Late-term abortionist killed
- Thread starter aristotle
- Start date
Turtle, that was NOT the point. Moral people use judgement to stay out of trouble. I was taught by my parents and in school to use "good judgement" in choosing my friends, my actions etc. That ability kept me from getting into trouble as many my age did. I could "judge" that a person was of bad character and stayed away from them. It is a needed skill.
Not to use judgement in your life is foolish. That leads to trouble for many. It is a silly and somewhat dangerous idea that is the foundation of an amoral sociaty. It has lead to people like Hitler and Stalin.
I will NOT lower my standards to become part of a sociaty that places more value on sleeze and matierial things than they do on living a moral life. The sleeze we see on a daily baisis is due to a lack of judgement.
Not to use judgement in your life is foolish. That leads to trouble for many. It is a silly and somewhat dangerous idea that is the foundation of an amoral sociaty. It has lead to people like Hitler and Stalin.
I will NOT lower my standards to become part of a sociaty that places more value on sleeze and matierial things than they do on living a moral life. The sleeze we see on a daily baisis is due to a lack of judgement.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
Killing the man was wrong period..I won't go into if he deserved it or not, thats not up to me..but one thing that i didn't see mentioned here was "barrys" part in this....not to hijack the post, but the current occupant of the whitehouse put himself in the middle of this on the evening it happened and then again the next day...most here will agree that barry is pro abortion so it comes as no surprise that he would release a statement about an abortion doctor getting killed.....he wasn't happy, which no one should have been, but a press release !?!? Then to further show his support for abortion doctors , he and eric holder the next day sent out U.S. Marshals to abortion clinics all over the country........hmmmmm i guess they are a "protected group now"...
Well i guess that while that is a bit over the top from my point of view, it gets even worse when on 6/2 a U.S. Military Recruiter and another soldier were both shot as they stood in uniform in front of a military recruiting office, with the recruiter being killed. No press release from barry, eric holder didn't send U.S. Marshals to Military recruiting offices all over the country (recruiters are not allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves) and here we are 6/8 and barry hasn't said a word to the press about this that i have seen......wonder if since the guy that they arrested for the shooting and killing is an american that converted to islam and is now a muslum and the shooting took place just before barry was to give his highest praise to the muslum world had anything to do with his not wanting to step on the toes of the muslums by denonancing this shooting and shooter....Guess we see where he stands a bit more clearly......or at least the fact that he feels the need to protect those that are performing abortions and not those that are recruiting for the U.S. military.............and he certainly doesn't want to offend the muslums just as he was apologizing to them for all of us americans and all of our ills towards them and praising them for all they they may have brought to the world.... lol a bit off the topic, but did you see barry in germany after his "chat" in cario!?!? He praised islam and then slammed germany ..guess he feels he doesn't need to make any friends in germany, much like he didn't feel the need to with britain and as he is with israel........
My apologies the the OP for the hijack , but i think it is kind of fitting along with the orginal post......
Well i guess that while that is a bit over the top from my point of view, it gets even worse when on 6/2 a U.S. Military Recruiter and another soldier were both shot as they stood in uniform in front of a military recruiting office, with the recruiter being killed. No press release from barry, eric holder didn't send U.S. Marshals to Military recruiting offices all over the country (recruiters are not allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves) and here we are 6/8 and barry hasn't said a word to the press about this that i have seen......wonder if since the guy that they arrested for the shooting and killing is an american that converted to islam and is now a muslum and the shooting took place just before barry was to give his highest praise to the muslum world had anything to do with his not wanting to step on the toes of the muslums by denonancing this shooting and shooter....Guess we see where he stands a bit more clearly......or at least the fact that he feels the need to protect those that are performing abortions and not those that are recruiting for the U.S. military.............and he certainly doesn't want to offend the muslums just as he was apologizing to them for all of us americans and all of our ills towards them and praising them for all they they may have brought to the world.... lol a bit off the topic, but did you see barry in germany after his "chat" in cario!?!? He praised islam and then slammed germany ..guess he feels he doesn't need to make any friends in germany, much like he didn't feel the need to with britain and as he is with israel........
My apologies the the OP for the hijack , but i think it is kind of fitting along with the orginal post......
Last edited:
There are three types of morality, and they are very distinctively different from each other. They are:
Descriptive Morals, Normative Morals, and Ethical Morals.
