'abortion Like Holocaust'

This is certainly turning out to be a fascinating thread. I admit to being amazed that it is possible to hold an 'absolute' view on anything as emotive as the abortion debate.

This is a matter for the individual concerned and their own conscience - and a matter for those performing the operations.

I'm glad I never had to face the issue and can honestly say I have no idea what my decision may have been - it's one I certainly don't envy any woman having to make.
 
Expanding the topic geographically: it isn't the luxury of 'conscience' in millions of cases worldwide, Songsheet, though, is it? It's a matter of terribly poor, over-produced families not being able to feed a 10th or 15th child. Illegal abortions are performed every hour of every day and into the night in countries where there are predominantly large numbers of what are termed, in those countries, the peasant class. That's India, the Phillipines, and most of the urban South American countries. Their abortion totals make the UK's 200,000 (if that IS a true figure) look plating class.

The millionaire's daughter who Luke quotes as having four 'designer' abortions is one end of the spectrum, but the most common one is down to poverty, a culture in which it isn't 'manly' to don condoms, and a reliance on 'natural' methods which, naturally, are far from fail-safe.

I'm not saying that some Muslim girls don't get pregnant before they're married, since the less devout has its' share of the sexually-active. But I suspect I'd rather have one abort her foetus than be made to carry the baby to full term, then be stoned to death for fornication, which would be the family's right to demand to uphold its' 'honour'. Or the pregnant girl is sometimes just 'disappeared' (that's murdered to you and me) by her outraged family, with authorities turning a blind eye to what is sanctioned by Shari'ah Law.
 
I don't disagree with any of the above, Krizon !

The common factor between most countries with high birth rates and equally high illegal abortion rates are societies where religion and state matters are/have been mainly/historically controlled by men.
 
I see a Conservative candidate has been deselected it seems because the Catholic Herald did not like an article of his in the Spectator .

I thought we dissolved the monasteries for a reason !

The cardinal in my opinion should have resigned when it was found out he was shielding paedophile priests and giving them new jobs where they could offend again . He has no moral authority at all .
 
All religions, Songs, being homocentric, and the few women of note mentioned in any of the Big Three's holy books being portrayed as either whores or pious virgins or mothers, it's no wonder that the position of womanhood down the centuries has been promoted from the pulpit (don't forget its' position of power over communities) as either something to be vilified or to be placed on some unnaturally virtuous pedestal. I believe that is one of the reasons for the RC Church, through its' nuns, treating 'fallen' girls as little more than incipient whores, in a virgins-versus-the vile scenario.

Far from viewing the reasons behind abortion stats as something to be examined objectively, first in demographic terms, and then as individual cases, these criticisms are examples of the continuing religious vilification of the non-virgin, especially women who have not chosen, for whatever reason, to accept the sanctioned model of motherhood.

I think it is appalling that, globally, vast amounts of women seek terminations, many for repeat impregnations, as their only form of birth control, since they are denied any other (that is effective). When women (and their menfolk) are freed of the enduring shackles of dogma and its' attendant fear of Divine retribution for disobeying it, and are able to choose not whether to abort or not, but whether to become pregnant in the first place, the statistics will drop to tiny levels, families will be less poor and the desired children better fed and cared for, and perhaps, at last, the abandonment of tiny children to the mercies of the street - the truly evil result of such 'teachings' - will be the outcome.

Can't say any more about this - the whole issue reeks of the imposition of male-dominated, fear-mongering theocracy too much for my taste. While that continues, the abortions will go on, and on, and on. QED.
 
Originally posted by BrianH@Mar 28 2005, 06:55 PM
Well, I have no idea at jejquade's reason for starting the thread and of course we would all know his eminence's views. But what I object to is the mixing of religion with politics such as the cardinal's praising of Michael Howard. We've all seen what this has done elsewhere - and I'm referring particularly to the power of the religious right in the USA.
Click to expand...
Because abortion is an interesting topic to talk about? Thought that would of been self explantory???? Obviously not huh?????????????/ Blimey some peoples grasp of current affairs is attrocious!!!!!!!
 
