Pro-life or Pro-choice?

[Ifur]

It has do with having sanity between mind and body dichotomy among other things, where trinity also deal with SENSES and consciousness.

As an archetype of protagonist, can anyone in history measure to the guy behind the Athanasian Creed?

Athanasius the Apostolic, was the 20th bishop of Alexandria (as Athanasius I). His intermittent episcopacy spanned 45 years (c. 8 June 328 – 2 May 373), of which over 17 encompassed five exiles, when he was replaced on the order of four different Roman emperors. Athanasius was a Christian theologian, a Church Father, the chief defender of Trinitarianism against Arianism, and a noted Egyptian leader of the fourth century.

Exiled by FOUR Roman emperors?

 

[Infjente]

Ehm, stay on topic?

What Hos is really saying @Ifur : Sit down

 

[Deleted member 16771]

Ehm, stay on topic?

What Hos is really saying @Ifur : Sit down

I wouldn't ever say that

Edit: Was an oversight not to comment on revival of Gothic architecture as something positive. Not only is this a dead European culture and language originating in parts of Scandinavia and related to perhaps other cultures with similar names. The only thing from the Gothic language that has survived is a translation of the bible. Just don't, just stop arguing that point. And we still don't know who the Huns where, perhaps they were from Mongolia? Nobody knows, it's that dark.

For added hilarity, a cornerstone in freemasonry is these gothic texts likely written by madmen talking about Loke and creation. Or well, "gothic" is alluded to all over the place for them, but still; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_Bible suspected to have been written by someone following Arianism, which was banned in central Europe as it was the Shield of Trinity that won that argument, which involves head librarians of Alexandria.

I think this essentually decimated the Gothic.

Yeah, except I was referring to Gothic architecture, which has practically nothing to do with the language

The twelfth century saw the transition from Romanesque to Gothic architecture... it's just an example of the cultural innovations of the 'twelfth century renaissance' and a point against your classification of it being a 'dark age'.

To bring things back on topic, you made a point that Church teaching on abortion is hypocritical because women used to throw newborns in the Tiber in the twelfth century, which was a 'dark age' according to you. I merely wanted to point out that nobody considers it a dark age now (far from it), and that Church teaching was always consistent on abortion so the claim that the their teaching is hypocritical is baseless.

Now, I'm not defending one position or the other (though I'm European so I'm just pro-choice by default since the debate doesn't really exist here), just wanted to dip in to offer some clarifications where I have the expertise to do so. I happen to know some stuff about Church doctrine, so I'm here for that essentially.

 

[Ifur]

To bring things back on topic, you made a point that Church teaching on abortion is hypocritical because women used to throw newborns in the Tiber in the twelfth century, which was a 'dark age' according to you. I merely wanted to point out that nobody considers it a dark age now (far from it), and that Church teaching was always consistent on abortion so the claim that the their teaching is hypocritical is baseless.

According to which nations historians, and members of what church? So Germany is largely on the Arianism side of things, with Nietzsche and his complaints about the words has lost it's inherent meaning with a culture desperately searching for wealth, richest and a golden age.

The past few centuries with German romanticism, we are witnessing enlighenment in Germany currently? FYI, Germany was never really impacted by the Scottish enlighenment in partiular, or the French.

"Europe must hold together, we are one, them others are a threat, Europe must lead with their high moral standards." This doesn't remind one of Arianism ideology at all, and don't be confused with Aryan, just forget that even exists here -- as this has to do with philosophy, theology, language and culture -- not extremists attitudes and preservationists, some notions and and ideas can rear it's ugly head in subtle and larger contexts.

But in order to anchor this in the context of language mainly, names for things and agreement over fundamental concepts and structure. Just think about the history of German language here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_German_languages

There is a dissying array of developments.

 

[Infjente]

According to which nations historians, and members of what church? So Germany is largely on the Arianism side of things, with Nietzsche and his complaints about the words has lost it's inherent meaning with a culture desperately searching for wealth, richest and a golden age.

The past few centuries with German romanticism, we are witnessing enlighenment in Germany currently? FYI, Germany was never really impacted by the Scottish enlighenment in partiular, or the French.

