quote:

Originally posted by kait.:
Apparently you didn't see this, Laura. And as much as I'd like to go through and post about everything I see fit now, I feel like it's pointless. We're all repeating the same things over and over to you, but you're note even taking two seconds to actually think about what we're saying before spitting out some random response, mind you the same random responses over and over, and you have yet to prove your point to any of us, it seems. Anyway, my point is that it's pointless to continue to do this dance with you because you seem too close minded to understand where we're coming from, anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by killakayleigh:

quote:

Originally posted by ~Laura~:

quote:

do NOT mistake being pro-choice for being pro-abortion. do not.

You're right, I'm sure none of them are pro baby killing, but here's the thing. They still let it happen. They are not doing anything about it. If people were so against abortions, then they wouldn't let it happen. It doesn't matter if you only think it's ok for rape/incest victims or if a woman messed up and doesn't want her life to be held back. [u]Regardless of reason, the abortion still happens[/u] and the reason to have the abortion no longer matters. By letting it happen, that means that they see there is some good in it because they believe that someone (usually the mother) is benefitting from the abortion. That makes them a supporter of abortion. It doesn't matter if they personally are against it! A politician who is personally against something but votes the other way is totally useless. 4000 innocent babies are still being murdered every day because of abortion. Why bother being personally against something when you won't act on it? The way I see it, politicians have the ability to change things like this. When you have that ability and an evil in the world continue to spread without doing anything about it, then it makes you evil as well. It also makes you a coward.

In my opinion, there is no pro-choice, because in the end, the result is the same if you were pro-abortion. You will still allow abortions to take place. They are one in the same.

you're just plain wrong, i'm sorry. there is a HUGE difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. i myself am pro-choice. i will never ever tell someone that they're wrong for getting an abortion because it's their life, it's their body, and my beliefs have nothing to do with that and neither do yours. i don't think that i could ever personally have an abortion, and that is what makes me pro-choice rather than pro-abortion.

i'm not pro the action of aborting a life, or a soon to be life (because medically they are not alive), however i will never ever stand in someone's way of making their own decision.

also, can you just imagine what would happen if some right wing conservative presidency was able to make abortions illegal? marijuana is illegal and i'm sure you know of at least a handful if not more people that use that. do you realize how many people would be getting back alley abortions in unsterilized environments and ending up sick or dead?

in before they would deserve it.

But you don't seem to be getting the general point we're making. It's THEIR CHOICE. We may not LIKE that choice, and we may not make that choice ourselves, but WE are not THEM, and WE cant tell THEM what to do. No matter what. And anyone who thinks they have the right to tell another woman what she can and cannot do to her body, and something SHE took part in creating is stupid.

And do you not realize how almost hypocritical you're being? You talk about letting this happen (abortion) and how it shouldn't be allowed to happen, etc. and how it's against the church and everything... and yet you aren't saying anything like that about being gay? They're both against the religion. They're both a sin, according to your religion. Why is one more important than the other? Scratch that, I get why one is technically more important than the other, but in other words... why do you feel the need to not allow one of those sins, and accept the other?

Please don't call me closeminded. You have NO idea how much research I have done on abortion and how many debates I've been in. And not once have I found a reason that makes abortion ok. I'm sorry if you guys have yet to show me a reason. I'm being totally honest. That's not being close minded. I have taken all of your arguments and thrown you back one of my own.

I think you guys don't seem to be getting my point. Why should a woman be able to choose to kill a human? I'm sorry, that should not be a choice women should have. It's the exact same choice a man has with murdering an innocent kid. I have given you reasons why the baby is a human. Once you prove the baby is a human, then the killing of an innocent human is murder. And the baby is also not a part of the woman's body. Why? Because a baby can be separated from the mother without harming the mother. It is its own being and simply thrives from the mother temporarily. That doesn't make the baby a part of the mother.

How am I being hypocritical? I said in my first few posts why I was against gay marriage, even befoe this abortion thing started. I don't accept abortion or gay marriage.

And Colleen, the Church does not allow abortion in any way. There is a reason why Communion was refused to Rudy Giuliani, and that reason was because he was pro-choice.

quote:

if it can't survive on it's own, medically it is not considered alive.
and this is not a holocaust. you shouldn't even compare it to the holocaust. that was an absolutely disgusting time where people, actual real life living breathing people, were brutally murdered because of one man's sick ideals.

and even though those types of pregnancies occur less than 4% of the time, what about teenagers or drug addicts or women that don't have the means to raise a child or even go through a pregnancy? while i do not agree with many reasons people have for having abortions, they still have their reasons and i respect that and i will always support that.

also about those people that can't have babies, there are millions of children in the world that they could adopt. why bring four thousand MORE unwanted children in the world when we don't have to?

but don't get me wrong, i COMPLETELY understand what you're saying and why you feel the way you do.