Originally posted by solerina@Mar 28 2005, 10:11 PM
The only person who is qualified to make that decision is the prospective mother . So why should an embryo take precedence over someone's rights ? I can't see why . It its interesting that those who complain are male.
Click to expand...
I half agree, but i see and hear so many women get so venomous about other women who have abortions whatever the reasons. Perhaps they should concentrate on their own short comings before atacking other peoples. I also believe the mans opinion is just as important as the womans. My Fiancee would never be kept out of any decision. It would be 50/50
 
Originally posted by LUKE@Mar 28 2005, 11:38 PM
I agree with everything An Capall has said about this issue.When I lived in London I was shocked by the amount of convenience abortions I heard about.I knew a millionaires daughter who had four "terminations"-I find that very hard to justify.
Click to expand...
Thats totally different. People who use abortion as a form of contreception should never be allowed to have children until they have proven capable of looking after someone other than themselve
 
Religions don't cause problems in the world.

Man and his (and I use the masculine possessive guardedly) misinterpretation of religion has caused the problems.

Forgive me, jejquade, but I thought your reason for starting the thread was to mount an attack on the Cardinal and had nothing to do with the issue of abortion.

As for you and your fiancé - fiancée if you're engaged to another woman - having a 50/50 say in a decision...yeah, right, so long as it's what you want.
 
Man and his (and I use the masculine possessive guardedly) misinterpretation of religion has caused the problems
Click to expand...

Now that does surprise me coming from you, Mo!

After all, where did religion emanate from other than Man himself?

I can't accept the argument that your God somehow gave Man a divine set of guidelines - if you're arguing that particular brief, then the same would apply to all other forms of religion from that of the first Homo Sapiens 5000 years ago when drawing images on a cave face, through Egyptians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Druids, Buddhists, whatever - they would all equally claim some 'divine' law.

So whichever way you look at it, all religions are the result of a group of people (usually men) devising a set of guidelines to live within and by.

Man devising this construct called 'religion' has indeed caused most of this world's problems by his very insistence that his preferred moral (or, just as often, immoral) code is the one everyone else should abide by and thus intolerance was born.
 
It would be naive in the extreme to think that humans wouldn't find something else to fight about in the absence of religion. Neither of the 2 world wars were about religion.
 
It depends on one's beliefs, Songsheet...

True Christians believe their religion came directly from God, not from a man.
 
Religion was invented by conmen thousands of years ago to keep people in their place.

Those are the words of Harry Findlay, but I find myself in agreement.....even if my good Cathlic mother would disown me if she heard me say it :shy:
 
I would say that Marxism and Socialism are the religions of those who wish to prevent the evolutionary revolution from continuing.

There is no intellectual case for either of them.
 
I would disagree with your last statement there Terry - just because you don't agree with what is being said, it does not mean that the basis of thought which produced the idea stems from lack of intelligence.

It's a bit like saying that anyone who does not wish to see the gap growing, or at least being maintained, between say Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea and the rest of the league is stupid.
 
That isn't an intellectual argument Simmo. There is no comparison between Chelsea and the odd looking creature which supposedly crawled out of the sea in search of food.

If those creatures had been socialists they'd probably all have starved.
 
Originally posted by terry@Mar 30 2005, 12:46 PM
That isn't an intellectual argument Simmo. There is no comparison between Chelsea and the odd looking creature which supposedly crawled out of the sea in search of food.

If those creatures had been socialists they'd probably all have starved.
Click to expand...
Not quite Terry, they would have all eaten.

What did happen was that some of them were stronger/fitter than others and thus survived. Your suggestion that socialism somehow panders to those who are unfit is quite revolting at worst, and in line with Brian's suggestion, entirely at odds with the precept of christianity which some of us in this world are so fond of.

Give me your poor, I'll slaughter the little feckers cause they can't provide for themselves. That'll sort out the evolutionary process and teach those socialist blighters a lesson in to the bargain.

Without socialism in some form, you are simply left with a situation of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
 
Well that is plain nonsense Simmo. You should know better.

What annoys me is how some people decry religion whilst at the same time putting up socialism as a solution. I would imagine that one of the ways in which we became 'human' was when 'people' started helping out their fellow humans when they were in need. I don't think that this involved the group 'nationalising' all group property and telling the parents of children that they had to go and be taught in some tosspot group school where they ran around chucking rocks at Og the teacher.

I remain fully commited to helping my fellow man but equally vehement in my opposition to all things socialist.
 
Back
Top