Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Two hot topics for the price of one

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #1

Post by Diogenes »

Roe v. Wade has been overturned today.
This subtopic specifically does not invite debate on the prohibition of abortion.

The question for debate is whether this sweeping decision allowing the States to outlaw abortion will lead to civil unrest and disrespect for the Court. My guess is, it will do both and will lead to women traveling from their homes in the South and much of the heartland of the United States to States that protect the 'right' for 50 years.

The 'abortion pill' will be banned in many States and the 'pro-choice' advocates will try to get the pill into those States where it will be a felony to possess it. I can envision armed militias at borders and around airports.
When the 18th Amendment prohibited Alcohol in 1919 it produced a new, illegal industry and related violence that lead to the passage of the 21st Amendment in 1933, repealing that Amendment.
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

User avatar
Jose Fly
Guru
Posts: 1462
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
Location: Out west somewhere
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 906 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #41

Post by Jose Fly »

Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:23 pm I simply brought a much more insidious example of this into the discussion
None of what you posted had anything to do with the recent SCOTUS decisions.
to put the silliness about the coach praying into perspective.
It's not just that they ruled in favor of the coach. As I explained, it's that in doing so they overturned Lemon v Kurtzman and the Lemon Test that resulted, and replaced it with a standard that's basically a pathway towards government promotion of Christianity, but not any other religions. That's going to have implications far beyond the Kennedy case.
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1569
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #42

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to Inquirer in post #40]
Societies can enact rights irrespective of whether abortion is sanctioned or not.
Obviously. History reveals this. Societies can also enact rights irrespective of whether slavery is sanctioned. My point was it is illogical to do so. There is a disconnect there.

I’m really not sure pro aborts have any idea how illogical their bodily autonomy argument is when we are talking about two bodies?
All rights are arbitrary.
I don’t think anyone actually believes that. We certainly act and live on a daily basis to the contrary.
Well perhaps I did over-generalize, but most of those I've meet or seen or read who support Trump (some even still claiming he won the election) do fit that mold.
Isn’t that interesting? Most of the people I’ve met, seen, or read about who support Trump do not fit that mold. In fact, I have never met or even actually seen in person a single person who fits the mold you described. Where are all these white supremacists? Are you aware that there is nothing more racist than abortion. More African American babies are killed in abortion than white babies. Planned Parenthood was literally founded to decrease “the negro population”.
So would you be pro abortion under any circumstances?
I can’t think one. Feel free to come up with some extreme, strange hypothetical to challenge me on that, but in doing so, also please keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of abortions are not due to rape/incest/life of the mother. In fact, each of those makes up less than one percent of abortions. This leaves 99% of abortions performed for reasons other than all those 15 year olds needing an abortion from being raped by their uncles that for some reason always comes up from the pro aborts. So, let’s at least start by being honest about the whole thing. If you are pro abortion and think it ok to kill a human life in the womb, because that human life is not convenient right now, then at least own that position.

User avatar
Inquirer
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #43

Post by Inquirer »

Jose Fly wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:09 pm
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:23 pm I simply brought a much more insidious example of this into the discussion
None of what you posted had anything to do with the recent SCOTUS decisions.
to put the silliness about the coach praying into perspective.
It's not just that they ruled in favor of the coach. As I explained, it's that in doing so they overturned Lemon v Kurtzman and the Lemon Test that resulted, and replaced it with a standard that's basically a pathway towards government promotion of Christianity, but not any other religions. That's going to have implications far beyond the Kennedy case.
But I guess you'd be fine with government's promoting atheism!

User avatar
Inquirer
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #44

Post by Inquirer »

RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:31 pm [Replying to Inquirer in post #40]
Societies can enact rights irrespective of whether abortion is sanctioned or not.
Obviously. History reveals this. Societies can also enact rights irrespective of whether slavery is sanctioned. My point was it is illogical to do so. There is a disconnect there.

