The Real Pro-abortion Agenda

[j2k4]

Originally posted by 1234@8 January 2004 - 18:15

You mean you cannot answer my points? Blanket statements like that just show your lack of real arguments.

Okay-

Let us backtrack:

Could you recount these points you claim to have made?

Please do it simply, as in: Point 1...Point 2....etc.

If you will do this for me, I will answer them for you-I promise.

Try to keep things orderly; I will do the same.

Try also to leave extraneous thoughts, commentary and tone aside, please.

[bjford]

The Catholic church is one of the richest institutions known to man. If it wanted to it could open 100 hospitals in India tomorrow. However it doesn't, and Theresa didn't even feed the poor or tend to them very well. Her hospice was an utter disgrace and many catholic nurses have come out and said so. They arrived thinking they would be helping the people of India and came to realize it was just a place to get people to convert to Catholicism out of desperation. It was filthy and full of malnourished people. I attack Theresa not because she was catholic, but because she was a woman without human compassion who reveled in misery.

Your statement is ridiculous! The Missionaries of Charity are not affiliated with the Vatican, which has all the money. None of the orders in the Church are. The Missionaries of Charity were not founded by the Catholic Church, but by members of the Catholic Church. The Catholics in India make up less than 2% of the population, and yet they have the most hospitals all over India. Don’t come and tell me there are not enough hospitals in India- there are. However, since India is a confederacy instead of a federacy, every state has different laws on medicine, and so benefits that Americans get (such as Medicare) are not always available to Indians. Mother Theresa founded her organization in India, so the missionaries didn’t “arrive” in India, they began in India. Mother Theresa was working completely alone in the beginning, simply saving a few women. However, soon more and more women joined in until it became an organization. I’ve been working with the Missionaries of Charity since I was a teenager, and I can tell you that they do not at all pressure people to convert to Catholicism. However, their goal is to lead people to heaven by showing their good works. Is there anything wrong with that? Ghandi fasted to save the Indians, Mother Theresa founded the Missionaries to save souls. Nothing wrong with that.

Spare me the crap about poverty too, go take a look at the Vatican (or any other catholic establishment) and tell me they are short of cash.

The Catholic Church does have plenty of money, but we must remember it relies completely on donations, and that all of the money goes to Church programs.

Do you know why Ghandi fasted? He did it to stop the violence in India. He didn't do it to glorify himself (though I am sure he was not totally without ego) but to force his followers to renounce the use of violence. That is a worthy use of spirituality, not the counting of souls while disregarding their care.

That’s a logical fallacy. You’re saying Ghandi fasted to stop violence in India, because he said so. Mother Theresa never said she did her work to glorify herself, and also said to help the poorest of the poor. However, because Mother Theresa is Catholic, you want to criticize her so you say she did that work to glorify herself. LOL. That’s so ignorant and illogical.

You misread my statement on foetus', read it again. I said "survive outside the womb unaided". Births at 4 months premature do not survive unaided. You are then into the realm of man's interference in the natural order, something as a catholic (assumption I know) you should abhor (cf birth control).

I’m not going to state whether I’m Catholic or not (and don’t assume I’m Catholic, even if I like Mother Theresa and work with the missionaries, as many other non-Christians work with missionaries as well).

Births at 5 months can’t survive unaided! 6 months! Not even 7 months! As a matter of fact, even a full-term infant can’t survive unaided (though less so)! A child can’t survive unaided! What’s your point? Handicapped people can't survive unaided... are they not human either? Again, another logical fallacy.

[j2k4]

BTW, 1234-

I asked for a CIVIL response.

If you cannot provide one, please do not bother.

As I don't know when you are on board, I will wait a suitable amount of time before I begin the deconstruction of your posting to this point.

I think that is fair.

[Biggles]

Although the comparison between Mother Theresa and Ghandi is intriguing it is somewhat spurious. Ghandi was a political leader that successfully led a campaign against British colonialism in his own country. He also did much to help the poorer castes in India and create a more equal and democratic society. As poltical leaders go, he was one of the better ones and will always be very dear to the hearts of Indians; in much the same way as Washington and Lincoln are to Americans. Consequently, bjford, I think your dismissive tone towards him is unfounded, although I do appreciate that you are responding to an attack on someone you hold dear.

To be perfectly honest I know little about Mother Theresa, other than she was Albanian and very old school Catholic. It stands to reason that her views on many social issues would reflect that background and theology. Is therefore any pupose in continuing to lob bricks at each other over the Catholic Church's stance over birth control and abortion. It is a given which will not change quickly - it took quite a while and a few burnings before they accepted the world is round, but now they have their own astronomers and are more willing to accept the antiquitity of the universe and life on other planets than many Protestant churches are.

bjford - your ecumenical spirit is to be commended - living in the West of Scotland it is not something I see often (where the term "mixed marriage" is automatically assumed to mean Protestant/Catholic).

However, the point J2 raised was not whether abortion is right or wrong but rather one concerning political agendas and the infringement of the rights of parents. These are quite separate from the abortion debate per se and equally can be applied to a number of issues.

[leftism]

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
I asked for a CIVIL response.

If you cannot provide one, please do not bother.

As I don&#39;t know when you are on board, I will wait a suitable amount of time before I begin the deconstruction of your posting to this point.

I think that is fair.&nbsp;

[/b]

Originally posted by j2k4@
I haven&#39;t witnessed such rampant ignorance since the heyday of Zardoz.

