Pro-life Paralysis

[KingsGambit]

I know the international adoption process can be difficult. I know a guy who feels called to adopt an international orphan but has had difficulties over the last couple years. He and his wife are on their third attempted country and still trying to navigate a jungle of red tape. I don't know as much about the domestic process.

[lilpixieofterror]

Not at all. I recall Ansgar Seraph when he was here holding a very teneble and well thought out prolife position. Most of your brothers and sisters actually hold moderate prolife positions and wouldn't, for example, disingenuously call a zygote a baby.

Considering Sam's position is no different than other pro baby killer positions are, I'm sure his position made you quite happy.

[lilpixieofterror]

The problem with most of the pro-life crowd is that they demonise those who disagree with them, argue emotionally rather than factually, and misrepresent the actual positions of their adversaries. These are all signs associated with not having any valid arguments, and practically guaranteed not to change anyone's mind.

A couple of days ago, mountain_man posted a pro-life argument that was devoid of emotional appeals, misrepresentation, fallacies and inputs; and could be the basis for fruitful discussion and persuasion rather than adversarial entrenchment. Y'all could learn from him.

Roy

Irony at it's finest because I catch many pro abortionist doing the same thing. Pretty entertaining.

[mossrose]

When you can't refute what your opponent says, dive straight into character assassination!

Hey! My character is not assassinated by being called YEC!

Just so you know....

[lilpixieofterror]

Hey! My character is not assassinated by being called YEC!

Just so you know....

He's just trying to say, "Oh yeah, you're a YEC!" as though that actually proves a word you said as wrong. It would be the equivalent of saying that Sir Author Doyle is a bad writer because he believed in spiritualism. Even if we automatically assume YEC is wrong, it doesn't logically follow that everything a YEC says is wrong or illogical. It is quite possible to hold to a wrong position in X, but be perfectly logically justified in Y and Z, at the same time. I met it as no insult, but as a way of pointing out his well poisoning since he actually didn't refute or even try to refute what you said.

[whag]

I know the international adoption process can be difficult. I know a guy who feels called to adopt an international orphan but has had difficulties over the last couple years. He and his wife are on their third attempted country and still trying to navigate a jungle of red tape. I don't know as much about the domestic process.

https://www.adoptivefamilies.com/how...m-foster-care/

How long does it take to adopt from foster care?

The freeing of a child for adoption through the termination of parental rights and the legal process of adoption are complex procedures. Families who are just beginning to explore whether or not adoption from foster care is right for them should plan on spending nine to 18 months, on average, to complete the inquiry, orientation, preparation classes (typically 24 to 30 hours over the course of several weeks), and homestudy requirements. In 2013, children spent an average of 12.3 months in foster care between the time when parental rights were terminated and their adoption.

[whag]

Just because someone calls themselves Christian doesn't mean they really are. It's easy to say something, but actions speak louder than words.

Keep believing this failure isn't yours. Most of those are young woman who were raised in Christian homes.

Maybe if these families acknowledged that the early onset and strength of the sex drive has nothing to do with sin but rather the production of more offspring than could survive (due to predation, disease, and calamity), your children would be less interested in exploring something far more mundane than a "taboo" or, at least, have a birth control safeguard in place to lessen the chance your daughter will get pregnant to begin with.

[mossrose]

Keep believing this failure isn't yours. Most of those are young woman who were raised in Christian homes.

Maybe if these families acknowledged that the early onset and strength of the sex drive has nothing to do with sin but rather the production of more offspring than could survive (due to predation, disease, and calamity), your children would be less interested in exploring something far more mundane than a "taboo" or, at least, have a birth control safeguard in place to lessen the chance your daughter will get pregnant to begin with.

You misunderstand the concept of salvation. Just because someone is raised in a Christian home doesn't mean that they are automatically Christians. They may call themselves that, but there is no guarantee that being raised by believers means you will be a believer. Each person makes that choice on their own. The failure is not mine, but that of the culture of death, that tells young people they can have indiscriminate sex and not have to deal with the consequences.

Your attempts to inspire guilt in believers for the failure of the culture is misguided.

[whag]

You misunderstand the concept of salvation. Just because someone is raised in a Christian home doesn't mean that they are automatically Christians.

No, I understand it perfectly as it's not rocket science. I was saying Christian families,to an enormous degree, aren't effectively evangelizing their children, and that says volumes. Your teaching your progeny that science is a hoax has a lot to do with that.

They may call themselves that, but there is no guarantee that being raised by believers means you will be a believer. Each person makes that choice on their own. The failure is not mine, but that of the culture of death, that tells young people they can have indiscriminate sex and not have to deal with the consequences.

Um, no. The failure certainly is yours. You'd rather perceive yourself as doing everything right because that makes you feel comfortable and persist in your laziness.

Your attempts to inspire guilt in believers for the failure of the culture is misguided.

Stop passing the buck and take responsibility for your actions.

[tabibito]

No, I understand it perfectly as it's not rocket science. I was saying Christian families,to an enormous degree, aren't effectively evangelizing their children, and that says volumes. Your teaching your progeny that science is a hoax has a lot to do with that.

yup

Um, no. The failure certainly is yours. You'd rather perceive yourself as doing everything right because that makes you feel comfortable and persist in your laziness.

Buying into the idea that perfectly normal development and need to establish relationships during the early teens is somehow inappropriate is not a matter of laziness, it is a matter of being duped.

Stop passing the buck and take responsibility for your actions.

A matter that "pro-choice" advocates would do well to apply to themselves, surely. The idea that people should take responsibility for their actions would apply to taking appropriate steps when CHOOSING to become sexually active seems to escape them.

[whag]

yup




Buying into the idea that perfectly normal development and need to establish relationships during the early teens is somehow inappropriate is not a matter of laziness, it is a matter of being duped.

I would agree with that for the most part.

A matter that "pro-choice" advocates would do well to apply to themselves, surely. The idea that people should take responsibility for their actions would apply to taking appropriate steps when CHOOSING to become sexually active seems to escape them.

I agree that this is a problem, as well. This will persist so long as the extremists control the discussion. Surely, we both know examples of moderate prolifers and prochoicers who successfully teach their children about sex without having to lie about the procreative impulse.

[Jedidiah]

Just because someone calls themselves Christian doesn't mean they really are. It's easy to say something, but actions speak louder than words.

Yes, and whoever does it is killing a baby Christian or no.

[Teallaura]

1) The only ambivalence is in the question of personhood, not the question of humanity. Prolifers almost universally reject personhood as a criterion.
Where it is accepted the pro-life position is that we are to err on the side of the baby.

2) If you are old enough to consent you are old enough to face the consequences of your decisions. If you did not consent or were not old enough it is rarely the case that killing the baby will truly be best for you in the long run. Even in the limited case where killing the baby is best for the mother, other than life or limb being jeopardized, the killing of the baby is not justified.

3) Just because it doesn't meet some arbitrary requirement about capabilities that cannot be reasonably evaluated anyway doesn't mean it is any less human. Humanity, not personhood, is the correct criterion.

[Cow Poke]

You misunderstand the concept of salvation. Just because someone is raised in a Christian home doesn't mean that they are automatically Christians.

Yeah, if a cat crawled in an oven and gave birth to kittens, that doesn't make them muffins.

[Teallaura]

Yeah, if a cat crawled in an oven and gave birth to kittens, That doesn't make them muffins.

Sure it does. Muffin, Cake, Cookie and Cupcake...

What else would you name them?