So, the abortion issue is now back in the limelight...

[93henfan]

Well stated.

I think that goes in line with most Americans thinking - abortion is a personal decision that should not be taken lightly, but should be just that, a personal decision.

Also, highlighting the need to prevent the need for abortions in the first place. The most rabid forced-birthers are usually the same ones that refuse to address the issues, or allow discussion of what could be done to prevent unintended pregnancies in the first place - education, easy access to birth control, options for the mother both during and after the pregnancy, support to allow the child to be healthy and stay with the mom, expanded adoption avenues.

As far as I'm concerned we can make all forms of birth control over-the-counter and put them in vending machines at every convenience store. Most pro-life people are not the "we-don't-want-to-encourage-promiscuity" types.

But that would go against all the good Catholics on this board, as their church teaches them that it is ALWAYS wrong to use birth control.

[89Hen]

OK, give me the day, hour and minute it becomes a person.

I'll be the first to tell you, I have NO idea when that is. That is exactly why it is wrong to terminate it at any point.

If we consider someone dead when the heart stops beating...why not alive once it begins. Take the "is it human?" out of the equation. Is it alive?

That's a surprisingly thoughtful post, not kidding. More discussion like that would actually be helpful.

So you're OK to say no abortions after 22 days? Did you realize is was that early?

[BDKJMU]

And it is a left wing myth that the Constitution is a "living, breathing, document" and somehow it means differently than it did in the 1800s or 1900s.

And it is a left wing myth that there is a right to privacy in the Constitution, which is what a liberal SCOTUS invented in Roe via the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.

You mean as the US becomes more liberal, the right continues to want conservative justices. Its ok to use liberal, it not a dirty word..

It's all interpretation. The document should be "living and breathing" as the world has changed since 1788. Society has changed.

So what if society has changed. The articles & 1st 10 amendments haven't changed one iota. There's nothing living/breathing about them.

Yes society has changed. There's a process for dealing with that. The amendment process. There's now 28 of them.

[89Hen]

Because it’s illegal and harms a person.


What do I win?

I already tried that excellent response and it went whoosh!

Whoosh as in down the toilet.

[89Hen]

Claiming victory.... sure sign of ineptitude. But hey, if it makes you sleep better.

How many times do I have to say that nobody “wins” an abortion debate? Reading is obviously not a strong point for you.

I guess until you believe it and apply it to yourself?

[89Hen]

As far as I'm concerned we can make all forms of birth control over-the-counter and put them in vending machines at every convenience store. Most pro-life people are not the "we-don't-want-to-encourage-promiscuity" types.

But that would go against all the good Catholics on this board, as their church teaches them that it is ALWAYS wrong to use birth control.

That's why I'm not a "good" Catholic. Don't know too many who are in that regard.

[93henfan]

How many times do I have to say that nobody “wins” an abortion debate? Reading is obviously not a strong point for you.

I guess until you believe it and apply it to yourself?

I never claimed any victory. I did present far more compelling information than you did. That’s all I was really getting at as far as the debate went. ECLA’s take is far more reasoned than anything you (or your church) has presented.... in my opinion. It was a welcome coincidence that my take is pretty much exactly the same as my church’s stated positions, which I read for the first time yesterday evening.

Your opinion is different, and I’m fine with that. Carry on.

[93henfan]

But that would go against all the good Catholics on this board, as their church teaches them that it is ALWAYS wrong to use birth control.

That's why I'm not a "good" Catholic. Don't know too many who are in that regard.

Are you picking and choosing which church issues to agree with? Egad! BAD 89!!!

[89Hen]

I guess until you believe it and apply it to yourself?

I never claimed any victory. I did present far more compelling information than you did. That’s all I was really getting at as far as the debate went. ECLA’s take is far more reasoned than anything you (or your church) has presented.... in my opinion. It was a welcome coincidence that my take is pretty much exactly the same as my church’s stated positions, which I read for the first time yesterday evening.

Your opinion is different, and I’m fine with that. Carry on.

Oh, so your stance is coincidentally the same as your church's but my stance it the same as my church's because it is my church's stance. Got it.

BTW, as I mentioned, your church's stance isn't really much of a stance at all. It's more fence straddling than even GF would attempt.

[89Hen]

That's why I'm not a "good" Catholic. Don't know too many who are in that regard.

Are you picking and choosing which church issues to agree with? Egad! BAD 89!!!

Yup. I'd like to see priests be able to get married too.

