# Under Attack! Being pro-life in a blue state



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

I am feeling as if war has been declared on me. So far it has only been online attacks but that could change. I have been reading the chatter and it seems church's will be targets of protest. They plan on burning the Eucharist and disrupting masses. Security is becoming very important to me. I have cameras that need to be installed and the church has cameras already. I am a member of the Knights of Columbus so I am a target. Also the local pregnancy center we support can be a target too. I recently changed my passwords to be more secure. I have had my google account hacked because of my political beliefs before they changed all my YouTube comments after I made them. I can't stay silent or self-censor my conscience wouldn't let me.


Does anyone have any ideas on how to fight this?
Do you feel this way too?


----------



## Jarine88 (Apr 2, 2020)

Keep up the fight, brother. This is a spiritual battle. Pray, pray, pray. We cannot let the enemy win. Our God is greater than anything they can throw at us.


----------



## Underrock (12 mo ago)

A comment on this volatile topic: I'd like to believe no one is PRO abortion, but many are pro CHOICE as well as NO CHOICE. I am not a woman and will never be faced with making THAT decision; Therefore, (I feel) governing laws should provide strict guidelines for women (not men) to have options open to them when having to make a choice.


----------



## Jarine88 (Apr 2, 2020)

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, it does not outlaw abortion. It only passes the decision to legalize, limit or prohibit abortion back to the States and the people in those States. 

And there are people who are very pro abortion. Check this out:









 VinnDogg Radio USA🎙️🙏🇺🇲🇮🇱✝️💙 on Instagram: "#Repost from @latinoswithtrump This fight for LIFE is purely a spiritual battle. Those who are for abortion are either ignorant or very spiritually bankrupt people. They need Jesus, they don’t know their worth. The devil is working overtime right now. 😔 Pray 🤲 In video is @sister_cindy …it’s scary everyone cheered as she said that (she’s a pro-lifer, showing how crazy abortionists sound) 🎞🎥Repost via @emma_mitchem #VinnDoggradio"


VinnDogg Radio USA🎙️🙏🇺🇲🇮🇱✝️💙 shared a post on Instagram: "#Repost from @latinoswithtrump This fight for LIFE is purely a spiritual battle. Those who are for abortion are either ignorant or very spiritually bankrupt people. They need Jesus, they don’t know their worth. The devil is working...




www.instagram.com


----------



## Underrock (12 mo ago)

Jarine88 said:


> If Roe v. Wade is overturned, it does not outlaw abortion. It only passes the decision to legalize, limit or prohibit abortion back to the States and the people in those States.
> 
> And there are people who are very pro abortion. Check this out:
> 
> ...


----------



## Underrock (12 mo ago)

Thank you Jarine88, and please excuse my ignorance about Roe v Wade.


----------



## KellyDude (11 mo ago)

Alex Jones says if you're attacked, it's because you are over the target. That is a badge of honor. Stay strong!

Re: abortion- it's not about statues, flags, collusion, racism, LGBTlmnop etc- it's keeping conservatives on the ropes so they don't attack.
And it's working....


----------



## wraithofroncollins (11 mo ago)

Mr.penguin said:


> Does anyone have any ideas on how to fight this?


Make shirts that say "I don't kill babies" and guard your church with a guns... Ultimately, you have a right to self-defense. Even in Commiefornia you can appeal til you hit Federal Court and bring up Beard v US and a few other SCOTUS cases.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Underrock said:


> A comment on this volatile topic: I'd like to believe no one is PRO abortion, but many are pro CHOICE as well as NO CHOICE. I am not a woman and will never be faced with making THAT decision; Therefore, (I feel) governing laws should provide strict guidelines for women (not men) to have options open to them when having to make a choice.


It's fictional to think of it as a "decision" one must make. The decision was made long before the pregnancy was confirmed. A man and a woman made a decision together.
If women have options open to them, men should too. That developing baby is just as much the man's as it is the woman's.
The reality of equality hurts sometimes.


----------



## WolfBrother (Mar 15, 2016)

Kauboy said:


> It's fictional to think of it as a "decision" one must make. The decision was made long before the pregnancy was confirmed. A man and a woman made a decision together.
> If women have options open to them, men should too. That developing baby is just as much the man's as it is the woman's.
> The reality of equality hurts sometimes.


OK - opinions are like lower posterior body parts. Most everyone has one and sometimes they stink.
OK - having noted that the following is my opinion.

_A man and a woman made a decision together._
They may have only been poking fun and wasn't expecting to be taken serious about it. 

_If women have options open to them, men should too. _
I think up until ejaculation the man has lots of options. After that point, his decision becomes a roll of the dice and his options decrease dramatically. His decision was to do or do not, if do he cedes a lot of control to the woman.

_That developing baby is just as much the man's as it is the woman's._
Yes and no, his decision to do has him ceding lots of control to the woman.

I'm holding men to a specific standard. You make it, you pay for it without a lot of say about it until birth. Then the man either Cowboy's Up and becomes a Dad to the best of his ability and as allowed by prevailing law or he's only a male not a man.


