What upset? I just dont think such an event should be used to promote a political agenda. You obviously are happy taking advantage of such an event
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It's A BABY after all...
- Thread starter Kenny
- Start date
What upset? I just dont think such an event should be used to promote a political agenda. You obviously are happy taking advantage of such an event
You appear to protest to much.
I asked what hatred?
And are you saying your abuse of s happy event was not political?
No... you didn't "what hatred" - you asked "WHY hatred"
So... let's review...
First, "hatred"
Second, "political"
Third, "protest"
Fourth, "abuse"
So, actually, my question of "why are you so upset" is quite valid.
And the answer to your question, "no, not political".
However, it would appear that it is you that is protesting too much (by empirical and verifiable evidence)
Ok am dyexic, so shoot me. And notice the question mark
Stop trying to change the subject to cover your own butt.
You made a statement tast smacked of hatred to the pro choice people, a statement that is politically based and you abused a happy event to do so.
And i have already informed you, i am nor upset, but i am rather agast at your attitude.
wow
However you want to dismiss your own words
You don't want to confront your own personal issues.
Last edited:
Please advise what personal issues have i raised appertaining to myself.
On the contrary, it appears to be you dodging responsibility for your own words
With a hug attached... you wanted to make it personal by calling it hatred
Then you wanted to make it political
Then, with all of your protests, you projecting it on me.
Then, with the projection, you called it abuse.
I have no idea what the personal issue you have, but the empirical and verifiable evidence it appears that there must be a root.
So that you know there is no hatred, I have said in times past that we must support those who had an abortion, love them and help them through it. My sister found that Jesus was the key but I'm sure there are other venues that can help too.
It most certainly was hatred to use s beautiful event to push a political agenda.
And you protest far too much and once again attempt to shift your iwn failing onto me
I am not the only one to mention your misuse of this event. Bit still, if you are happy in what you do
Rational Agnostic
Well-Known Member
I don't. I think everyone should have the right to decide for themselves where the line is. But you DO impose your unprovable definition of "human life" on others, and want it legislated.
This rather reminds me of the feticide rights people who vehemently object to using the term "baby" to describe an unborn human being. They think that's too emotive.
But referring to an unborn human being as a "parasite" is OK.
Tom
This rather reminds me of the feticide rights people who vehemently object to using the term "baby" to describe an unborn human being. They think that's too emotive.
But referring to an unborn human being as a "parasite" is OK.
Tom
Well.. the fetus does take all its needs from the host body in a truly parasitic way.
But that wasnt my argument, my concern was @KenS use of his event as a platform to promote his anti abortion rhetoric
All human beings do, at the earliest stage of life.
It's the hypocrisy of objecting to the accurate term baby while using the term parasite.
Tom
Obvious snipe at the abortion debate notwithstanding, I hope that the baby and mom continue to be healthy!
Imo, as an aside, I've never found the question of personhood relevant to the abortion debate. I would side with women to end a pregnancy literally any time, since I put value on body autonomy more than any person of any age (even if it were an adult in there). Point of viability just changes the process. After viability through induction of labor or c-section.
Do you struggle this hard with questions like legal age requirements for consent, alchohol, prison, cigarettes, joining the military etc? Although science can give some objective ballpark data from which to decide reasonable limits (just like viability) they have no magic line either.
Imo, as an aside, I've never found the question of personhood relevant to the abortion debate. I would side with women to end a pregnancy literally any time, since I put value on body autonomy more than any person of any age (even if it were an adult in there). Point of viability just changes the process. After viability through induction of labor or c-section.
When born. That is the beginning of the infant developmental stage. Terms like "baby" are non-technical colloquial terms, and you can call your pet cat a baby and still have the same weight as calling a six week embryo like the one in this dish:
I always go by dictionary definition, i.e. a very young child.
Some will call a fetus a child, that is up to them, i call a fetus a fetus
Legislation ALWAYS imposes on others--whether pro-choice or pro-life. Whether driving at 65 mph or 75 mph. That's what laws do.
So?