So an infant baby can't survive on it's own without the help of a motherly/fatherly figure feeding it, cleaning it, etc. A 15 year old who is paralyzed from the neck down and can't feed himself without the help of a machine wouldn't be able to survive on his own. Those people aren't alive? Then you mention breathing. So someone who is on a beathing tube is also not human then?

I can give a list of organizations, many of them Catholic, that help single women who are having babies. Abortion is not the only option a woman has. To me, there is no reason to kill. And I'm going to keep using kill and murder unless you can give me something that shows me that the baby is not a human.

Why bring 4000 more into the world? Well first of all who are we to decide who can and cannot be born? Have we become Arianists all of a sudden? Except it's more a, "I will kill this baby since it is not a convenient time right now or because I don't want it right now." According to our Constitution, we all have the right to life. Those 4000 kids are given the chance to live a life on this world and it's being taken away from them. One of my very good friend's mother was told to have an abortion because her son was going to die at birth and if he survived, he would be deformed and retarded. She said no to the abortion and he came out completely normal and he's one of the smartest men I know. Now how many millions of kids didn't have that shot to do something with their lives? How is that fair to them? Everyone should have a chance to live their lives, like it is said in our Constitution.

quote:

so it is a valid argument to say, 'science has proved this has brain activity and a heartbeat' but not valid to say that 'science has proven that being gay is something beyond one's conrtol'?
because both have been proven.

Well see you CAN scientifically prove brain activity and a heart beat through an ultrasound. Science and such haven't shown us much about the whereabouts of being gay. I'm no scientist so I'm not going to pretend I know anything about those experiments, but I think being gay can come from a variety of things, one big one being your family life. Nothing has been proven yet because people are still experimenting. Finding out whether or not a baby has a heart beat or brain activity can easily be solved through science, and it has been.

OK, I've just read this whole thread, so bear with me. Most of the stuff I'm replying to was pages and pages ago.

quote:

Originally posted by killakayleigh:
yeah i completely get what you're saying winnie. i guess i just see buddha as a guy that realized a really good way to live and spread it around, and less of a god?
maybe because he seems more... attainable? he was a real guy. not some mystical being it takes faith to believe in.

Jesus was a real guy, just like Mohammad, Abraham and Moses. All four, along with good old Siddhartha (Buddha), Zoroaster and Confucius, were men who came along with their own ways of living that differed from the norm (which during their time was their state's religion). If you think about it, religion is a way of life. Each has a holy text of some sort with a written set of rules (made by man, whether it was passed along by a god or not, man wrote it down, therefore it is fallible). If you want to achieve Nirvana, get to Heaven, or be reincarnated into a higher caste, you have to live by these rules. Some of these ways of life are a bit more forgiving, such as Christianity's forgiveness of sins policy, but all basically say if you follow this set of rules, you will be rewarded, whether on Earth or in the afterlife.
NOTE: This is a very general comparison, once you get into the actual doctrines of these religions, they are pretty different.

quote:

Originally posted by Niki Starship.:
But Meg, if you say "be nice about it", where did those morals come from? Someone one day wasn't just like "It's mean to murder someone." No, there is that little list called The Ten Commandments.

Actually, that rule was around in Ancient Babylonia (around 300 years before Moses was born). It was part of Hammurabi’s Code of Laws, along with an “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” I so didn't just go look that up in my world history book.

quote:

Originally posted by Dana.:
I think they would because isn't it un-Christ-like to not accept someone? :|

Isn’t it also un-Christ like to start Crusades? To try and exterminate other religions from the face of the Earth? I guess of the past sins that were committed in the name of Christ, this one doesn’t seem as bad…

quote:

Originally posted by killakayleigh:
see i've been thinking about this stuff and forming these opinions ever since i started separating myself from the church. because one day i realized that church isn't a place to grow as a christian as much as it's a place to go and pat each other on the back for just how christian and wonderful you are. and i didn't like that. there's a cockiness that goes along with organized religions, there's a sense of superiority and people seem to think they're smarter and better off and almost pity those that aren't on the same path in their lives. and i didn't like that. because everyone is different, everyones' lives are different, and we can't expect the same religious mold to fit perfectly to each of them. and if we're not willing to make exceptions and bend the "rules" a little, then we're excluding people which seems to go against every single thing that we're supposed to believe as christians. it's hypocritical and egotistical and i'd rather just have faith in myself and in what i feel and believe and what i've learned and gathered over the years, and that includes a love for and trust in God and Jesus.

I feel the exact same. I was disillusioned pretty fast because of my church’s administration, they treated church as more of a circus instead of what it was supposed to be, a place of worship. My church was and still is just a place for people to see and be seen. “Oh, yes, I was in church yesterday! Of course, I’m such an awesome Christian!” But as soon as Sunday was over, these people were not Christian-like in the least bit. But they figured as long as they go to church every Sunday, they’re covered. I’m not saying everyone is like these people, this is just what I have observed at my own church.

quote:

Originally posted by ♥Gigi Loves You!♥:
okay, in my religion book, it said that Catholics...it's hard to phrase this...but they may only receive heaven in its truest form because the other forms of Christianity either change things from Catholicism or leave things out. that confused me, but I honestly think Heaven is the same for everyone, no matter what religion. your opinions?