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

Mr.penguin said:


> I am feeling as if war has been declared on me. So far it has only been online attacks but that could change. I have been reading the chatter and it seems church's will be targets of protest. They plan on burning the Eucharist and disrupting masses. Security is becoming very important to me. I have cameras that need to be installed and the church has cameras already. I am a member of the Knights of Columbus so I am a target. Also the local pregnancy center we support can be a target too. I recently changed my passwords to be more secure. I have had my google account hacked because of my political beliefs before they changed all my YouTube comments after I made them. I can't stay silent or self-censor my conscience wouldn't let me.
> 
> 
> Does anyone have any ideas on how to fight this?
> Do you feel this way too?


Don't be afraid. The absolute worst that could happen is also the best to your honor in heaven; that you'd be martyred defending Our Lord on the Altar. 

I don't know which state you're living and and the laws are all different in terms of what weapons if any you can and can not carry. 

Since you're a member of the Knights of Columbus, I'd suggest you have a meeting with your pastor and any interested service men, vets and police officers, etc. Have a plan to deal with these vile creatures who want to disrupt the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The creatures need to be escorted out hopefully without too much fuss. Don't make them "victims" if you can possible help it. They love being victims. 

Taylor Marshall suggested the old ladies in the congregation could be armed with vials of holy water. Give the feminists the old asperges on there way out. lol.

It's very important that there be individuals at every Mass who have the priest's back.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

WolfBrother said:


> _A man and a woman made a decision together._
> They may have only been poking fun and wasn't expecting to be taken serious about it.
> 
> _If women have options open to them, men should too. _
> ...


If you engage in the ONLY act that leads to pregnancy, it's not a gamble to say it could lead to pregnancy. You should not engage in it if you don't expect the known result. Self-control literally saves lives.

Your conjecture concerning a man's ejaculation supposes the above point was ignored. If the above point is ignored by both parties, they have both made the decision. The consequence is already underway.
If we imagine that additional decisions are up in the air to end the human life being created, those decisions must be available to both parties. Equality.

No control is ceded. This supposes men and women are not equal.
The baby does not exist without both parties. It is, and should legally be considered, equally owned by both parents by default.
Whatever options available to one should be available to the other. The current law, allowing a mother to unilaterally decide to kill the child, is immoral and disregards the father's opinion.
Fair is fair. If the woman has this option, so too should the man. If that sounds barbaric, that's because IT IS, regardless of who makes the choice.

I'm holding all parties to a specific standard. If you engage in sex, you must accept the consequences, just like every other decision you make in you life.


----------



## wraithofroncollins (11 mo ago)

WolfBrother said:


> I'm holding men to a specific standard.  You make it, you pay for it without a lot of say about it until birth. Then the man either Cowboy's Up and becomes a Dad to the best of his ability and as allowed by prevailing law or he's only a male not a man.


And I will hold a woman to similar standard, she can either make him were a Jimmy Cap or not. Here is the ultimate problem, you have sex, you create a life and now have to be responsible for it. Killing the baby is killing the baby, doesn't matter if it is abortion or, a woodchipper.

Thats why it takes two to make a baby, I can understand health issues and so on but... Lets be real, as a man, I'd (a) hate any woman who aborted my child and (b) would sue her for emotional damages to ensure she faced some kind of punishment for it. There is no excuse for murder, plain and simple.


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

I apologize to the moderators for making this thread as it might get out of control. Please everyone remember the site guidelines before posting. Also remember that it's ok to hate someone's opinion but not ok to hate the person personally.


----------



## One Shot (Oct 25, 2021)

Mr.penguin said:


> I apologize to the moderators for making this thread as it might get out of control. Please everyone remember the site guidelines before posting. Also remember that it's ok to hate someone's opinion but not ok to hate the person personally.


It won't get out of hand, we have good mods here.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

I believe that people (both men and women) should take personal responsibility for their own choices. People have options to prevent unwanted pregnancies, such as abstinence, birth control, condoms, etc. If pregnancy occurs even after using available options to prevent pregnancy (which is unlikely but possible), people also have the option to use the morning after pill / plan B or Queen Anne's Lace to end a pregnancy (preferrably the day after, but at least within 8 weeks of pregnancy, before pain receptors begin to form). I believe that the only acceptable reason for abortion after 8 weeks, is if it saves the life of the mother ... which would be rare, but possible ... in which case it would be a life saving medical procedure. If a woman is raped, and she is unable to access available options to end the pregnancy within 8 weeks, it is not the pregnant woman or baby's fault, but I believe that abortion would in such a case be murder. Everyone knows that incest is likely to result in medical problems for a baby that is born of incest ... but abortion in this case, unless the woman is raped, would still be murder.

My body my choice works fine for making a choice only for your own body (such as whether or not to get the covid-19 'vaccine'), but abortion concerns not just the body of a pregnant woman, but also the body of an unborn child that lives within her body.

The lame excuse that if abortion isn't legal, women will just do it illegally (with a coat hanger or whatever), which could cost them their lives ... lame. It is her choice to or not to do something so stupid, and if she does, it is no one's fault but her own. This is like saying 'if you break up with me, I'll kill myself, and it will be your fault'. Maybe people should hand out free condoms and birth control pills instead of paying for and handing out free needles and crack pipes.