"Europe must hold together, we are one, them others are a threat, Europe must lead with their high moral standards." This doesn't remind one of Arianism ideology at all, and don't be confused with Aryan, just forget that even exists here -- as this has to do with philosophy, theology, language and culture -- not extremists attitudes and preservationists, some notions and and ideas can rear it's ugly head in subtle and larger contexts.

But in order to anchor this in the context of language mainly, names for things and agreement over fundamental concepts and structure. Just think about the history of German language here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_German_languages

There is a dissying array of developments.

To bring things back on topic

= For å komme tilbake til temaet

 

[Truth Eternity]

Are you sure? Scandinavian power waned after the end of the Viking Age, but I'm not sure how you could describe it as a 'dark age' more generally.

You and Ifur's convo is most definitely a very INTJ thing to have. Was dying of laughter (on the inside of course, this is the internet) while reading this on an INTJ thread.

Thought this was the "What's your opinion on INTJs" thread. So please disregard my last statement.

 

[Krypton]

I started off pro life, moved to mostly pro-choice, and am starting to move back to pro-life again. Largely the change has been the result of changing definitions of life, and a hypothetical someone introduced me to about a coma patient.

That said, it does sit with me the wrong way to jail women for it, so I think it'd be good to have universal healthcare-provided vasectomies and/or tubal litigations for people so they can just...not have to worry about it.

 

[Pin]

As an archetype of protagonist, can anyone in history measure to the guy behind the Athanasian Creed?



Exiled by FOUR Roman emperors?

The institution of the church is certainly one to be involved with, its longevity is so impressive. Imagine how glorious it is to be the Bishop of Rome.

 

[Ifur]

The institution of the church is certainly one to be involved with, its longevity is so impressive. Imagine how glorious it is to be the Bishop of Rome.

Certainly, the inhabitants of Alexoandria were likely impressied by Rome rather than the acts of this person after several thousand years under Egypt.

 

[SpecialEdition]

Pro Choice.
Maybe it's because I live in a country where abortion is legal I've grown up knowing that women had a choice to abort pregnancies and that it was always accepted as a good thing. We have prolife groups here of course but it's not woven into our politics or media or anything like that.

It disturbs me that people feel they have some kind of right to speak on what someone else does with their body and their life. If I ended up pregnant and was forced to have a child I feel that I would very seriously want to kill myself. I have never wanted to be a mother. Never. So this idea that I would be forced into being one by law makes me sick. If a pro lifer wanted to give me a hard time about it they can fund my post partum care, therapy, nanny services, etc.

Telling someone they must have a child is just as bad as denying someone else the right to have one if they want one.

 

[ZcM4xzkjgzCjytBc]

I'm for both bro life and bro choice

 

[Truth Eternity]

I'm neither because of this:

The problem is that 90% of both pro lifers and pro choicers actually want the same thing, but don't communicate it properly.
Both of them agree that women can get an abortion if their life is in the line, they were raped, or the baby will be born messed up and live a very short life.
For the most part, neither side agrees that women can get an abortion just because they can.
The miscommunication stems from this:
Pro Choicers - They think Pro Lifers want to regulate women's pregnancies and bad abortion outright , taking away women's right. They also have the false idea that pro lifers are all Christian Conservatives who are heavily right winged, which is entirely incorrect.
Pro Lifers - They believe that Pro Choicers want to to abort children any time they don't feel like having a child, regardless of reason or morality. They believe Pro Choicers want to abort a baby if they "accidentally" got pregnant or if they are financially handicapped, don't feel like having a child but don't care about preventing pregnancy, don't want mommy and daddy to find out, and other nonsensical reasons to kill a baby.

Here's the thing, though: Both Pro Lifers and Pro Choicers want women to have the ability to have an abortion for SUFFICIENT REASONS (i.e the ones stated earlier), and don't want any law that has to do with child birth to exist.
Let me end off by saying this: Financial issues are NO reason to abort a child. If they were, me, my brother, and my sister wouldn't be alive. My sister is from different parents, so her and me+my brother's birth parents' financial issues are different, but they are still financial issues.
In fact, adoption wouldn't exist if people were to abort babies during to financial issues.
If you have financial issues, you put your child up for adoption. There is almost no paperwork for you to fill out (all you do is sign your name for consent), as the adopting family fills out most of the paperwork. You also have a financial incentive to adopt a child rather than abort them, as the adopting family is responsible for any bills and charges.
Side note: Paperwork is no excuse to choose abortion over adoption. It's literally saying, "This is too much stress and writing so I'll just kill my perfectly healthy child instead."

