as subordinationism refers to gradations of divinity in the Godhead. Yet, the ascription of equal divinity does not at this time in Christian history rule out a hierarchical understanding of the Trinitarian relations by which second-century theologians often differentiated the Three.” [See Briggman, Anthony, Irenaeus Of Lyons and the Theology of the Holy Spirit pp. 201-203].
In other words the views held by Irenaeus’ with regard to a Trinity were most likely far removed from the homoousion concept that would be presented well over one hundred years later at Nicaea in 325 CE.
You also need to remember that even after the death of Constantine and despite the decision taken at Nicaea, the issue of the relationship between the Son and the Father remained unresolved. In 341 CE, Eusebius of Nicomedia, a supporter of Arian, presided over the Dedication Council at Antioch, oversaw Athanasius and his fellow like-minded bishops being deposed, and ensured the ascendancy of official Arianism in the East for the next thirty years.
By the last quarter of the fourth century the situation had become completely farcical with imperial Christianity effectively split and the two Augusti supporting different beliefs. Valentinian II [reigned in the West from 375 until 392 CE] was a Homoean and Theodosius I [reigned from 379 until 392 CE as Augustus of the East] and as sole emperor until 395 CE was a supporter of the Nicene Creed.
Your “orthodoxy” could only be enforced by Imperial edict with the threat of severe punishment [including death] for those who dissented. And that is what happened in 381 CE.
That is why all those Gnostic texts were hidden at Nag Hammadi. From 381 they were deemed heretical.
I find that so many Christians simply fail to understand the development of their religion over its first three hundred years or so.
You seem [if I understand that comment correctly] to be suggesting that lay Christians were at odds with their various pastors, priests, and vicars on this issue. On what evidence?
I must admit your earnest desire to stress your credentials does rather put me in mind of Gertrude’s line in Hamlet, you “protest too much, methinks”.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
[QUOTE=Hypatia_Alexandria;750891]The old chestnut. If you had to choose and could only choose one which would you save in a fire? A container holding 10 fertilised embryos or a day old baby?That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostI would argue on the one hand, leaving the issue of whether it is a human person or not aside, that the reason is because it's the womans body, so regardless of whose DNA it is, it is up to her if she wants to house a fetus within it.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostThat's a location. Being inside a garage doesn't make you part of the garage.
Or that the pregnant woman is merely a convenient growing medium for a completely independent embryo."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
[QUOTE=Bill the Cat;750916]Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
What if that day old baby is Adolph Hitler?"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
Why? What had the day old Adolph Hitler done?That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostOk, if you were in a burning room with your mother and 15 terminal cancer patients and could only save one or the other, which would you save?"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostOk, if you were in a burning room with your mother and 15 terminal cancer patients and could only save one or the other, which would you save?The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostAh standard deflection tactics.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostNope. Just countering to show the absurdity of that canard. Valuing 2 choices at different gradients in no way means the lesser valued item is in and of itself worthless. Now answer if you can. Your mom or the cancer patients...The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 03:46 PM
|
0 responses
24 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by KingsGambit
Yesterday, 04:11 PM
|
||
Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 01:52 PM
|
1 response
26 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Yesterday, 10:46 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 09:08 AM
|
6 responses
58 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by RumTumTugger
Yesterday, 10:30 AM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 07:44 AM
|
0 responses
21 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 07:44 AM | ||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 07:04 AM
|
29 responses
187 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Yesterday, 02:59 PM
|
Comment