As is apparent from your ranting posts, you haven&#39;t the slightest idea of intellectualizing a response, effective or otherwise, to any decently presented argument.

That is to say, even if I WERE wrong, YOU are not capable of explaining the "how" or "why" of it.

Your posting personifies inflammatory and extremist rhetoric at it&#39;s worst, compounded by the fact of your factual and logical "bereftness".

You may commence with your imminent further attempts at my abasement, none of which will have the slightest effect, I assure you.

BTW-

You haven&#39;t any children, have you?

Nor would you, I suspect.

I suppose that is a good thing, given your addled and high-strung state of mind..

It is also good this occurs in cyberspace; else I fear we&#39;d all be soaked by your spittle.

<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew 7:3&#045;5

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother&#39;s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, &#39;Let me take the speck out of your eye,&#39; when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother&#39;s eye.[/quote]

[Billy_Dean]

I haven&#39;t seen the point of view that abortion is murder stated yet, so I&#39;ll make it.

Abortion is murder.

That&#39;s an opinion, so don&#39;t try running me down for it.

The foetus is a life, when it&#39;s aborted it dies, murder.

[clocker]

Originally posted by leftism+9 January 2004 - 04:10--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism @ 9 January 2004 - 04:10)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
I asked for a CIVIL response.

If you cannot provide one, please do not bother.

As I don&#39;t know when you are on board, I will wait a suitable amount of time before I begin the deconstruction of your posting to this point.

I think that is fair.

[/b]

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@
I haven&#39;t witnessed such rampant ignorance since the heyday of Zardoz.

As is apparent from your ranting posts, you haven&#39;t the slightest idea of intellectualizing a response, effective or otherwise, to any decently presented argument.

That is to say, even if I WERE wrong, YOU are not capable of explaining the "how" or "why" of it.

Your posting personifies inflammatory and extremist rhetoric at it&#39;s worst, compounded by the fact of your factual and logical "bereftness".

You may commence with your imminent further attempts at my abasement, none of which will have the slightest effect, I assure you.

BTW-

You haven&#39;t any children, have you?

Nor would you, I suspect.

I suppose that is a good thing, given your addled and high-strung state of mind..

It is also good this occurs in cyberspace; else I fear we&#39;d all be soaked by your spittle.

<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew 7:3&#045;5

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother&#39;s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, &#39;Let me take the speck out of your eye,&#39; when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother&#39;s eye.[/quote] [/b][/quote]
Bravo.
The concept of cut and paste raised to sheer perfection.

I applaud your elevation of the artform.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by leftism+9 January 2004 - 12:10--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 9 January 2004 - 12:10)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Matthew 7:3&#045;5

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother&#39;s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, &#39;Let me take the speck out of your eye,&#39; when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother&#39;s eye.

[/b][/quote]
Lefty,

In serveral posts you have requested that people scrutinize themselves first before commenting on someone else.

I thought you might like this for your avatar and sig.



"Man in the Mirror"

I&#39;m Starting With The Man In
The Mirror
I&#39;m Asking Him To Change
His Ways
And No Message Could Have
Been Any Clearer
If You Wanna Make The World
A Better Place
(If You Wanna Make The
World A Better Place)
Take A Look At Yourself, And
Then Make A Change
(Take A Look At Yourself, And
Then Make A Change)
(Na Na Na, Na Na Na, Na Na,
Na Nah)

You may need to omit a few "Na, na"s to meet sig restrictions.

Enjoy.

[leftism]

I&#39;m glad to see plenty of specifics in your accusations .

Let me be specific in my accusations though.. in the three posts I&#39;ve seen j2k4 in &#39;action&#39; his pattern has been identical.

He goes into flame overdrive, rarely addresses any of the issues and then demands that others address the issues and treat him with the utmost respect&#33;

Hence the bible quote. I thought this was particularly amusing as he is a strong supporter of Christianity, yet seems unable to adhere to one of the more well known lessons Jesus gave.

Now.. would you guys like to be specific about your accusations against me, or would you prefer to keep it as ambiguous as possible? After all nobody can pin you down then. This is something that all three of you appear to have in common at the moment

Before you guys start digging trenches and securing your positions for the ensuing battle, I politely request that the two of you look at 1234&#39;s post and then look at j2k4&#39;s response. (Beginning "I haven&#39;t witnessed such rampant ignorance since the heyday of Zardoz. etc".)

Do you really want to defend that?

[clocker]

Originally posted by leftism@9 January 2004 - 13:56


Before you guys start digging trenches and securing your positions for the ensuing battle, I politely request that the two of you look at 1234&#39;s post and then look at j2k4&#39;s response. (Beginning "I haven&#39;t witnessed such rampant ignorance since the heyday of Zardoz. etc".)

Do you really want to defend that?

I rarely dig trenches being genetically averse to manual labor.
However, I did expend the energy to reread the post/response as requested.

1234&#39;s post was sheer, unmitigated drivel and inflammatory, to boot.
Linking Bush and the Taliban and making assertions about the likelihood of a (presumed) Catholic daughter&#39;s chances of pregnancy was obviously intended to provoke a heated response.

Which j2 provided.

He certainly requires no defense from me, he&#39;s a big boy and can take care of himself.

My post was not a response to either of those two however.
I aimed at you.
I&#39;m not fond of, nor impressed by, cut and paste jobs.
If irony was the intent, wouldn&#39;t some pithy words of your own have better served? The juxtaposition of quotes seemed lazy.