I’m really not sure pro aborts have any idea how illogical their bodily autonomy argument is when we are talking about two bodies?
All rights are arbitrary.
I don’t think anyone actually believes that. We certainly act and live on a daily basis to the contrary.
Well perhaps I did over-generalize, but most of those I've meet or seen or read who support Trump (some even still claiming he won the election) do fit that mold.
Isn’t that interesting? Most of the people I’ve met, seen, or read about who support Trump do not fit that mold. In fact, I have never met or even actually seen in person a single person who fits the mold you described. Where are all these white supremacists?
Plenty live a few miles from me, you can tell easily because they have flags hoisted above their houses saying "F**k Biden" and other endearing terms.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:31 pm Are you aware that there is nothing more racist than abortion. More African American babies are killed in abortion than white babies. Planned Parenthood was literally founded to decrease “the negro population”.
I have no idea how true that is, do you have any reference material?
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:31 pm
So would you be pro abortion under any circumstances?
I can’t think one. Feel free to come up with some extreme, strange hypothetical to challenge me on that, but in doing so, also please keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of abortions are not due to rape/incest/life of the mother. In fact, each of those makes up less than one percent of abortions. This leaves 99% of abortions performed for reasons other than all those 15 year olds needing an abortion from being raped by their uncles that for some reason always comes up from the pro aborts. So, let’s at least start by being honest about the whole thing. If you are pro abortion and think it ok to kill a human life in the womb, because that human life is not convenient right now, then at least own that position.
Very well. I am of the opinion that it doesn't actually matter any more than any other kind of avoidable death over which many people don't fuss. Most people favor abortion so on the basis of democracy it seems legitimate.

If we outlawed cars and driving we'd save 43,000 lives a year or insane gun ownership we'd save 45,000 lives, and so on, one man's meat is another man's poison.

I consider myself a Christian too and as a rational educated Christian I must take a philosophical approach to such questions, questions of morality.

If we leave God/Bible out of it (I won't explain here why the Bible specifically stands out) then there is no absolute right/wrong, there are several threads underway here about this very theme.

So without some absolute definition of good/bad how can we argue the case on moral grounds? we can't. All we can do is each of us define our own personal morality and push for that against others who may have a different morality.

Scripturally the Bible and especially the NT say zero about abortion, it isn't mentioned once so hardly seems to have been on the minds of people at that time, look at Judaism, abortion isn't regarded as anything special.

My gripe is primarily with vocal militant "Christians" who make a huge fuss over abortion yet are comparatively silent on infanticide, particularly the bombing of foreign nations where vast numbers of babies and children die because of our weapons and policies, policies that often have material benefits to us back here.

These militant Christians are often rather nationalistic and firm supporters of our military escapades where vast numbers are killed, today there are hundreds of deaths and serious injuries to young children in Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq and so on due to unexploded munitions and it is tiny children who are the victims, do these kids have a right to life? why argue that they must be born only to then argue that it doesn't matter if they are maimed by the time they are four years old?

The anti abortion fanatics are selective, they care about avoidable deaths but only a specific kind of death impacting a particular age group, that's hypocrisy plain and simple.

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1569
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #45

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to Inquirer in post #44]
Plenty live a few miles from me, you can tell easily because they have flags hoisted above their houses saying "F**k Biden" and other endearing terms.
While ‘F*ck Biden’ might be a classless immature flag, I have no idea how it translates to White Supremacy. And I can assure you, I have heard ‘F*ck Trump’ way more often than I’ve heard ‘F*ck Biden’.
RightReason wrote: ↑Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:31 pmAre you aware that there is nothing more racist than abortion. More African American babies are killed in abortion than white babies. Planned Parenthood was literally founded to decrease “the negro population”.

I have no idea how true that is, do you have any reference material?
TRAGIC: Black women abort at almost four times the rate of white women
https://www.liveaction.org/news/black-w ... ate-white/

These numbers reveal how abortion is disproportionately targeting the Black community.

Since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in 1973, abortion has killed an estimated 20 million black babies — more than the entire black population of 1960.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... -s-in-1960

Although black Americans comprise 13.4% of the U.S. population, they accounted for 36.0% of the abortions in 2015, which was almost identical to the percentage of abortions (36.9%) that year among white Americans, who make up 76.6% of the population.


The report also showed that the abortion rate among black people (25.1) was significantly higher than that of white people (6.8). Abortion rate, according to the CDC, describes the number of abortions in a certain racial or ethnic group per 1,000 women in that same group.

In addition, the abortion ratio, or the number of abortions per 1,000 live births within a given racial or ethnic group, was much higher among black women (390) than white women (111).

In some areas of the United States, the percentage of black women who had abortions in 2015 was noticeably, and disproportionately, larger than the percentage of white women who did.

In Georgia, for example, where blacks make up 32.2% of the population and whites make up 60.8%, black women had 62.4% of abortions while whites only had 24.7%.

