The Proudest Hour of the Prolife Movement.

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
72
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Can you cite just ONE single occasion among the 45,000,000 abortions in the U.S.and the 3,000,000 in Canada when the wishes of the "sperm donor" was ever considered by the abortionist "doctor"? Or in any court of law?


Why should they, Yukon? It is none of the sperm donor’s business; he doesn’t have to carry the pregnancy for nine months. He doesn’t have to suffer as a result of complications arising out of pregnancy. It is between a woman and her doctor.
Healthwise. Sociologically, you are dead wrong.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
72
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
JLM, there is one crucial thing that sets me apart from SirJosephPorter: I admit and I apologize when I am wrong.

No you don’t, Yukon. If you apologized every time you were wrong, you would be apologizing just about every other post.
And you are so vague, obtuse, and verbose no-one would ever be able to tell if you apologized or accepted blame. So?
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
72
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Oh, I agree, TenPenny, and that is how the issue is settled most of the time. The man and the woman would discuss it and come to some kind of an agreement.

We know a couple, they had two kids and she was pregnant for the third time (this was perhaps 20 years ago). The woman was working full time, decided that she couldn’t handle three kids and decided to get an abortion. Her husband persuaded her not to, promising that he would help a lot more in the housework. As a result, she did not have an abortion. The husband kept his promise and he really does a lot around the house (even now that the kids have left home).

That is a reasonable way of settling the issue and I think most of the time it is settled in a reasonable manner. However, when push comes to shove, when in the rare instances the two cannot agree, it is for the woman to make the final decision.
Ah clear enough for me to point out the flipflop. lmao
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
NO- the subject is what is being aborted.

That is the big bone of contention, isn’t it, JLM? Some say a baby is being aborted, others say it is not. The question is whether those who claim that a baby is being aborted should be able to impose their view upon others.
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
So verify it. Reference for this definition?

"Moral" problems are relative. Societies define what is moral. Christianity is only one society and it is one that doesn't value ALL life.

You know L., a repetitive litany of 'prove it' does not constitute an argument. I don't post links because i have found it a futile exercize, you can find links that 'prove' just about anything on any side of an issue on the internet.. from absurdities, like the is earth is flat, to alien abduction experiences, to man made Global Warming, to homosexuality as a natural, genetically defined state. It's all just a lot of nonsense, gift wrapped in some academic sounding mumbo jumbo... worthless in practical terms.

You prove it. I haven't seen anything from you that presents a position on anything, just a cantakerous rejection of anything that doesn't smack of the most maudlin, relativistic moral goo, involving absolutely no societal or individualistic responsibility at all.. beyond one's own material gratification.

And 'moral' problems are absolute not relative. They are imprinted as absolute Truth into the fabric of Creation. Society, post or ex the Divine.. in inspiration, revelation, law.. is utterly incapable of defining what is good or evil. We see that all around us now, most profoundly in the holocaust of 'legal' abortion. We saw it when the Nazi 'society' determined that racial purification would rid the world of 'useless eaters'.

That is undoubtedy based on faith, and therefor beyond proof.. but it is also True. The manifestation of not accepting Truth will be seen in a chaotic dissolution of a society, whose ethos is to its own 'freedom' from any 'God' given moral maxims.

The proof will be in that pudding.
 
Last edited:

Niflmir

A modern nomad
Dec 18, 2006
3,460
58
48
Leiden, the Netherlands
NO- the subject is what is being aborted.

Cells that do not have the ability to survive on their own? I spit some of them out every morning when I am brushing my teeth. Is that somehow someone's business? I guess I will have to post about them every morning, noon and night then.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
That is undoubtedy based on faith, and therefor beyond proof.. but it is also True.

And that, my friends, is the distilled summary of the problem. Some people believe that their own set of beliefs, their personal faith, is somehow the One True Law, and that anyone who disagrees with them is Wrong.

Good Night.
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
And that, my friends, is the distilled summary of the problem. Some people believe that their own set of beliefs, their personal faith, is somehow the One True Law, and that anyone who disagrees with them is Wrong.

Good Night.


And some people believe the Post Structural, Culture of Death, Moral Relativism that pervades our public discourse now does NOT constitute a Atheistic belief system in its own right in fact far more self righteous and tyrannical that what it replaces.

That somehow this has provided them with an 'objectivity' unavailable to Theists. From these lofty heights they pontificate on the purely humane logic of ethical compromise.. leaving a trail of blood and dead babies in their wake, from these societally developed expediencies of the 'common good'.
 
Last edited:

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
And some people believe the Post Structural, Culture of Death, Moral Relativism that pervades our public discourse now does NOT constitute a Atheistic belief system in its own right. Far more self righteous and tyrannical that what it replaces.

That somehow this has provided them with an 'objectivity' unavailable to Theists. From these lofty heights they Pontificate of the purely humane logic of ethical compromise.. leaving a trail of blood and dead babies in their wake, from this societally developed morality.

I don't Pontificate, I'm not Catholic.

While I enjoy a complex Sentence consisting of words with many Syllables, and the occasional use of an Upper Case Letter or even 'quote marks' to make the words look more Important, in the end, your lovely Post means the square root of Diddly, and I don't mean Bo.