I also believe that because it takes both man and woman to cause pregnancy, both the man and woman who caused a pregnancy should have equal say in what happens to their (not just her) unborn child.

I do not believe that any person owns any other person, but both mothers and fathers should take personal responsibility for their children, until their children become adults ... or give up their children to be adopted by someone else who will.

If pregnant women are unwilling to protect their unborn children from being murdered, I see nothing wrong with others (including individual states) stepping in to do it for them.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

The incest case probably sounds a bit confusing ... I mean, the cause of incest would be irresponsibility, unless due to rape. To be a bit more specific about this one, it may depend on whether or not it is known that the baby would die during or shortly after pregnancy, or if the baby (after being born) would suffer until he / she dies, or depend on others for survival for his / her entire life ... this one may be a bit of a gray area ...


----------



## Jarine88 (Apr 2, 2020)

The rape and incest arguments are ruses. They are such a small percentage of the abortions that they get lost in the standard deviations.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

Jarine88 said:


> The rape and incest arguments are ruses. They are such a small percentage of the abortions that they get lost in the standard deviations.


I agree ... possible, but unlikely.

A vasectomy or tube tying are also options, for people who intend to have sex, but do not intend to ever have children. It isn't guaranteed to prevent pregnancy, but the chances of causing a pregnancy in this case, would be slim to none.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Mr.penguin said:


> I apologize to the moderators for making this thread as it might get out of control. Please everyone remember the site guidelines before posting. Also remember that it's ok to hate someone's opinion but not ok to hate the person personally.


Healthy debate should ruffle feathers. It's why we debate at all. We want to express opinions and facts that support our view, and listen to those that support another's view.
Contention is built into the system. But it can remain cordial and should always end with mutual respect. Most debates aren't won during the argument, but in the hearts and minds of the participants well after the discussion has ended.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

My first pregnancy was with twins, but I didn't know it. I knew I was pregnant and wanted to be, but didn't know I was pregnant with two babies. About half way through the pregnancy, one of the twins died. Again, I didn't know. I have O- blood type, which can cause my body to treat a baby with another blood type as an infection or foreign object ... which can cause my body to kill the unborn child. I didn't know that at the time either. I think that is what happened, but don't know for sure. I don't know what gender or blood type the baby who died had. The other was a girl with O+ blood type. I was also pregnant for 11 months.

Looking back, I think it would have been better for me, and maybe for the baby that lived, to have had the deceased baby removed from within my womb during pregnancy, than to finish the pregnancy, give birth to one twin, and then the dead one ... that was pretty shocking for me, to say the least. In this case however, my body did the aborting. If the baby would have been and stayed healthy for the whole pregnancy, I would not have chosen to abort.

My second pregnancy was a girl with O- blood type. That pregnancy lasted 9 months.

My oldest daughter has had one son. My second daughter has had two children, and I don't think either of them has O- blood type, but she was given the Rhogam shot during each pregnancy, to prevent her body from aborting either baby due to their blood type.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

CC Pereira said:


> I also believe that because it takes both man and woman to cause pregnancy, both the man and woman who caused a pregnancy should have equal say in what happens to their (not just her) unborn child.
> 
> I do not believe that any person owns any other person, but both mothers and fathers should take personal responsibility for their children, until their children become adults ... or give up their children to be adopted by someone else who will.


Our society has become so passive with the idea of sex that pregnancy is looked upon as an unintended consequence of the pleasure-seeking experience, and not a direct result.
Along with drug use, it is the height of selfishness to think that sex is only intended for one's own gratification and nothing more. But that is what it's become.
We must correct society's view of this. We must bring sanctity back to the sexual relationship between a man and a woman.
It is my personal view that God gave humans the pleasure of sex as a gift to cherish between a married couple. This won't sit well with some, but I consider it a horrible blaspheme against God to engage in sex outside of marriage. The common retort is "humans will be humans and like to do it". But this would suggest we are no different from wild animals, incapable of restraining our urges. I reject that notion.

Preventatives exist for a reason, but we're becoming less and less focused on informing people about what sex is really for.
So they engage in it, thinking it's normal behavior to have a fling, and never consider the life-altering decision being made.
Pardon the imagery, but having sex should be as important a decision as buying a house with someone. There are expectations and there are consequences, and they have high potential to last a very long time.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

CC Pereira said:


> My first pregnancy was with twins, but I didn't know it. I knew I was pregnant and wanted to be, but didn't know I was pregnant with two babies. About half way through the pregnancy, one of the twins died. Again, I didn't know. I have O- blood type, which can cause my body to treat a baby with another blood type as an infection or foreign object ... which can cause my body to kill the unborn child. I didn't know that at the time either. I think that is what happened, but don't know for sure. I don't know what gender or blood type the baby who died had. The other was a girl with O+ blood type.
> 
> Looking back, I think it would have been better for me, and maybe for the baby that lived, to have had the deceased baby removed from within my womb during pregnancy, than to finish the pregnancy, give birth to one twin, and then the dead one ... that was pretty shocking for me, to say the least. In this case however, my body did the aborting. If the baby would have been and stayed healthy for the whole pregnancy, I would not have chosen to abort.


