I think you missed the historical reference.
Advertisement
by Ifreann » Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:58 pm
by The Kingdom of the Three Isles » Sat Oct 23, 2021 2:59 pm
Those who say they are based aren’t based. Those who say they are humble ain’t humble. Those who say they are chads ain’t chads.Ordo Theutonicorum wrote: they have a cross-pattee on their flag??
by Betoni » Sat Oct 23, 2021 5:17 pm
The New California Republic wrote:Betoni wrote:'
It really isn't, the fetus has no capacity to act in any sense much less legal, so it cannot use anything or have any rights. Laws banning abortion don't create new rights for fetuses they limit the rights of the mother. Have you then conceded already that a fetus is capable of having rights?
Given the pro-life crowd very frequently want the fetus to be considered a person, the question of it being a legal entity in this context is very pertinent, hence why we need to speak in terms like this.[/qute]
by Grave_n_idle » Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:47 pm
Sundiata wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
I'm fine with Sun 'doing it wrong', I'm picking up his religious anti-abortion arguments (or in this case, religious hijack) and explaining where they are wrong for the benefit of others.
I'm not making religious arguments. And second, there's nothing wrong with Catholicism.
by Grave_n_idle » Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:50 pm
The Kingdom Of The Three Isles wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
I'm fine with Sun 'doing it wrong', I'm picking up his religious anti-abortion arguments (or in this case, religious hijack) and explaining where they are wrong for the benefit of others.
Did you just assume that I was pro life? Man, can someone prove them wrong because they won’t believe me. Neutraligon you tell em.
by Sundiata » Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:09 pm
Grave_n_idle wrote:Sundiata wrote:I'm not making religious arguments. And second, there's nothing wrong with Catholicism.
We've addressed your claim to not make religious arguments before - on this same topic - and it wasn't true that time either.
Now, I get the celibacy-versus-vasectomy thing was a hijack you were encouraging, but your argument on the hijack was religious, too... and were wrong on that, too
I'm not even discussing whether Catholicism is 'wrong' or not, so take that windmill tilting to someone else.
(And if you're going to argue that I am saying Catholicism is wrong because your arguments are the opposite of what Jesus said - your argument isn't with me, it's with Jesus).
by Neutraligon » Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:45 pm
Sundiata wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
We've addressed your claim to not make religious arguments before - on this same topic - and it wasn't true that time either.
Now, I get the celibacy-versus-vasectomy thing was a hijack you were encouraging, but your argument on the hijack was religious, too... and were wrong on that, too
I'm not even discussing whether Catholicism is 'wrong' or not, so take that windmill tilting to someone else.
(And if you're going to argue that I am saying Catholicism is wrong because your arguments are the opposite of what Jesus said - your argument isn't with me, it's with Jesus).
I've not made a religious argument yet you continue to accuse me of being wrong on the grounds of my religion: Catholicism. You're hijacking this thread by mentioning Jesus, what scripture says, etc.
What Jesus said is not the point of this thread. What Catholicism teaches is not the point of this thread. Stop imposing your views on religion where they just don't need to be.
by Grave_n_idle » Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:13 am
Sundiata wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
We've addressed your claim to not make religious arguments before - on this same topic - and it wasn't true that time either.
Now, I get the celibacy-versus-vasectomy thing was a hijack you were encouraging, but your argument on the hijack was religious, too... and were wrong on that, too
I'm not even discussing whether Catholicism is 'wrong' or not, so take that windmill tilting to someone else.
(And if you're going to argue that I am saying Catholicism is wrong because your arguments are the opposite of what Jesus said - your argument isn't with me, it's with Jesus).
I've not made a religious argument yet you continue to accuse me of being wrong on the grounds of my religion: Catholicism. You're hijacking this thread by mentioning Jesus, what scripture says, etc.
What Jesus said is not the point of this thread. What Catholicism teaches is not the point of this thread. Stop imposing your views on religion where they just don't need to be.
by The New California Republic » Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:38 am
Sundiata wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
We've addressed your claim to not make religious arguments before - on this same topic - and it wasn't true that time either.
Now, I get the celibacy-versus-vasectomy thing was a hijack you were encouraging, but your argument on the hijack was religious, too... and were wrong on that, too
I'm not even discussing whether Catholicism is 'wrong' or not, so take that windmill tilting to someone else.
(And if you're going to argue that I am saying Catholicism is wrong because your arguments are the opposite of what Jesus said - your argument isn't with me, it's with Jesus).
I've not made a religious argument yet you continue to accuse me of being wrong on the grounds of my religion: Catholicism. You're hijacking this thread by mentioning Jesus, what scripture says, etc.
What Jesus said is not the point of this thread. What Catholicism teaches is not the point of this thread. Stop imposing your views on religion where they just don't need to be.
by Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:09 am
Neutraligon wrote:Sundiata wrote:I've not made a religious argument yet you continue to accuse me of being wrong on the grounds of my religion: Catholicism. You're hijacking this thread by mentioning Jesus, what scripture says, etc.
What Jesus said is not the point of this thread. What Catholicism teaches is not the point of this thread. Stop imposing your views on religion where they just don't need to be.
Why are you pro-life?
by Neuer California » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:12 am
by Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:17 am
by The Alma Mater » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:22 am
by The Alma Mater » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:25 am
by Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:29 am
by Neuer California » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:33 am
by Grave_n_idle » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:33 am
by Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:35 am
Neuer California wrote:Sundiata wrote:Because a zygote is a life and an innocent life no less, to actively kill that life is immoral. Because choosing to kill an innocent human life is certainly immoral.
And what of cases where the zygote fails to implant, or become viable, or ends up implanting in the wrong area (ectopic pregnancy, for example)?
BTW, imo, life begins when the fears can survive outside the mother without extensive medical care beyond what a standard preemee would need.
by Neuer California » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:41 am
Sundiata wrote:Neuer California wrote:And what of cases where the zygote fails to implant, or become viable, or ends up implanting in the wrong area (ectopic pregnancy, for example)?
BTW, imo, life begins when the fears can survive outside the mother without extensive medical care beyond what a standard preemee would need.
In those cases my answer remains unchanged; a zygote is still an innocent human being and to intend and execute its death is immoral whatever the consequence.
by Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:44 am
Yes: the principle of double effect.Neuer California wrote:Sundiata wrote:In those cases my answer remains unchanged; a zygote is still an innocent human being and to intend and execute its death is immoral whatever the consequence.
Even in cases where there is no way the zygote will ever develop into a baby? Ectopic pregnancies routinely end with the zygote/fetus dead or aborted because there's no way they'll become viable and having them continue to "develop" greatly endangers the mother for no benefit to her or the zygote.
by Ifreann » Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:20 am
Sundiata wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:Many people believe that, but are not "pro-life".
What is the follow-up reasoning?
Because a zygote is a life and an innocent life no less, to actively kill that life is immoral. Because choosing to kill an innocent human life is certainly immoral.
We certainly should not choose to kill innocent human beings, individually or collectively.
by Genivaria » Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:45 am
by Sundiata » Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:55 am
Genivaria wrote:Sundiata wrote:Not really, no. No.
Yes they are, you are literally trying to ascribe guilt or innocence to what is essentially a bacterium.
Covid is not 'guilty' because it doesn't posses the capacity to make moral judgements, it does harm and must therefore be eradicated.
Try a less stupid argument.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Immoren, Singaporen Empire, The Holy Therns
Advertisement