When Does Life Begin?

cicerone imposter wrote:

All those children also needs shelter and food. Who is providing those necessities of life/living?

Maybe you should forego 2 or 3 of your vacations this year, C Imposter.

0 Replies

No, the way it works is that those of you who want all pregnancies to come to term are the ones responsible to make sure life is preserved and cared for; not only the fetus but also includes all babies until they are able to care for themselves. I have no such grandiose belief; and leave the choice up to the woman who must care for her child after birth.

I leave the responsibility for any birth to the woman and her doctor. Not up to some zealot such as you!

0 Replies

Aren't you the one who constantly says that the living need food and shelter?

What are you doing about it? Wasting your money traveling the world 4-6 times a year.

Why don't you put your money where your mouth is?

'From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.'

You do believe in that, don't you? I thought you were a good democrat.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

No, the way it works is that those of you who want all pregnancies to come to term are the ones responsible to make sure life is preserved and cared for; not only the fetus but also includes all babies until they are able to care for themselves. I have no such grandiose belief; and leave the choice up to the woman who must care for her child after birth.

I leave the responsibility for any birth to the woman and her doctor. Not up to some zealot such as you!

It always comes back to the same thing w/you ci:

"You should do what I say you should do, regardless of whether I do the same thing or not, because that is my choice. It is my place however to tell you to do this and don't do that... But I am no hypocrit because I do this and don't do this..."!

0 Replies

You guys will never "get it," because you try to impose your morals on other people's lives you don't even know or care about. Your logic is lost on "all life is precious, and we must defend the fetus over its mother." Then not only forget all the orphans in this world, but all the children alive and starving.

Yeah, life is precious - only when it's in a woman's womb.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
Bartikus wrote:
Supply and demand is related.

"All you need is love."
John Lennon

If all one needs is love, you better be sure there is enought to go around.

T
K
O
If not, we hafta killya.

Speak up, the zygote has a difficult time hearing you without ears and the ability to process the signal...

T
K
O

0 Replies

They love to use words like "kill," but fail on the logic test; they don't give a shet about those children already alive; they're just dying a slow death from starvation.

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
Bartikus wrote:
Supply and demand is related.

"All you need is love."
John Lennon

If all one needs is love, you better be sure there is enought to go around.

T
K
O

That's up to us is'nt it?

Sure is, and before you can rationalize a much greater influx of unwanted children that would come with outlawing abortion, you'd better be able to demonstrate that the current orfans of the world can be given a home.

Your plan requires things to be in place that aren't.
Your plan is also out of order.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
All those children also needs shelter and food. Who is providing those necessities of life/living?

Love brings that and more....

Man does not live by bread alone.

So now man needs more than love? He needs bread too?

Better have a lot of bagels and teddy bears.

T
K
O

0 Replies

This is getting more than a little annoying.

CI isn't asking others to do as he says and not as he does. He is asking others to act in accordance to what they say.

If you are pro-life, then be it, don't half-arse it.

If you really think you are so benevolent, you'll do what it takes to be "pro life." This means you'll prove that the ones alive can be taken care of first. You have no ethical footing as is.

My stance does not require that I help anyone else to be consistant with my beliefs, but I do it anyways as I see fit.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

This is getting more than a little annoying.

CI isn't asking others to do as he says and not as he does. He is asking others to act in accordance to what they say.

If you are pro-life, then be it, don't half-arse it.

If you really think you are so benevolent, you'll do what it takes to be "pro life." This means you'll prove that the ones alive can be taken care of first. You have no ethical footing as is.

My stance does not require that I help anyone else to be consistant with my beliefs, but I do it anyways as I see fit.

T
K
O

Sheez - you're getting as bad as ci! Where has anyone on here said;

Quote:

...they don't give a shet about those children already alive...?

0 Replies

baddog1 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
This is getting more than a little annoying.

CI isn't asking others to do as he says and not as he does. He is asking others to act in accordance to what they say.

If you are pro-life, then be it, don't half-arse it.

If you really think you are so benevolent, you'll do what it takes to be "pro life." This means you'll prove that the ones alive can be taken care of first. You have no ethical footing as is.

My stance does not require that I help anyone else to be consistant with my beliefs, but I do it anyways as I see fit.