In New York City in 2015, more black children were aborted than were born alive.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/em ... -abortions


Planned Parenthood finally admits that its founder was a horrific bigot
https://nypost.com/2020/07/22/planned-p ... fic-bigot/

Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America. 78% of their clinics are in minority communities. Blacks make up 12% of the population, but 35% of the abortions in America. Are we being targeted? Isn't that genocide? We are the only minority in America that is on the decline in population. If the current trend continues, by 2038 the black vote will be insignificant. Did you know that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a devout racist who created the Negro Project designed to sterilize unknowing black women and others she deemed as undesirables of society? The founder of Planned Parenthood said, "Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated." Is her vision being fulfilled today?

http://www.blackgenocide.org/planned.html

Remove statues of Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood founder tied to eugenics and racism
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 480192002/


Very well. I am of the opinion that it doesn't actually matter any more than any other kind of avoidable death over which many people don't fuss. Most people favor abortion so on the basis of democracy it seems legitimate.
The ‘most people favor abortion’ isn’t quite accurate.
Poll: 75 percent of adults want restrictions on abortion
https://www.americamagazine.org/politic ... s-abortion

New Poll: Most Americans Support Abortion Restrictions
https://news.yahoo.com/poll-most-americ ... 44024.html

As for thinking abortion equivalent to any other kind of avoidable death, I don’t see the logic.

A person might not be able to avoid being killed by a serial killer, but we should all expect to be able to avoid being killed by our mothers.
If we outlawed cars and driving we'd save 43,000 lives a year or insane gun ownership we'd save 45,000 lives, and so on, one man's meat is another man's poison.
But car crashes are accidents. Abortion is purposeful direct killing. Also, we do outlaw driving drunk and speeding/reckless driving. Your argument is inconsistent.

I consider myself a Christian too and as a rational educated Christian I must take a philosophical approach to such questions, questions of morality.


If we leave God/Bible out of it (I won't explain here why the Bible specifically stands out) then there is no absolute right/wrong, there are several threads underway here about this very theme.
I couldn’t disagree with you more. Your entire premise is self defeating.
John: There is no absolute right/wrong?
Joe: Is that absolutely right?

One can’t claim I am right in claiming there is no such thing as right.

All men can know right/wrong and we live and act with this in mind all the time.

So without some absolute definition of good/bad how can we argue the case on moral grounds? we can't. All we can do is each of us define our own personal morality and push for that against others who may have a different morality.
Nope. See above. We all appeal to an external standard of right/wrong. It’s how/why we all value friendship and loyalty but know that rape is wrong.
Scripturally the Bible and especially the NT say zero about abortion
Not exactly true. Also, Christianity is not based on sola scriptura. Jesus founded a Church. We didn’t get the Bible until years later, which was given to us by the Church. For a Christian, both Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the Church) are our authority. And the Church is clear in her teaching regarding the immorality of abortion.
look at Judaism, abortion isn't regarded as anything special.
This isn’t exactly accurate either. Orthodox Judaism is anti-abortion.

My gripe is primarily with vocal militant "Christians" who make a huge fuss over abortion yet are comparatively silent on infanticide, particularly the bombing of foreign nations where vast numbers of babies and children die because of our weapons and policies, policies that often have material benefits to us back here.
I don’t know very many Christians who are silent on infanticide, but if they are, yes that would be wrong too.

These militant Christians are often rather nationalistic and firm supporters of our military escapades where vast numbers are killed, today there are hundreds of deaths and serious injuries to young children in Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq and so on due to unexploded munitions and it is tiny children who are the victims, do these kids have a right to life? why argue that they must be born only to then argue that it doesn't matter if they are maimed by the time they are four years old?

The anti abortion fanatics are selective, they care about avoidable deaths but only a specific kind of death impacting a particular age group, that's hypocrisy plain and simple.
I think this is a repeated talking point with little evidence. Not sure I see the ‘either/or’ that you do. I also think the argument that pro-lifers don’t do anything to help the mother or baby after the baby is born is unfounded. A quick Google search can show all the programs and organizations that help mom’s and babies. All of those arguments of hypocrisy are just attempts to justify the unjustifiable position of pro abortion.