You would be further ahead to simply state that you think abortion is agianst your pesonal views, and believe it should be outlawed.
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
I don't Pontificate, I'm not Catholic.

While I enjoy a complex Sentence consisting of words with many Syllables, and the occasional use of an Upper Case Letter or even 'quote marks' to make the words look more Important, in the end, your lovely Post means the square root of Diddly, and I don't mean Bo.

You would be further ahead to simply state that you think abortion is agianst your pesonal views, and believe it should be outlawed.


Abortion is against the laws of God. Those are easily accessible in our own divinely ordained conscience, if it hasn't been deluded by a lot of relativistic propoganda.

And usually when i see people criticize, or atleast distract the conversation to grammar or spelling or punctuation it just indicates to me they've run out of arguments and have decided they cannot compete on the basis of the substance of the discussion. Well, thanks for your 'compliment' anyway.

And you seem to 'pontificate' pretty well, atleast in a facsimile form. :smile:
 
Last edited:

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
72
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
You know L., a repetitive litany of 'prove it' does not constitute an argument.
Neither does opinion, and claiming stuff without providing evidence is simply that. As I said, there are 6 billion other opinions out there and yours is only one. People that make claims and provide evidence are more likely to be listened to than those with just an opinion.
I don't post links because i have found it a futile exercize, you can find links that 'prove' just about anything on any side of an issue on the internet.. from absurditiesthe like earth is flat, to alien abduction experiences, to the Global Warming hoax, to homosexuality as a natural, genetically defined state. It's all just a lot of nonsense, gift wrapped in some academic sounding mumbo jumbo... worthless in practical terms.
People have been conviced that the Earth is not flat simply because a few others tested their opinions and demonstrated with EVIDENCE that it isn't. There is a hoax involved with global warming, I agree. If you look at the data people provide, it's a reasonable conclusion that the planet is warming. I know there's an awful lot of BS going on about it, but ithe BS is avoidable.

You prove it. I haven't seen anything from you that presents any position on anything, just a cantakerous rejection of anything that doesn't smack of the most maudlin, relativistic moral goo, involving absolutely no societal or individualistic responsibility at all.. beyond one's own material gratification.
If you haven't seen any it's because you haven't got a clue what any proof would consist of or else you just plain ignore it. I suspect the latter, but you may prove me wrong. You have no clue about whether I have societal or individual responsibility or not because all you have is your simple-minded, religious dogma-inspired opinion.

And 'moral' problems are absolute not relative. They are imprinted as absolute Truth into the fabric of Creation.
That's your opinion. You are quite welcome to have your opinion but there is absolutely NO evidence to support your opinion.
Society, post or ex the Divine.. in inspiration, revelation, law.. is utterly incapable of defining what is good or evil. We see that all around us now, most profoundly in the holocaust of 'legal' abortion. We saw it when the Nazi 'society' determined that racial purification would rid the world of 'useless eaters'.
And we see it when some religious dogma demands that unless people brown-nose to some particular faith or other, they'll be killed, either in this life or some fictional life. Big difference. The Bible is no more moral than Mother Goose.

That is undoubtedy based on faith, and therefor beyond proof.
Typical escapist sophism when people have no basis for belief.
but it is also True.
Truth is relative.
The manifestation of not accepting Truth will be seen in a chaotic dissolution of a society, whose ethos is to its own 'freedom' from any 'God' given moral maxims.
Which god? Loki? Ra? Hanuman? It makes no difference which because they are ALL products of human imagination.

The proof will be in that pudding.
Wrong.
BTW, you don't provide evidence because you have no idea how to. How's that for an opinion? My evidence? Your complete lack of anything to substantiate what you claim.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
72
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
And some people believe the Post Structural, Culture of Death, Moral Relativism that pervades our public discourse now does NOT constitute a Atheistic belief system in its own right. Far more self righteous and tyrannical that what it replaces.
Ah, so you are convinced that everything would be hunkydory if it wasn't for atheists. How very bigoted of you. Wrong, also. You are just as mired in the mud of Christian rhetoric as eannasir is mired in the mud of Islamic rhetoric. Haven't a bright thought between the two of you. All you can do is regurgitate your silly "god given maxims".

That somehow this has provided them with an 'objectivity' unavailable to Theists. From these lofty heights they pontificate on the purely humane logic of ethical compromise.. leaving a trail of blood and dead babies in their wake, from these societally developed expediencies of the 'common good'.
Blind bigot.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
72
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
I don't Pontificate, I'm not Catholic.

While I enjoy a complex Sentence consisting of words with many Syllables, and the occasional use of an Upper Case Letter or even 'quote marks' to make the words look more Important, in the end, your lovely Post means the square root of Diddly, and I don't mean Bo.

You would be further ahead to simply state that you think abortion is agianst your pesonal views, and believe it should be outlawed.
Quite right.
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
Ah, so you are convinced that everything would be hunkydory if it wasn't for atheists. How very bigoted of you. Wrong, also. You are just as mired in the mud of Christian rhetoric as eannasir is mired in the mud of Islamic rhetoric. Haven't a bright thought between the two of you. All you can do is regurgitate your silly "god given maxims".

Blind bigot.


Likewise. L., you sound pretty dogmatic and myopic and chauvinistic yourself.

So what are you saying, that i'm bigoted against atheists. :roll:

Pot, Kettle, Black.