You are confusing the different types and are trying to put all of your morals into a single type. No offense intended, I promise, but this is exactly what many religious people do. Their religious morals (Descriptive Morals) are so strongly held that other types of morals are viewed through the same black and white lens, so that even judgment morals (Ethical Morals) are no longer a judgment call, but a very delineated right or wrong, i.e., if you don't agree with someone's judgment, then their judgment is wrong.
Descriptive Morality is that strict code of conduct that is the final authority of what constitutes right and wrong. Descriptive Morals are defined by society (laws), philosophy (experience and predictive outcomes), religion (various Commandments or other religious laws), and individual conscience (if the thought of doing something makes you nauseous or uncomfortable, like incest or cannibalism, there ya go). These are not objective morals, but are very subjective to their creation, and are non-negotiable to those who believe in the basis of what created and defined them.
Normative Morality is the type of morality that all rational people would agree on if given the same set of circumstances. These are the objective, normal morals that normal people encounter through their relatively normal lives, and the moral choice taken is the one that most people would also choose. For example, religious or atheist, most people can agree that murder is wrong, your background and belief system is irrelevant to this morality.
Ethical Morality is where moral judgment calls get made (largely, the kind that keep you out of trouble, IF you make the right call). This is where cause and effect are determined, and sometimes flip-flopped where you try and determine how a moral outcome can be achieved under a given set of circumstances (those "good judgments" in choosing what to do or who to become friends with that keep you out of trouble that you talked about). This is also where some parts of Normative Morality gets defined, using Normative Ethics, to determine which morals people obey and which ones are either no longer obeyed or no longer relevant (livin' in sin, sex out of wedlock, a wife disagreeing with her husband in public).
Ethical Morality shows that moral judgments like stealing, murder, lying, all can be agreed upon by most in a given set of circumstances, but not by all in another set of circumstances, as they are objective. These can include many, many things, but for our purposes here, they include abortion, capital punishment, wars of invasion which results in loss of life.
The problem comes when someone wants to take a firm hold on a Normative Morality, like abortion, and encase it in their own very subjective non-negotiable Descriptive Morality, and then force your non-negotiable morality onto others who aren't borne of the basis of the belief that made it non-negotiable in the first place, which is precisely what you and many anti-abortionists attempt to do.
If you want to make people believe the same way as you do about abortion, you must first make them believe in the same things that created the circumstances which created the non-negotiable morality in the first place. For example, if you're talking to a Jew who does not believe in Jesus, you're gonna have a tough time convincing him to embrace a moral decision that is based on the existence of Jesus. There is very little that you can point to in the New Testament that will force a Jew to change their moral thinking.
Your morals are your morals, but don't kid yourself into thinking that yours are the only morals worth having. Otherwise, you're not allowing people to make their own moral judgments, you're trying to make their moral judgments for them.
Judgements (moral decisions, I'm assuming you're talking about) are made every day by both the wise and the foolish. Seems to me that you're saying that moral judgments need to be made, but only if they are based on the morality that you agree with, only if they are the same moral judgments that you would make yourself.
What if I have a different morality about some things? Is my morality right, or wrong?
Your morals or someone else's?
Or a lack of moral guidance.
That is just what I find so weird. The people who tend to scream the loudest about the infringements of their rights also tend to scream the loudest about infringing the rights of others. It's incongruous. Can't have it both ways and eat it too eh.
No offence to anyone in particular here or anywhere, but it seems that the real issue is that some people just want to rule the world, decide what liberties will be allowed, and which won't, to whom it will apply and to whom it will not, and all the while, scream about freedom and rights. The study of humans is fascinating !
That is just what I find so weird. The people who tend to scream the loudest about the infringements of their rights also tend to scream the loudest about infringing the rights of others. It's incongruous. Can't have it both ways and eat it too eh.
No offence to anyone in particular here or anywhere, but it seems that the real issue is that some people just want to rule the world, decide what liberties will be allowed, and which won't, to whom it will apply and to whom it will not, and all the while, scream about freedom and rights. The study of humans is fascinating !
I have to go with you Pjjjjjjj.....It is between the woman and the unborn..it is a personal choice.....and it is their choice. Not yours, not mine.....she has to live with that decision not yours....
Does a pregnant girl lose her constitutional rights?
If you feel the right to represent the unborn than fine YOU raise it...afterall it is your responsibility isn't it....you made it such by taking over decision making for it....you care so much...you raise it.
Your so hypocritical....you scream and tell the government to get out of your life and not make decisions for you and then you want to make decisions for a complete stranger?