That must have been very tough.
Thank you for sharing. I hope you have made peace with this and can take solace in knowing you may meet your child again someday.


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

Annie said:


> I don't know which state you're living and and the laws are all different in terms of what weapons if any you can and can not carry.


Lets play a game. Name that State! No knife above 4 inches long can be concealed, BB guns are classed as fire arms, It is a misdemeanor to use a Taser on a person (unless you are police) , there is no open carry law, there is no stand your ground law. Guns must be locked in a safe at all times SEPERATE from the ammo. Hint it is in New England.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

Kauboy said:


> Our society has become so passive with the idea of sex that the consequence of pregnancy is looked upon as an unintended consequence of the pleasure-seeking experience, and not a direct result.
> Along with drug use, it is the height of selfishness to think that sex is only intended for one's own gratification and nothing more. But that is what it's become.
> We must correct society's view of this. We must bring sanctity back to the sexual relationship between a man and a woman.
> It is my personal view that God gave humans the pleasure of sex as a gift to cherish between a married couple. This won't sit well with some, but I consider it a horrible blaspheme against God to engage in sex outside of marriage. The common retort is "humans will be humans and like to do it". But this would suggest we are no different from wild animals, incapable of restraining our urges. I reject that notion.
> ...


I agree with most of this, but not with marriage first ... only because I have known so many people that get married, then move in together, then have sex, then have a baby/ies, then decide they don't like who they married, because they didn't know one another well enough to make such decisions. My husband and I did things really backwards. We had sex, then moved in together, then started a family, then after living together as a couple for 9 years and after having two children, then we got married ... and by then, we knew each other pretty well. We have been together now for 26 years this June, have two children, and three grandchildren. Not saying this is the way to go or not, but I think people should know each other really well before they get married, move in together, or start a family.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Mr.penguin said:


> Lets play a game. Name that State! No knife above 4 inches long can be concealed, BB guns are classed as fire arms, It is a misdemeanor to use a Taser on a person (unless you are police) , there is no open carry law, there is no stand your ground law. Guns must be locked in a safe at all times SEPERATE from the ammo. Hint it is in New England.


Jersey?


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

CC Pereira said:


> Not saying this is the way to go or not, but I think people should know each other really well before they get married, move in together, or start a family.


Completely agree.
My wife and I were engaged for 3 years before we got married, and dated for 2 before that.
Relationships need time to grow. If you get married before the new wears off, you're setting yourself up for failure.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

Kauboy said:


> That must have been very tough.
> Thank you for sharing. I hope you have made peace with this and can take solace in knowing you may meet your child again someday.


It was very tough. I gave birth the first time in a chair, which took 4 days ... in a place called 'Eagle's Nest' ... the second time I didn't even bother to get out of bed ... I just did it in bed. I did have some post partum depression for a few months after giving birth the first time (which to me, did not seem like depression at all, but more like ... animalistic cookooville ... like a fear that somehow it was my fault and I might not be a good enough mother, and maybe didn't deserve to be a mother because of it), and bled almost nonstop for 6 years thereafter ... but I have moved past that since. I have done the best I could, and I have probably made some mistakes along the way ... but I am okay, and very much love, admire, and appreciate the family I have.


----------



## Underrock (12 mo ago)

Dear Mr. Penguin,
Sometimes I innocently say something only to realize, too late, that I lit a fuse. Abortion rights is a VERY sensitive topic as are politics and religion. This topic includes politics AND religion. The reactions to your original post has caused me to think-before-posting a new topic that might have me thinking I didn't write a post... but stepped in it.


----------



## Jarine88 (Apr 2, 2020)

Underrock said:


> Dear Mr. Penguin,
> Sometimes I innocently say something only to realize, too late, that I lit a fuse. Abortion rights is a VERY sensitive topic as are politics and religion. This topic includes politics AND religion. The reactions to your original post has caused me to think-before-posting a new topic that might have me thinking I didn't write a post... but stepped in it.


While I cannot answer for Mr. Penguin, I did see your note back to me. I appreciate your response.


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

Kauboy said:


> Jersey?


Nope


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

Underrock, I wasn't expecting to start a discussion on abortion today when I started this topic. I don't have the energy to argue with anyone else after arguing with family on Facebook all day. I just came out as pro-life and I am being vocal about my opinions now for the first time and I am receiving some push back and all caps messages.


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

Mr.penguin said:


> Lets play a game. Name that State! No knife above 4 inches long can be concealed, BB guns are classed as fire arms, It is a misdemeanor to use a Taser on a person (unless you are police) , there is no open carry law, there is no stand your ground law. Guns must be locked in a safe at all times SEPERATE from the ammo. Hint it is in New England.


haha! This is FUN! Okay, it's not Vermont, New Hampshire nor Maine. It's gotta be Connecticut, Rhode Island and/or Taxachusetts. One of those three, correct?