Technically, they are right about some of that. Catholicism was the first established form of Christianity. Protestantism was a rebellion of Catholicism, a protest of what Catholicism had become, it would only make sense to just take the parts of the religion that were acceptable to the protesters and leave off the bits they didn’t like. And every denomination after that has taken what it wanted and left what it disagreed with. So, Catholicism, it can be argued, is the true form of Christianity. So, if Catholicism is the only true form, wouldn’t that be the only denomination with the correct path to Heaven?
My personal opinion is no. I believe that as long as you believe in God and Jesus and lead a good life, you’re in, no matter what denomination or lack thereof you believe in. You don’t have to go to church to be spiritual, you just have to believe.


BUT, my answer to the original question of the thread is: people are people, it just doesn't matter what they believe in, what their sexual orientation is, or whether they're pro-choice or pro-life. Everyone should be treated with the same respect and kindness.

laura, you did make alot of good points on why an abortion could be the wrong choice. and i do understand your point of view better from it.

i feel like people who want to get an abortion should hear those things before they get one to maybe change their mind or to make sure they make the most informed decision possible. but for someone who is outside of the personal situation to force someone to have to do something with their body and possilbly make them turn to a dangerous back alley abortion doesnt seem right either.


also, from being in this thread so much all my ads are turning into ones about being pregnant and stuff lmfao

i seem to keep saying this, but it's true. medically speaking a fetus is not a live human being. it just isn't. i never said it wasn't human, just that it wasn't alive as far as law and medicine are concerned. it would not be able to survive outside of the womb. that isn't the same thing as a baby, where you care for it. you aren't breathing for it or pumping it's blood through it's body.

the example of the 15 year old and the person on a breathing tube are stretches, i think. breathing tubes are often used while a body takes time to heal itself, it's definitely not the same thing as being a fetus. and for that matter, i don't consider 'vegetables' to be alive. and the 15 year old i would deduct would've become paralyzed after living for years. he's been alive but now is ill, therefore he can survive with the help of machines.

i'd like to see a fetus surviving on a machine. then i will agree with you that it is murder and will concede to you and become pro-life.

quote:

Originally posted by Rockin' Robyn:
Jesus was a real guy, just like Mohammad, Abraham and Moses.

i didn't mean Jesus, i meant God. who isn't a guy at all, and cannot be PHYSICALLY attained, do you know what i mean?

quote:

Originally posted by killakayleigh:

quote:

Originally posted by Rockin' Robyn:
Jesus was a real guy, just like Mohammad, Abraham and Moses.

i didn't mean Jesus, i meant God. who isn't a guy at all, and cannot be PHYSICALLY attained, do you know what i mean?

Yeah, I got it, but religion was set up by men. God did not physically come down and say, "All right, guys, here's how it's going to work!" All these men claimed to have visions of a god or they they were the son of god. I'm not defending or refuting any of these claims, just laying down the facts.


Actually, that reminds me of a debate I had with my friend. If you're a Christian, do you believe that Jesus was a man who happened to be the Son of God? Or do you believe that Jesus is God in human form?

Depending on your answer, I suppose you could definitely disagree with my statement about God not physically coming down and setting up the church.

quote:

Originally posted by killakayleigh:
i seem to keep saying this, but it's true. medically speaking a fetus is not a live human being. it just isn't. i never said it wasn't human, just that it wasn't alive as far as law and medicine are concerned. it would not be able to survive outside of the womb. that isn't the same thing as a baby, where you care for it. you aren't breathing for it or pumping it's blood through it's body.

the example of the 15 year old and the person on a breathing tube are stretches, i think. breathing tubes are often used while a body takes time to heal itself, it's definitely not the same thing as being a fetus. and for that matter, i don't consider 'vegetables' to be alive. and the 15 year old i would deduct would've become paralyzed after living for years. he's been alive but now is ill, therefore he can survive with the help of machines.

i'd like to see a fetus surviving on a machine. then i will agree with you that it is murder and will concede to you and become pro-life.

quote:

Originally posted by Rockin' Robyn:
Jesus was a real guy, just like Mohammad, Abraham and Moses.

i didn't mean Jesus, i meant God. who isn't a guy at all, and cannot be PHYSICALLY attained, do you know what i mean?

But the law and medicine have been wrong in the past, it's not like what they say is the ultimate truth. I just want to know how it isn't alive. It's growing every second.

But hang on, if it isn't alive, then what is it? If it isn't alive, then it must be dead and that isn't the case. You said tha