To add....perfect example..TeamC aka Linda...just made this quote concerning carrier specific forums and their justification....the same principle should be applied to abortion...
because it is none of your business and it is not your life...
Last edited:
I do NOT want to interfere with others liberty. I DO however believe that a moral socaity have the duty to protect innocent life. The condoning of killing of innocent life by a people speaks voluums to it's lack of morals, standards and it's almost total lack of respect for human life. What is next? Killing severly retarded people? It has been suggested by some very liberal college professors. The slope has been greased and it steepens with each step down.
Just to get the rules right here...
Abortion...rape, incest or the life of the mother...ie medical reasons...
NOT life style abortion, on demand, as a way of birth control.
And within the 1st Trimester...
Thank you. You just shot yourself in the foot and succinctly defined why you and anyone advocating abortion are wrong. You are wrong because what you said above is right. It is between the woman and the baby, their choice, and to be so that requires the baby being born and becoming capable of participating in the choice. Oh, and except for the world's two most perfect daughters I didn't make it so it isn't my responsibility actually. It is the responsibility of the male/female sperm/egg donors to either step up to the plate and convert from donors to parents or to give it up to a loving couple who choose to be parents.
pjjj, I fully believe in individual rights and government staying out of things as well as prohibiting abortion except in certain instances. That is because until birth that is the only mechanism available to protect the unborn.
That would be my choices for this. I do believe that in the case of rape and incest that the mental and emotional health of the mother is a stake.
There just is NO valid excuse these days to kill an innocent developing human being because you could not control youself. Like I said before, we knew WAY back when I was a kid what caused pregnacy AND how to prevent it. We are NOT wild animals. WE have a brain. That brain is more than capable of controlling ANY urge. Beyond that, in this day and age, if a person is SO weak minded that they are unable to control thier own body there are more than ample ways to prevent pregnacy, both chemical and mechanical.
Ok Joe we are good to go...Now to see how Leo chimes in....
Together we can save the world!!
Oh Nooo....You are not turning into a Gore-Ite are ya???*LOL*
OH NO!!! Un-like Gore I really CAN save the world!!! HEHEHE I bet some it here won't take this as a joke!! Ya think?
I bet some it here won't take this as a joke!! Ya think?
OK, so OVM you are saying that it's fine for the woman to decide for another individual the life they'll be allowed to live, or in this case not live, but when the decision to respect life is removed from her hands then it's not right?
It's the mother's decision since she's an adult and the baby isn't an adult yet with the ability/right to make decisions? Fine then. In that case it's ok and legal for the mother to choose to terminate the life of the minor child up until it's 18th birthday since it's a minor without options.
I don't mind the back and forth but my position is absolute (and correct). Except in the case of rape and incest, and maybe with absolute proof of severe genetic defects that preclude any sort of enjoyable life, abortion is wrong.
It's the mother's decision since she's an adult and the baby isn't an adult yet with the ability/right to make decisions? Fine then. In that case it's ok and legal for the mother to choose to terminate the life of the minor child up until it's 18th birthday since it's a minor without options.
I don't mind the back and forth but my position is absolute (and correct). Except in the case of rape and incest, and maybe with absolute proof of severe genetic defects that preclude any sort of enjoyable life, abortion is wrong.
jujubeans
OVM Project Manager
Just a reflection, gentlemen:
With the exception of Cheri, it's like it was back in the 60's...all the mores and condemnations of men...who don't have to raise that child and bear that child and cry for that child. I agree with abortion ONLY for the rape, incest and health of the mother, but not for a method of birth control.
This IS still a woman's issue, until you are the ones to bear the children...This is why we applauded Roe vs Wade back then...It put the control back in OUR hands.
With the exception of Cheri, it's like it was back in the 60's...all the mores and condemnations of men...who don't have to raise that child and bear that child and cry for that child. I agree with abortion ONLY for the rape, incest and health of the mother, but not for a method of birth control.
This IS still a woman's issue, until you are the ones to bear the children...This is why we applauded Roe vs Wade back then...It put the control back in OUR hands.
It is a HUMAN issue. Men and women are supposed to be partners, not competetors or enemies. Pro-creation takes two, when done the proper way, and the results are the responsibility of both. BOTH should take part in all discussions on the fate of the child, after all, it IS part of "MAN" as well. Just as much his child and responsibility as hers. We are designed to function together. Sorry if I am too 50's. I like my old fasioned ways. They work sooo much better than todays. Todays "anything goes" amoral socaity is NOT an improvement.