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> Jersey?


Jersey's not New England. Yankees, yes. But New England, no. But you're right; is as much as from the description, it could've been Jersey.


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

CC Pereira said:


> My first pregnancy was with twins, but I didn't know it. I knew I was pregnant and wanted to be, but didn't know I was pregnant with two babies. About half way through the pregnancy, one of the twins died. Again, I didn't know. I have O- blood type, which can cause my body to treat a baby with another blood type as an infection or foreign object ... which can cause my body to kill the unborn child. I didn't know that at the time either. I think that is what happened, but don't know for sure. I don't know what gender or blood type the baby who died had. The other was a girl with O+ blood type. I was also pregnant for 11 months.
> 
> Looking back, I think it would have been better for me, and maybe for the baby that lived, to have had the deceased baby removed from within my womb during pregnancy, than to finish the pregnancy, give birth to one twin, and then the dead one ... that was pretty shocking for me, to say the least. In this case however, my body did the aborting. If the baby would have been and stayed healthy for the whole pregnancy, I would not have chosen to abort.
> 
> ...


Wow, that's really crazy. So sorry for that. I have o-blood, too. The first three were not a problem. The last two babies had jaundice, but nothing like what you went through.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

Annie said:


> Wow, that's really crazy. So sorry for that. I have o-blood, too. The first three were not a problem. The last two babies had jaundice, but nothing like what you went through.


The second pregnancy was much easier than the first. I didn't even know I was pregnant until about 6 months, didn't look pregnant until about 7 months, then had her 2 months later, and birth only took 2 days instead of 4. The girls have turned out great so far, and they are wonderful mothers to their children. Their dad and I can take _some_ credit, but much of the credit belongs to them.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

I suppose my overall point with sharing my experience, is to express how precious I believe that each life is, and how difficult it can be for some people to bring new life into the world.


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

Annie said:


> haha! This is FUN! Okay, it's not Vermont, New Hampshire nor Maine. It's gotta be Connecticut, Rhode Island and/or Taxachusetts. One of those three, correct?


Correct one of those three.


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

@Mr.penguin Kyrie eleison.


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention Annie. I spoke with my head priest and he told me to be on watch online for something like this I am going to call him now. VIVA JESUS


----------



## 46rkl (May 2, 2020)

So, my opinion is a bit outside the norm. As a biologist, I realize that an embryo is a far cry from a human child. As a man, I believe that a woman should be absolutely in charge of what she allows to grow within her body. I also believe that adoption is a far better choice than abortion but again, a woman should be the one to decide that. The government should have no say in this matter. I really don’t feel like debating this set of ideas, but it fits with my overall philosophy of government staying out of my personal life.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

46rkl said:


> So, my opinion is a bit outside the norm. As a biologist, I realize that an embryo is a far cry from a human child. As a man, I believe that a woman should be absolutely in charge of what she allows to grow within her body. I also believe that adoption is a far better choice than abortion but again, a woman should be the one to decide that. The government should have no say in this matter. I really don’t feel like debating this set of ideas, but it fits with my overall philosophy of government staying out of my personal life.


If you didn't feel like debating your ideas, why preface with credentials and then state them?

If it is the government's role to ensure the rights of life, liberty, and property(as all powers of a just government serve to do), then how can you pretend that the life of the human inside the mother is not due the same protection?
If a child's own mother won't protect its life, who will?


----------



## Daduate (May 13, 2021)

Ok… I really try to stay out of politics on any social media platform whatsoever. But here is something I would care to share. I feel I must express both of my points of view, mine and the God I serves. As a human being with no influence whatsoever from my beliefs here is how I feel. I am a father of 5 ( I am with my wife and all of our kids are with us under one roof.) Before I had children the biologist kauboy quoted above a views were pretty linear with mine. The moment I held my first child, everything changed. There is nothing more innocent, more perfect than a newborn child . I won’t get into nomenclature of when an embryo is a child but I know it damn sure resembles a baby at that 4 month ultrasound. I have a family member( non-nuclear) who is radically pro-life and some of the abortion procedures they shared with me actually took my breath away. The fact that as a society there is someone willing to do that to a developed child inside the mothers womb embarrasses me of humanity as a whole. As a man I do believe in morals and do feel anger towards the “dr’s” who took the Hippocratic oath and are willing to do these procedures. I know pregnancy can be terrifying and my heart does break for the Rape case scenario . I swear it does my heart breaks for those women as much as it does for the children. But people it’s a child. Regardless of conception, if that baby isn’t aborted it could come out , you could hold it , look into it’s eyes teach it , love it , raise it, and who knows. I hate to be brutally honest and if I’m banned from this platform so be it . But abortion is ide say about 10,000xs more likely to be used as a method of contraception than this rape scenario that is so quickly brought up by pro choice enthusiasts. I’m sorry it just is . I’ve been in the city’s man don’t tell me . Don’t sit from behind a computer screen in middle suburbia. Go into the city’s go by some of these clinics. Get to know some of the people who these PRO-CHOICE People claim to represent. ( who when I see demonstrating on the television are all white college kids) I’m not making this racial there is no race in my eyes for real I’ll tell you one thing socioeconomic status to me I see color. The wealth discrepancy in this country racially is disgusting. I’m white and Hispanic how dare you . Drive through a city of poverty man tell me what colors you see . Listen black and Hispanic people have the most values I’ve seen in a long time. Yea we may act a little different from white people at the dinner table, but in general , as a whole, we revere god . I bet our percentages of people believing in higher powers is 10xs that of Caucasian. And the Bible is clear on beliefs of abortion and we know that. A lot of abortions from minority is from poverty. For real . Scared people with nowhere to go no one to offer a hand. I’ve seen both sides of the equation my whole life . I will tell you man stop bleeding this money funding planned parenthood and help fix our cities! How does it take me , a nobody to say it. I know how a lot of people look down on minorities . Politicians raped minorities, if you deny that. I don’t even waste my breath on you. Suppression is real , gentrification is real. You know what the media makes it seem like all minorities are Democrats. Ha it just shows how out of touch they are . They share a lot of the same views we do on capitalism! They feel they just haven’t got a chance ! BEWARE THE POLITICIAN. Who actually does what he says and gives them one . 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