User avatar
historia
Prodigy
Posts: 2603
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 6:41 pm
Has thanked: 221 times
Been thanked: 320 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #46

Post by historia »

Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:07 am
historia wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:30 pm
Inquirer wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:45 am
Yes but it must be acknowledged that these are all extra Biblical sources and express opinions rather than inspired Christian doctrine . . . i.e. this literature has no authority.
No, the Church Fathers absolutely have authority within Christianity.
One must be very careful here
One must also be mindful of the fact that we are now discussing a tangent of a tangent, leading us further away from the main topic of the thread. So allow me to address your questions here with an eye toward getting us back to your first post.
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:07 am
But how do we decide what is authoritative and what is not, when reading this literature?
If by "we" you mean you and me, then the answer is we don't.

It's not up to you and me to decide whether the Church Fathers are authoritative or not. For our purposes, it is enough simply to acknowledge the fact that, aside from some Protestants in the modern period, Christians have historically considered the Fathers authoritative.
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:07 am
So you accept the Phoenix tale as authoritative? Please explain.
Again, what I accept is irrelevant. The Church, on the other hand, has historically seen the consensus patrum (the consensus of the Fathers) as authoritative, and a witness to sacred Tradition, which is equal to Scripture in authority.

As we can see above, there is a clear consensus among the Fathers that abortion is murder. There is no such consensus regarding the phoenix, which Clement is just using as an allegory of the Resurrection anyway.

Your initial question was, at any rate, an historical (rather than a theological) one. The Fathers provide us with historical evidence of what the early Christian community believed, regardless of whether you personally agree with them or not.

You may still have a question about whether this would have necessarily reflected the beliefs of Jesus and his very earliest followers. But the fact that there is a clear and vociferous objection to abortion among some of our earliest Christian sources (some of which predate even the latter books of the New Testament) suggest this was a widely held view in the primitive Christian community.

User avatar
Inquirer
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #47

Post by Inquirer »

RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm [Replying to Inquirer in post #44]
Plenty live a few miles from me, you can tell easily because they have flags hoisted above their houses saying "F**k Biden" and other endearing terms.
While ‘F*ck Biden’ might be a classless immature flag, I have no idea how it translates to White Supremacy. And I can assure you, I have heard ‘F*ck Trump’ way more often than I’ve heard ‘F*ck Biden’.
Yet you'll be very hard pressed to see a flag or bumper sticker disparaging Trump in that way, people don't want to risk being shot.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm
RightReason wrote: ↑Tue Jun 28, 2022 3:31 pmAre you aware that there is nothing more racist than abortion. More African American babies are killed in abortion than white babies. Planned Parenthood was literally founded to decrease “the negro population”.

I have no idea how true that is, do you have any reference material?
TRAGIC: Black women abort at almost four times the rate of white women
https://www.liveaction.org/news/black-w ... ate-white/

These numbers reveal how abortion is disproportionately targeting the Black community.

Since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in 1973, abortion has killed an estimated 20 million black babies — more than the entire black population of 1960.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... -s-in-1960

Although black Americans comprise 13.4% of the U.S. population, they accounted for 36.0% of the abortions in 2015, which was almost identical to the percentage of abortions (36.9%) that year among white Americans, who make up 76.6% of the population.


The report also showed that the abortion rate among black people (25.1) was significantly higher than that of white people (6.8). Abortion rate, according to the CDC, describes the number of abortions in a certain racial or ethnic group per 1,000 women in that same group.

In addition, the abortion ratio, or the number of abortions per 1,000 live births within a given racial or ethnic group, was much higher among black women (390) than white women (111).

In some areas of the United States, the percentage of black women who had abortions in 2015 was noticeably, and disproportionately, larger than the percentage of white women who did.

In Georgia, for example, where blacks make up 32.2% of the population and whites make up 60.8%, black women had 62.4% of abortions while whites only had 24.7%.

In New York City in 2015, more black children were aborted than were born alive.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/em ... -abortions


Planned Parenthood finally admits that its founder was a horrific bigot
https://nypost.com/2020/07/22/planned-p ... fic-bigot/

Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America. 78% of their clinics are in minority communities. Blacks make up 12% of the population, but 35% of the abortions in America. Are we being targeted? Isn't that genocide? We are the only minority in America that is on the decline in population. If the current trend continues, by 2038 the black vote will be insignificant. Did you know that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a devout racist who created the Negro Project designed to sterilize unknowing black women and others she deemed as undesirables of society? The founder of Planned Parenthood said, "Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated." Is her vision being fulfilled today?

http://www.blackgenocide.org/planned.html

Remove statues of Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood founder tied to eugenics and racism
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 480192002/


Very well. I am of the opinion that it doesn't actually matter any more than any other kind of avoidable death over which many people don't fuss. Most people favor abortion so on the basis of democracy it seems legitimate.
The ‘most people favor abortion’ isn’t quite accurate.
Poll: 75 percent of adults want restrictions on abortion
https://www.americamagazine.org/politic ... s-abortion

New Poll: Most Americans Support Abortion Restrictions
https://news.yahoo.com/poll-most-americ ... 44024.html
That's a lot of material, thanks for sharing it, I will be reading through this when I get some time.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm As for thinking abortion equivalent to any other kind of avoidable death, I don’t see the logic.