[93henfan]

Oh, so your stance is coincidentally the same as your church's but my stance it the same as my church's because it is my church's stance. Got it.

If you came up with your archaic stance on your own, then God help you!

BTW, as I mentioned, your church's stance isn't really much of a stance at all. It's more fence straddling than even GF would attempt.

Actually, GF’s stance and the last quote I pasted from ELCA say pretty much the same thing. They’re both well reasoned and account for the maximum benefit possible for both mother and baby, which is what I would hope most compassionate people would want.

[93henfan]

Are you picking and choosing which church issues to agree with? Egad! BAD 89!!!

Yup. I'd like to see priests be able to get married too.

Even the straight ones?

[89Hen]

Oh, so your stance is coincidentally the same as your church's but my stance it the same as my church's because it is my church's stance. Got it.

If you came up with your archaic stance on your own, then God help you!

BTW, as I mentioned, your church's stance isn't really much of a stance at all. It's more fence straddling than even GF would attempt.

Actually, GF’s stance and the last quote I pasted from ELCA say pretty much the same thing. They’re both well reasoned and account for the maximum benefit possible for both mother and baby, which is what I would hope most compassionate people would want.

It's archaic to admit I don't know when a baby becomes a person so we should err on the side of caution? What exactly about that is archaic? Or did you just throw out a word hoping it would stick?

[dbackjon]

I think that goes in line with most Americans thinking - abortion is a personal decision that should not be taken lightly, but should be just that, a personal decision.

Why isn't child abuse a personal decision for the parent? See, you've skipped ahead again.

A fetus is not a child. And abortion is not a Black and White issue like you forced birthers try to make it.

Especially the male forced birthers (who are the majority of them).

[93henfan]

If you came up with your archaic stance on your own, then God help you!



Actually, GF’s stance and the last quote I pasted from ELCA say pretty much the same thing. They’re both well reasoned and account for the maximum benefit possible for both mother and baby, which is what I would hope most compassionate people would want.

It's archaic to admit I don't know when a baby becomes a person so we should err on the side of caution? What exactly about that is archaic? Or did you just throw out a word hoping it would stick?

Your “erring on the side of caution” would mean millions more sufferering, abandoned, unwanted, and abused humans. I find that archaic, yes.

[dbackjon]

A free foursome at 89's club.

It's ok for 89 to skip ahead a declare a zygote a person though.

OK, give me the day, hour and minute it becomes a person.

I'll be the first to tell you, I have NO idea when that is. That is exactly why it is wrong to terminate it at any point.

When it is born. Your birthday.

[93henfan]

And there’s the other extreme. I can’t say I agree with that either.

[dbackjon]

Yup. I'd like to see priests be able to get married too.

Even the straight ones?

[dbackjon]

And there’s the other extreme. I can’t say I agree with that either.

Legally it is true.

I don't know anyone that advocates for late-term abortion (which is very rare) except in case of danger to the mother.

[CAA Flagship]

Even the straight ones?

[89Hen]

Why isn't child abuse a personal decision for the parent? See, you've skipped ahead again.

A fetus is not a child. And abortion is not a Black and White issue like you forced birthers try to make it.

Especially the male forced birthers (who are the majority of them).

You know there's about a 4% spread between women and men in abortion polling?

So you believe a baby in the womb has no rights. I'm just trying to clarify everyone's position on what I said was the most important piece of this.

[89Hen]

It's archaic to admit I don't know when a baby becomes a person so we should err on the side of caution? What exactly about that is archaic? Or did you just throw out a word hoping it would stick?

Your “erring on the side of caution” would mean millions more sufferering, abandoned, unwanted, and abused humans. I find that archaic, yes.

And there you go skipping ahead again. You just can't help yourself. What next, cases of incest?

[89Hen]

OK, give me the day, hour and minute it becomes a person.

I'll be the first to tell you, I have NO idea when that is. That is exactly why it is wrong to terminate it at any point.

When it is born. Your birthday.

Got it. Partial birth abortions are OK with Jon.

[kalm]

I already tried that excellent response and it went whoosh!

Whoosh as in down the toilet.

I answered your “primary question” in the affirmative.

Get it?

[93henfan]

Your “erring on the side of caution” would mean millions more sufferering, abandoned, unwanted, and abused humans. I find that archaic, yes.

And there you go skipping ahead again. You just can't help yourself. What next, cases of incest?

Skipping ahead of what? I’ve answered every single question you’ve asked.