Thank you @Daduate for speaking your mind, I doubt anything will happen to you for doing so. Except maybe starting an argument in the comments. I am White and Hispanic too and I also find that Hispanics culturally are more spiritual than your average American. That being said I have been fortunate to belong to a diverse diocese with Poles, Ukrainians, Italians, French men, and Irish men as well as Hispanics. All of us praying to the same God. At one time in our history we were all segregated. Each race choosing between three different catholic churches. But now we are one body of Christ.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

46rkl said:


> So, my opinion is a bit outside the norm. As a biologist, I realize that an embryo is a far cry from a human child.


If that's the case and an embryo isn't considered a living being, then why is someone charged with murder if they kill a fetus?



https://vistacriminallaw.com/killing-a-fetus-in-california-crime-can-be-murder/







__





State Laws on Fetal Homicide and Penalty-enhancement for Crimes Against Pregnant Women






www.ncsl.org


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

The movement seems more “pro-birth” to me. “Pro-life” would seem to dictate a greater emphasis on education, health care, environmentalism, anti-war, etc. I don’t hear a lot of pro-lifers talking about how they are supporting these babies they’re “saving” after birth, during their “life”.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

If people weren't forced to pay for so many unnecessary things (such as multiple mansions, buttlers, maids, private jets, and private security guards for a single politician), we would have more than enough to go around, to pay for things that actually matter (such as finding good homes for children that are unwanted by their selfish, irresponsible, biological parents).


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

theprincipal said:


> I don’t hear a lot of pro-lifers talking about how they are supporting these babies they’re “saving” after birth, during their “life”.


That's probably because it isn't their responsibility. It's the responsibility of the people who created the baby.
I don't take responsibility for any other poor decisions they may make, why would I do so for this one?
It's a pretty simple stance...
"Don't kill innocent humans."
Or more simply, "pro-life".


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

theprincipal said:


> I don’t hear a lot of pro-lifers talking about how they are supporting these babies they’re “saving” after birth, during their “life”.


They don't have to. The feds take care of more and more of those each year. Last report I heard was pushing 70% of the population. Cradle to grave, food, housing, education, even clothing in many cases, the feds supply many needs. Granted that if more abortions are allowed, then that frees up the money for those crossing the border.


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> That's probably because it isn't their responsibility. It's the responsibility of the people who created the baby.
> I don't take responsibility for any other poor decisions they may make, why would I do so for this one?
> It's a pretty simple stance...
> "Don't kill innocent humans."
> Or more simply, "pro-life".


You’re proving my point. It seems to me that as soon as the fetus has completed it’s trip through the birth canal, the collective moral obligations for “life” from the “pro-life” movement evaporates and morphs into “personal responsibility”. Maybe “pro-fetal life” or “pro-birth” would be a little more accurate…. My point isn’t that anyone should take responsibility for others’ actions, but if they are “pro-life”, they should support more causes that enrich and support the living.


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

@theprincipal 
The only way to make a baby is by having sex. People have sex then are surprised when they get pregnant. They want all the fun of being an adult but none of the responsibility. This new American generation wants the government to take care of them and their children. But they forget that our government is "of the people for the people" if no one lifts a finger to contribute government will fail. Look at what policy's are popular here in the U.S.: spending money, borrowing money and reducing taxes all at the same time. It doesn't take an economist to figure out why the national debt is so high. 
I am sure these children will be taken care of and given food, shelter, and education. If not by the government then by Non-Government Organizations NGO's. It won't be the best there is to offer but these NGO's have a proven track record. That is why so many pro-life organizations support these NGO's.