A person might not be able to avoid being killed by a serial killer, but we should all expect to be able to avoid being killed by our mothers.
And expect not to be bombed in our homes or kindergartens or hospitals by other people's mothers.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm
If we outlawed cars and driving we'd save 43,000 lives a year or insane gun ownership we'd save 45,000 lives, and so on, one man's meat is another man's poison.
But car crashes are accidents. Abortion is purposeful direct killing. Also, we do outlaw driving drunk and speeding/reckless driving. Your argument is inconsistent.
Car crashes are rarely "accidents" just as pregnancies are rarely accidents. The fact is we are all willing for lives to be lost for the pursuit of certain goals. If one cared about the children killed in car crashes or reckless use of guns then one would take immediate steps to eliminate cars and guns. One would protest vocally in the streets about the tragic loss of life arising from pursuit of selfish aims.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm
I consider myself a Christian too and as a rational educated Christian I must take a philosophical approach to such questions, questions of morality.

If we leave God/Bible out of it (I won't explain here why the Bible specifically stands out) then there is no absolute right/wrong, there are several threads underway here about this very theme.
I couldn’t disagree with you more. Your entire premise is self defeating.
John: There is no absolute right/wrong?
Joe: Is that absolutely right?

One can’t claim I am right in claiming there is no such thing as right.

All men can know right/wrong and we live and act with this in mind all the time.
You are conflating "right" with "true" above. Each of us has our own view of what is right and wrong, it is always relative, there is not absolute definition other than one defined or enforced by humans - unless we consider God.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm
So without some absolute definition of good/bad how can we argue the case on moral grounds? we can't. All we can do is each of us define our own personal morality and push for that against others who may have a different morality.
Nope. See above. We all appeal to an external standard of right/wrong. It’s how/why we all value friendship and loyalty but know that rape is wrong.
So therefore - by your own reasoning - there must be an external standard being represented by those who advocate abortion. Also "we" do not know that rape is wrong, most rapists do not regard it as wrong at all.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm
Scripturally the Bible and especially the NT say zero about abortion
Not exactly true. Also, Christianity is not based on sola scriptura. Jesus founded a Church. We didn’t get the Bible until years later, which was given to us by the Church. For a Christian, both Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the Church) are our authority. And the Church is clear in her teaching regarding the immorality of abortion.
look at Judaism, abortion isn't regarded as anything special.
This isn’t exactly accurate either. Orthodox Judaism is anti-abortion.
I disagree, consider:
Wikipedia wrote:In Judaism, views on abortion draw primarily upon the legal and ethical teachings of the Hebrew Bible, the Talmud, the case-by-case decisions of responsa, and other rabbinic literature. While all major Jewish religious movements allow (or even encourage) abortion in order to save the life or health of a pregnant woman, authorities differ on when and whether it is permitted in other cases.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm
My gripe is primarily with vocal militant "Christians" who make a huge fuss over abortion yet are comparatively silent on infanticide, particularly the bombing of foreign nations where vast numbers of babies and children die because of our weapons and policies, policies that often have material benefits to us back here.
I don’t know very many Christians who are silent on infanticide, but if they are, yes that would be wrong too.
They are silent, compare the protests about abortion compared to the protests about babies dying in Yemen from Western weapons that are supplied to the Saudis, nothing, these deaths do not matter to the militant Christians. They care about only one specific means of killing the young, the rest they don't care about or protest about.
RightReason wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 8:08 pm
These militant Christians are often rather nationalistic and firm supporters of our military escapades where vast numbers are killed, today there are hundreds of deaths and serious injuries to young children in Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq and so on due to unexploded munitions and it is tiny children who are the victims, do these kids have a right to life? why argue that they must be born only to then argue that it doesn't matter if they are maimed by the time they are four years old?