T
K
O

Sheez - you're getting as bad as ci! Where has anyone on here said;
Quote:
...they don't give a shet about those children already alive...?

Make a point please so I can address it.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

Chumly wrote:
Bartikus wrote:
Babies are like the best of us.
Given that young babies have no knowledge nor practice of ethics you are saying "the best of us" have strong psychopathic inclinations!
Bartikus wrote:
It's a small innocent baby in my eyes.
Your claim that babies are innocent means that you cannot be a Christian, because original sin is pivotal to the Christian religion. Babies are not innocent but in fact sinful by Christian standards.

You don't understand the Christian faith. There is a difference between having a propensity to sin and being guilty of sin. The unborn do not qualify.

All babies are innocent of sin.

False! Original sin is a condition, not something that people do: It's the "normal" spiritual and psychological condition of human beings, not their bad thoughts and actions. Even a newborn baby who hasn't done anything at all is damaged by original sin.

In Christian teaching, original sin is the result of Adam and Eve's disobedience to God when they ate a forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

baddog1 wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
This is getting more than a little annoying.

CI isn't asking others to do as he says and not as he does. He is asking others to act in accordance to what they say.

If you are pro-life, then be it, don't half-arse it.

If you really think you are so benevolent, you'll do what it takes to be "pro life." This means you'll prove that the ones alive can be taken care of first. You have no ethical footing as is.

My stance does not require that I help anyone else to be consistant with my beliefs, but I do it anyways as I see fit.

T
K
O

Sheez - you're getting as bad as ci! Where has anyone on here said;
Quote:
...they don't give a shet about those children already alive...?

Make a point please so I can address it.

T
K
O

OK - I'll spell it out for you:

ci said: "they don't give a shet about those children already alive".

You said when speaking of ci: "He is asking others to act in accordance to what they say."

I asked you: When & where did someone say; (quoted from ci): "they don't give a shet about those children already alive"?

0 Replies

Christians believe that human beings can't cure themselves of original sin. The only way they can be saved from its consequences is by the grace of thier Christian god.

Christians believe the only way people can receive god's grace is by accepting his love and forgiveness, believing that Jebuz died on the cross to redeem their sins, and getting baptised.

0 Replies

Baddog1 - Simply put, the incosistancy of the pro-life lobby makes that statement.

T
K
O

0 Replies

A newborn is affected by original sin...I never said otherwise. I just said they are not guilty of sin. But yes they are affected by it.

0 Replies

baddog1 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
baddog1 wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
This is getting more than a little annoying.

CI isn't asking others to do as he says and not as he does. He is asking others to act in accordance to what they say.

If you are pro-life, then be it, don't half-arse it.

If you really think you are so benevolent, you'll do what it takes to be "pro life." This means you'll prove that the ones alive can be taken care of first. You have no ethical footing as is.

My stance does not require that I help anyone else to be consistant with my beliefs, but I do it anyways as I see fit.

T
K
O

Sheez - you're getting as bad as ci! Where has anyone on here said;
Quote:
...they don't give a shet about those children already alive...?

Make a point please so I can address it.

T
K
O

OK - I'll spell it out for you:

ci said: "they don't give a shet about those children already alive".

You said when speaking of ci: "He is asking others to act in accordance to what they say."

I asked you: When & where did someone say; (quoted from ci): "they don't give a shet about those children already alive"?

I think they meant they don't give 2 sheets? I don't know.

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

A newborn is affected by original sin...I never said otherwise. I just said they are not guilty of sin. But yes they are affected by it.

Guilt infers judgment and since your Christian god has judged that all are born with original sin, in your god's eyes all are guilty, thus babies are guilty too, and not "innocent" as you claim.

Rather ass-backwards compared to our modern legal system where you are innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt because in your ass-backwards Christian thinking babies are guilty and there is no reasonable doubt.

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
A newborn is affected by original sin...I never said otherwise. I just said they are not guilty of sin. But yes they are affected by it.
Guilt infers judgment and since your Christian god has judged that all are born with original sin, in your god's eyes all are guilty, thus babies are guilty too, and not "innocent" as you claim.

Rather ass-backwards compared to our modern legal system where you are innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt because in your ass-backwards Christian thinking babies are guilty and there is no reasonable doubt.

This is not my thinking chumly.

0 Replies

When Does Life Begin?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know