----------



## Annie (Dec 5, 2015)

Mr.penguin said:


> Thank you for bringing this to my attention Annie. I spoke with my head priest and he told me to be on watch online for something like this I am going to call him now. VIVA JESUS


The Jews are receiving a lot of attacks these days. I understand they're coming up with protocols for their temples. We should do the same. So much hate in the world these days. It's sad.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

theprincipal said:


> You’re proving my point. It seems to me that as soon as the fetus has completed it’s trip through the birth canal, the collective moral obligations for “life” from the “pro-life” movement evaporates and morphs into “personal responsibility”. Maybe “pro-fetal life” or “pro-birth” would be a little more accurate…. My point isn’t that anyone should take responsibility for others’ actions, but if they are “pro-life”, they should support more causes that enrich and support the living.


Are you trying to make a semantics argument, or a moral one?
The purpose of the pro-life movement is, as stated, "don't kill innocent humans".
Argue semantics all you like if it makes you feel better. It doesn't change the movement's purpose.


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> Are you trying to make a semantics argument, or a moral one?
> The purpose of the pro-life movement is, as stated, "don't kill innocent humans".
> Argue semantics all you like if it makes you feel better. It doesn't change the movement's purpose.


In your terms, I would ask how the movement pushes their “don’t kill innocent humans” stance beyond being pro-birth.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

theprincipal said:


> In your terms, I would ask how the movement pushes their “don’t kill innocent humans” stance beyond being pro-birth.


Pro-life individuals simply seek to end the killing of innocent humans.

A pretty clear example of the pro-life doctrine was applied during the Terri Schaivo case.
That woman, through no indication of acceptance given by her, was executed via starvation while her own parents were kept out of her hospital room by guards stationed to ensure she received zero food or water.
There was national outcry at the notion that a husband could unilaterally control the life of his disabled wife, and that her own parents had no say.

I know you really want to twist this into a "society should pay" argument, and are attempting a logical argument correlation in order to get there, but it's a false premise.
The decision to engage in the only activity that can lead to pregnancy is a choice made by two people who bear FULL responsibility for the result.
Protecting the innocent life created _SHOULD_ be their primary focus. But when it is not, others step in to try to do so.
Protecting the life is separate and apart from bearing financial burden. Someone out there is willing to bear that burden on the parent's behalf via adoption. We only ask that the child, and those adoptive parents, be given that opportunity... and the innocent human to not be killed.


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> Pro-life individuals simply seek to end the killing of innocent humans.
> 
> A pretty clear example of the pro-life doctrine was applied during the Terri Schaivo case.
> That woman, through no indication of acceptance given by her, was executed via starvation while her own parents were kept out of her hospital room by guards stationed to ensure she received zero food or water.
> ...


I made no indication that financial burden should be shared. I simply stated that life extends beyond birth and that for the “pro-birth” group to be truly “pro-life”, they should fight for causes that are promoting life consistently.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

theprincipal said:


> I made no indication that financial burden should be shared. I simply stated that life extends beyond birth and that for the “pro-birth” group to be truly “pro-life”, they should fight for causes that are promoting life consistently.


And I gave an example.
If you can find other instances where innocent lives are being lost, and can find nobody opposing the action, I'd like to know about them.


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> And I gave an example.
> If you can find other instances where innocent lives are being lost, and can find nobody opposing the action, I'd like to know about them.


If you are indicating that the only cause/position that you can think of that saves lives and promotes life is being anti-abortion, then there is really no reason for us to converse.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

theprincipal said:


> If you are indicating that the only cause/position that you can think of that saves lives and promotes life is being anti-abortion, then there is really no reason for us to converse.


Nice try, but that isn't what I said.
You claim that pro-life people are only focused on births.
I asked you to provide any instance where innocent human lives are being lost *and there is no advocate group fighting against the atrocity*, and you cannot produce one.
Pro-life people speak out against senseless killings of innocent people all the time.


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> Nice try, but that isn't what I said.
> You claim that pro-life people are only focused on births.
> I asked you to provide any instance where innocent human lives are being lost *and there is no advocate group fighting against the atrocity*, and you cannot produce one.
> Pro-life people speak out against senseless killings of innocent people all the time.


Maybe we can start with the list of advocacy groups you are part of and go from there… or even the threads you comment on in which you speak against senseless killing.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

theprincipal said:


> Maybe we can start with the list of advocacy groups you are part of and go from there… or even the threads you comment on in which you speak against senseless killing.


We are discussing a topic. This will not devolve into the personal space.

You made a claim. Your claim was contested WITH support. A reply to the contestation is expected.
Support your claim or acquiesce.


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> We are discussing a topic. This will not devolve into the personal space.
> 
> You made a claim. Your claim was contested WITH support. A reply to the contestation is expected.
> Support your claim or acquiesce.


You did not contest my observation with credible evidence; Please show me the other causes that “save innocent lives” that the “pro-life” groups supports. Clearly “pro-life” is an “anti-abortion” group and not universal “anti-senseless killings” group. They are solely focused on the fetus. For evidence you can simply look up the definition of “pro-life” or the mission of any number of “pro-life” organizations…. “Pro-birth” in my opinion.