The anti abortion fanatics are selective, they care about avoidable deaths but only a specific kind of death impacting a particular age group, that's hypocrisy plain and simple.
I think this is a repeated talking point with little evidence. Not sure I see the ‘either/or’ that you do. I also think the argument that pro-lifers don’t do anything to help the mother or baby after the baby is born is unfounded. A quick Google search can show all the programs and organizations that help mom’s and babies. All of those arguments of hypocrisy are just attempts to justify the unjustifiable position of pro abortion.
Abortion is justified by the material benefits it produces for the pregnant woman, just as deaths by our weapons overseas produces benefits for political and industrial beneficiaries.

Being outraged by the former yet indifferent to the latter is quite simply, hypocrisy.

User avatar
Jose Fly
Guru
Posts: 1462
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
Location: Out west somewhere
Has thanked: 337 times
Been thanked: 906 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #48

Post by Jose Fly »

Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 5:59 pm
Jose Fly wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:09 pm
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:23 pm I simply brought a much more insidious example of this into the discussion
None of what you posted had anything to do with the recent SCOTUS decisions.
to put the silliness about the coach praying into perspective.
It's not just that they ruled in favor of the coach. As I explained, it's that in doing so they overturned Lemon v Kurtzman and the Lemon Test that resulted, and replaced it with a standard that's basically a pathway towards government promotion of Christianity, but not any other religions. That's going to have implications far beyond the Kennedy case.
But I guess you'd be fine with government's promoting atheism!
Why would you think that?
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.

User avatar
Inquirer
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #49

Post by Inquirer »

historia wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 11:02 pm
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:07 am
historia wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 8:30 pm
Inquirer wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 11:45 am
Yes but it must be acknowledged that these are all extra Biblical sources and express opinions rather than inspired Christian doctrine . . . i.e. this literature has no authority.
No, the Church Fathers absolutely have authority within Christianity.
One must be very careful here
One must also be mindful of the fact that we are now discussing a tangent of a tangent, leading us further away from the main topic of the thread. So allow me to address your questions here with an eye toward getting us back to your first post.
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:07 am
But how do we decide what is authoritative and what is not, when reading this literature?
If by "we" you mean you and me, then the answer is we don't.

It's not up to you and me to decide whether the Church Fathers are authoritative or not. For our purposes, it is enough simply to acknowledge the fact that, aside from some Protestants in the modern period, Christians have historically considered the Fathers authoritative.
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:07 am
So you accept the Phoenix tale as authoritative? Please explain.
Again, what I accept is irrelevant. The Church, on the other hand, has historically seen the consensus patrum (the consensus of the Fathers) as authoritative, and a witness to sacred Tradition, which is equal to Scripture in authority.

As we can see above, there is a clear consensus among the Fathers that abortion is murder. There is no such consensus regarding the phoenix, which Clement is just using as an allegory of the Resurrection anyway.

Your initial question was, at any rate, an historical (rather than a theological) one. The Fathers provide us with historical evidence of what the early Christian community believed, regardless of whether you personally agree with them or not.

You may still have a question about whether this would have necessarily reflected the beliefs of Jesus and his very earliest followers. But the fact that there is a clear and vociferous objection to abortion among some of our earliest Christian sources (some of which predate even the latter books of the New Testament) suggest this was a widely held view in the primitive Christian community.
The Didache also instructs Christians to pray the Lord's prayer three times a day, do you know of many Christians that actually regard that as necessary? Is it a sin to not do this? If this represents sacred tradition why has it been ignored?
Last edited by Inquirer on Wed Jun 29, 2022 12:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Inquirer
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Roe v. Wade Overturned June 24, 2022

Post #50

Post by Inquirer »

Jose Fly wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 12:16 pm
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 5:59 pm
Jose Fly wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 4:09 pm
Inquirer wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 1:23 pm I simply brought a much more insidious example of this into the discussion
None of what you posted had anything to do with the recent SCOTUS decisions.
to put the silliness about the coach praying into perspective.
It's not just that they ruled in favor of the coach. As I explained, it's that in doing so they overturned Lemon v Kurtzman and the Lemon Test that resulted, and replaced it with a standard that's basically a pathway towards government promotion of Christianity, but not any other religions. That's going to have implications far beyond the Kennedy case.
But I guess you'd be fine with government's promoting atheism!
Why would you think that?
Because you've never expressed disapproval over the promotion of atheism, not that I can recall anyway.

Post Reply