Of course, this excludes the 5% of people who don't fall into these: The selfish bastards in Congress who want to keep the "old ways," and the psychotic bitches who actually feel like them carrying the baby is a valid excuse for an abortion.
A fetus, upon entering existence, has a human soul. Term shouldn't even be an argument.
Both sides need to talk it out with one another respectfully.

 

[Truth Eternity]

Pro Choice.
Maybe it's because I live in a country where abortion is legal I've grown up knowing that women had a choice to abort pregnancies and that it was always accepted as a good thing. We have prolife groups here of course but it's not woven into our politics or media or anything like that.

It disturbs me that people feel they have some kind of right to speak on what someone else does with their body and their life. If I ended up pregnant and was forced to have a child I feel that I would very seriously want to kill myself. I have never wanted to be a mother. Never. So this idea that I would be forced into being one by law makes me sick. If a pro lifer wanted to give me a hard time about it they can fund my post partum care, therapy, nanny services, etc.

Telling someone they must have a child is just as bad as denying someone else the right to have one if they want one.

The problem is you know well how to avoid pregnancy, and if you so choose to have sex without any sort of protection (condoms, birth control, etc.,) it is your fault and you are accountable for the baby.
It is NOT your body, it is the child's body.
Telling you that you shouldn't abort a child is the exact same scenario as telling someone not to kill another human being.
Those are facts and morality. I can tell you what you should do with another life, in fact, if the law wasn't so corrupt and trashy, they law should be able to as well. You are handling another life, and you knew the risks of sex before deciding to ignore them. I know it sucks that this is something only women have to deal with, but that is more excuse for killing a life.

 

[SpecialEdition]

The problem is you know well how to avoid pregnancy, and if you so choose to have sex without any sort of protection (condoms, birth control, etc.,) it is your fault and you are accountable for the baby.
It is NOT your body, it is the child's body.
Telling you that you shouldn't abort a child is the exact same scenario as telling someone not to kill another human being.
Those are facts and morality. I can tell you what you should do with another life, in fact, if the law wasn't so corrupt and trashy, they law should be able to as well. You are handling another life, and you knew the risks of sex before deciding to ignore them. I know it sucks that this is something only women have to deal with, but that is more excuse for killing a life.

Yeah. I don't think it's a life until it grows far enough along that it can live outside of the womb. It's a sperm and an egg that are hanging out in the uterus and growing like a tumour until it decides to form into something baby like that might be a human down the line.

If you believe that it's a human the second the egg and the sperm connect and I don't, I don't think it's possible that anything we could say to each other would be all that productive.

 

[acd]

I'm neither because of this:

The problem is that 90% of both pro lifers and pro choicers actually want the same thing, but don't communicate it properly.
Both of them agree that women can get an abortion if their life is in the line, they were raped, or the baby will be born messed up and live a very short life.
For the most part, neither side agrees that women can get an abortion just because they can.
The miscommunication stems from this:
Pro Choicers - They think Pro Lifers want to regulate women's pregnancies and bad abortion outright , taking away women's right. They also have the false idea that pro lifers are all Christian Conservatives who are heavily right winged, which is entirely incorrect.
Pro Lifers - They believe that Pro Choicers want to to abort children any time they don't feel like having a child, regardless of reason or morality. They believe Pro Choicers want to abort a baby if they "accidentally" got pregnant or if they are financially handicapped, don't feel like having a child but don't care about preventing pregnancy, don't want mommy and daddy to find out, and other nonsensical reasons to kill a baby.