----------



## Underrock (12 mo ago)

In this corner is theprincipal, and the other corner is Kauboy: Will it be a knockout or draw? Either way, it's a damned fine and thoughtful discussion between two intelligent folks. I'm waiting to see how (if) it resolves.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

theprincipal said:


> You did not contest my observation with credible evidence


I gave you a specific case. Even the Catholic church came out in support of Terri, comparing their stance on her life as equal to their stance on unborn babies.
Pro-life is pro-life. You can play with semantics all you like.


theprincipal said:


> “Pro-birth” in my opinion.


'Nuff said.


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

Kauboy said:


> I gave you a specific case. Even the Catholic church came out in support of Terri, comparing their stance on her life as equal to their stance on unborn babies.
> Pro-life is pro-life. You can play with semantics all you like.
> 
> 'Nuff said.


The fallacy in your thinking is that we are not debating the position of the Catholic Church. We are clearly discussing the scope of “life” that the “pro-life” movement is “pro”. My point is that the “pro-life” movement is solely focused on the life of the fetus. For some reason you think that because other movements exist that protect lives, that expands the scope of the “pro-life” movement. I disagree. Falsely conflating the “pro-life” movement with other groups/causes, doesn’t contest my claim. Nice try.


----------



## WolfBrother (Mar 15, 2016)

theprincipal said:


> Maybe we can start with the list of advocacy groups you are part of and go from there… or even the threads you comment on in which you speak against senseless killing.


Your continuing niggling reminds me of an irritating ankle biting very small dog. 

Until you respond to the numerous requests for your sources why don’t you just shut the infierno up?


----------



## theprincipal (Mar 18, 2021)

WolfBrother said:


> Your continuing niggling reminds me of an irritating ankle biting very small dog.
> 
> Until you respond to the numerous requests for your sources why don’t you just shut the infierno up?


Kauboy is engaging in a typical straw man fallacy… asking me “to provide any instance where innocent human lives are being lost and there is no advocate group fighting against the atrocity”….. Yeah, I’m going to give sources for a claim that I didn’t make. 

That being said, your ad hominem attack is a bit bush league. I don’t think Kauboy needs you to pretend to be his daddy; he can take care of himself.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

@WolfBrother, @theprincipal, chill with the personal stuff. Stay on topic.

I've engaged in no straw-man argument.
You made a claim.
I provided a rebuttal that your claim does not fully encompass the entirety of the movement.
You asked for an example of the movement that extends passed birth.
I provided a specific example that clearly refuted your belief that pro-life is solely confined to births.
You ignored it and later claimed it to be without evidence. Since the case was nationally known and widely argued, the evidence is available and sound.
You persisted with "they should fight for causes that are promoting life consistently", which I already revealed to be the case, and provided the Catholic church as one such entity, being against the practice of euthanasia (link).
Again, you dismiss and persist without any substantive counterpoint being made. Just accusations against the general term "pro-life".

We can agree that there are specific organizations which are pro-life, and solely focus on the birth of babies.
But you made a generalization about a broad term, which is easy to defeat and has been.

If you wish to continue to argue your point, the onus is on you to prove that _all_ so-called "pro-life" movements are solely and completely confined to the realm of births.
Since I've already provided an argument on behalf of the Catholic church, this endeavor will be impossible. But you're free to try.

No straw man. But I do expect more effort than simple dismissal because you don't like the facts presented.

I will concede that the organizations which are specifically focused on births could be called "anti-abortion".
But you would have to make an extremely strong argument for why their opponents are not then rightly called "pro-abortion". Of the three(at minimum) humans involved in a pregnancy, two(or more) of them don't get any "choice", so that descriptor is an intellectual red herring.


----------



## Mr.penguin (9 mo ago)

@theprincipal the reason pro-life Christians are focused on abortion is because unlike other groups of people a fetus can't speak for themselves. Every other group can. You don't need to look far to find pro-life causes in other aspects of life. Every church has ministry's and many do good work everyday for years. As for what I am involved in look up catholic charity's and the knights of columbus. The problem is when a Christian supports a cause it is done in secret. When a person boasts about their charity work it is written: I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. *so that your giving may be in secret*. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

It is my understanding that if the Roe vs Wade case does get overturned, it simply allows the legality of abortion to be up to each state. If so, I think it is unlikely that all states will make it legal or illegal, or that all states would agree on the specifics. If a pregnant woman lives in a state where medically unnecessary abortions are illegal, she would still have the choice of going to another state where medically unnecessary abortions are legal. 

I have already expressed the details of my opinion about abortion, but I think one way to simplify this subject, would be to not only allow each state to make its own laws regarding abortion, but also to consider the medical opinion of OBGYNs and insurance companies. If for example, you have all 10 fingers and they all work as they are supposed to, but you want a surgeon to cut off a finger just for kicks (maybe you just don't like the way it looks), the surgeon (unless he / she makes a living from unnecessary surgeries, such as boob jobs, nose jobs, and liposuctions) would not agree to do it or refer the patient to someone else to do it, and the insurance company would not agree to pay for it. Likewise, if the OBGYN's opinion (not the opinion of an abortion clinic) and insurance companies are taken into account, if a pregnant woman wanted to get a medically unnecessary abortion, the OBGYN would not agree to do it or refer the patient to get it done by another, and the insurance company would not pay for it.


----------

