No communion for Obama supporters

[epchick]

Originally Posted by joliebelle

I'm just saying that since I'm pro-choice, to me there are other options than abortion. i.e keeping it, or putting it up for adoption.

That's not what "pro-choice" means though. The difference between pro-life and pro-choice is the latter believes that abortion should stay legalized (and the woman can chose to have an abortion).

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by epchick

The difference between pro-life and pro-choice is the latter believes that abortion should stay legalized

as another option. My church's authority does not extend beyond itself. I'm personally not allowed to even consider an abortion, but my concern is not those outside of the church. God will deal with them. The problem is that, legal or not, women will have abortions. So, do we care about the health of the mother who could ultimately confess what she's done and repent? Or do we let her die in a botched operation? (Not directed at you, in particular, epchick)

My bishop knows who I voted for and completely disagrees with my selection, but would not deny me communion. Now, if I told him I was planning on getting an abortion, we'd have a problem.

[SWTXBelle]

Logical fallacy alert - it is not either/or. The only two choices are NOT have an legal abortion, or die in a botched illegal one. Going back to the issue of choice - your hypothetical woman who CHOSES to have an illegal abortion has made a CHOICE.

People are always going to any number of immoral acts which are also illegal - you don't see many arguing that we should simply turn a blind eye to them legally and let God deal with them. The central issue is really quite simple - at what point does a baby become a baby, rather than a piece of tissue/fetus/embryo? I'm really tired of anti-abortionists being painted as somehow desiring to restrict freedom. Anti-abortionists believe that life begins at conception. If that is the case, destroying that innocent life is murder. I believe that most pro-abortion supporters do not believe that a fetus/embryo counts as a human (at least not for a certain period of time) and that therefore abortion is not the same as killing.

Both sides need to respect the idea that the other side has a different fundamental belief regarding the point at which life begins. That is where the debate should center, instead of the idea that anti-abortionists are somehow crazed fundamentalists who want to punish women, or that pro-abortion supporters are murderous immoral relativists. (climbing down off soap box)

[epchick]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Anti-abortionists believe that life begins at birth. If that is the case, destroying that innocent life is murder.

Don't anti-abortionists (aka "pro-life" ) believe life begins at conception which is why an abortion, at any stage, would be considered murder; and pro-abortionists (aka "pro-choice") believe life begins at birth, thus why an abortion wouldn't be considered murder?

[SWTXBelle]

Whoops - you're right, I misspoke. I'll go correct it.

eta - corrected. Life begins at CONCEPTION. Jeez . . .

[LttleMsPrEp]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Both sides need to respect the idea that the other side has a different fundamental belief regarding the point at which life begins. That is where the debate should center, instead of the idea that anti-abortionists are somehow crazed fundamentalists who want to punish women, or that pro-abortion supporters are murderous immoral relativists. (climbing down off soap box)

But isn't the debate in a way already centered there? For one to assert that abortion is wrong or that it's murder wouldn't one have to have a working definition of when life begins? Some say that life begins at gestation, others say it begins when vital organs begin to develop, and others (like myself) say that life begins when the fetus is able to survive on its own outside of the womb.

I think that both sides already understand that each has a different belief regarding the beginning of life I think the question is moreso which side has the "correct" definition.

[SWTXBelle]

LittlMs - I would argue that both sides attack the other not based on discussing the issue of when life begins, but on the sterotypes I mentioned before.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

you don't see many arguing that we should simply turn a blind eye to them legally and let God deal with them

Now that you bring it up, I think it's a bit ridiculous that we need laws telling people that rape and murder aren't so good. I realize we have to have some mutually agreed upon code which is why we have laws, but it makes laws no less ridiculous to me. And, God will deal with them.

[SWTXBelle]

Back to my point that both sides need to step away from the inflamed rhetoric.