Here's the thing, though: Both Pro Lifers and Pro Choicers want women to have the ability to have an abortion for SUFFICIENT REASONS (i.e the ones stated earlier), and don't want any law that has to do with child birth to exist.
Let me end off by saying this: Financial issues are NO reason to abort a child. If they were, me, my brother, and my sister wouldn't be alive. My sister is from different parents, so her and me+my brother's birth parents' financial issues are different, but they are still financial issues.
In fact, adoption wouldn't exist if people were to abort babies during to financial issues.
If you have financial issues, you put your child up for adoption. There is almost no paperwork for you to fill out (all you do is sign your name for consent), as the adopting family fills out most of the paperwork. You also have a financial incentive to adopt a child rather than abort them, as the adopting family is responsible for any bills and charges.
Side note: Paperwork is no excuse to choose abortion over adoption. It's literally saying, "This is too much stress and writing so I'll just kill my perfectly healthy child instead."

Of course, this excludes the 5% of people who don't fall into these: The selfish bastards in Congress who want to keep the "old ways," and the psychotic bitches who actually feel like them carrying the baby is a valid excuse for an abortion.
A fetus, upon entering existence, has a human soul. Term shouldn't even be an argument.
Both sides need to talk it out with one another respectfully.

Nah I'm pro life and think if a woman just doesn't want to carry a pregnancy to term for whatever reason she shouldn't be forced to do so.

 

[Truth Eternity]

Yeah. I don't think it's a life until it grows far enough along that it can live outside of the womb. It's a sperm and an egg that are hanging out in the uterus and growing like a tumour until it decides to form into something baby like that might be a human down the line.

If you believe that it's a human the second the egg and the sperm connect and I don't, I don't think it's possible that anything we could say to each other would be all that productive.

Unfortunately, your last statement is probably correct.
But I can assure you, once a fetus begins development, it has a human soul. You don't have to believe me, but it is true nonetheless.

 

[SpecialEdition]

Unfortunately, your last statement is probably correct.
But I can assure you, once a fetus begins development, it has a human soul. You don't have to believe me, but it is true nonetheless.

It's true to you and I think that's a fine belief for you to have.

 

[Truth Eternity]

Nah I'm pro life and think if a woman just doesn't want to carry a pregnancy to term for whatever reason she shouldn't be forced to do so. I personally may not agree that abortion is the moral or correct thing to do just because you don't want to be pregnant or can't afford a child.... But I respect that other women can make their own choices regarding their bodies. If a woman wants to abort because she can't afford a child and doesn't want to carry a pregnancy to term it should not be anyone elses business.

And those are your beliefs. My difference comes from your contradicting statements:
A. I personally may not agree that abortion is the moral or correct thing to do

B. If a woman wants to abort because she can't afford a child and doesn't want to carry a pregnancy to term it should not be anyone elses business.

But those are my beliefs, as I follow morality.
I also believe this shouldn't even be a discussion. Killing a baby is murder, and there is absolutely nothing controversial about that.
This is the same as arguing if murder is moral because, "We don't know, they could have wanted to be killed."
There are obvious exceptions for abortion as I previously stated, but other than those, it is immoral, evil, and flat out wrong.

It is stupid and outright silly that abortion has become a matter of belief. It is not beliefs, it is immoral and evil. But for the sake of harmony, I will respect others "beliefs," as I truly do respect where they are coming from. I am not speaking from myself, I'm speaking in the place of an unbiased outsider looking in, and seeing what is factually correct and factually incorrect.
When we are discussing lives it is not a matter of belief.

 

[acd]

And those are your beliefs. My difference comes from your contradicting statements:
A. I personally may not agree that abortion is the moral or correct thing to do

B. If a woman wants to abort because she can't afford a child and doesn't want to carry a pregnancy to term it should not be anyone elses business.

But those are my beliefs, as I follow morality.
I also believe this shouldn't even be a discussion. Killing a baby is murder, and there is absolutely nothing controversial about that.
This is the same as arguing if murder is moral because, "We don't know, they could have wanted to be killed."
There are obvious exceptions for abortion ad I previously stated, but other than those, it is immoral, evil, and flat out wrong.

I can separate my beliefs from someone else's. I don't think my personal beliefs should dictate some one else's choices.

Abortion is not infanticide.

 

[Peppermint]

@Truth Eternity do you know what psychotic means?