The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > New Tasmanian law aborts protests > Comments

New Tasmanian law aborts protests : Comments

By Chelsea Pietsch, published 27/11/2013

Pro-choice surely has to mean you have a right to not choose, and try to persuade others likewise.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All
Yuyutsu <"I only condemn those who try to enforce their will on others by the violence of legislation."

I totally agree Yuyutsu.
We certainly should not have legislation to force women to go on with a pregnancy they don't want.
Posted by Suseonline, Monday, 2 December 2013 9:52:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Suse,

<<I totally agree Yuyutsu.
We certainly should not have legislation to force women to go on with a pregnancy they don't want.>>

So it's a happy end - I am glad that most of us here agree.

For those few who don't, presumably on the grounds of religion, may I remind you that goodness, compassion and charity cannot be developed without the option of evil: if the way of sin is artificially blocked, then one is never able to develop and strengthen their character, learning to resist temptation out of one's pure love for God.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 2 December 2013 2:18:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yuyutsu – no it is not a happy end for those that get killed. If you were walking down the street and saw a child being beaten to death, would you just keep walking because you wouldn’t want to artificially block “the way of sin”?

I believe the defenceless should always be helped and not be left to be killed.
Posted by JP, Monday, 2 December 2013 3:18:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suseonline "Maybe if we make male masturbation a criminal offence, given that it is a terrible waste of live sperm?"

And that analogy does not compute.
Sperm actually *are* "part of a man's body", unlike a foetus/embryo, which is a genetically distinct entity.

"advocating for more contraception methods that will be easily and freely available"

They're already easily available.
But why should they be "free" (I presume you mean no monetary cost?)

Even if they were, you'd still be insisting on abortion being available (*also* funded by the government!), so that's a red herring.

People who object to abortion do so for moral reasons, and will do so whether contraception is available or not, free or not.

"It is easy for you guys to damn all women who do choose to consider abortion because you can be certain that will never have to be a choice you have to make about your bodies...."

It's a choice that still affects many men directly (It's *their* child too! The sperm came from some man.)

You also live in a society/community with men, and their opinions about what is socially acceptable are as valid as womens' on *any* issue.
You just can't seem to grasp that abortion is *not* just a personal act, it's a phenomena that affects society as a whole.

Yuyutsu "presumably on the grounds of religion"

Presumptions indeed.
Like, irreligious people shouldn't care less, right?
They have no moral code!

"goodness, compassion and charity cannot be developed without the option of evil: if the way of sin is artificially blocked..."

Then we shouldn't have laws about anything!

We wouldn't want to "block" the rapists, thieves and murderers.
They need to be tempted, so they can learn to resist.
Posted by Shockadelic, Monday, 2 December 2013 9:08:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear JP,

The reason we don't murder isn't because we want to prevent deaths (everyone will die anyway), but because we refuse to become murderers, straying away from God.

Generally, religion works not by attempting to fix the world, but by purifying oneself, making oneself God-ready (that's all we can do from our side, the rest comes as divine-grace).

However, while man cannot really fix the world, there are many religious practices, or methods to purify oneself suiting different temperaments and one of those approaches is of TRYING to fix the world (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_olam). That approach is likely to appeal and suit an active warrior like yourself, so please go ahead and try to help the defenceless. It is much better that you do it and gain religious merit than have it attempted by an atheist government for the wrong reasons.

Note that without villains, warriors like yourself would have no opportunities to develop their skills and courage, as necessary to build their character and make them God-ready.

In truth, how could anyone be defenceless in God's world, under His Providence?

Yet if a child APPEARS defenceless to you and you are a warrior by nature, then indeed you should do your duty without hesitation, risking life and limb to save that child.

Regarding those who get killed before they are born, for them it is in fact a happy-end as they're saved from the duty of falling to this world and its accompanying curses (Genesis 3,16-19). Perhaps their duty was already accomplished within a few months in the womb, so they're exempt from suffering the rest.

Babies usually begin to identify with their body and differentiating it from their environment around the age of one month, a process that lasts until about the age of 3 years. Before that, they feel no grief at the death of the body. Even later, younger children are more accepting and ready to die than adults.

Though never a justification for murder, the suffering incurred by the death of unborn babies, if any, is therefore less than that of adult animals being slaughtered.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Tuesday, 3 December 2013 12:33:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Shockadelic,

<<Like, irreligious people shouldn't care less, right?
They have no moral code!>>

If you have a moral code, then you are likely to be religious.
Belief in this or that is a poor criterion for religiosity.

<<Then we shouldn't have laws about anything!>>

Ideally so. Ideally you should be willing to turn the other cheek.
But we aren't there yet, are we? We are too afraid!

<<We wouldn't want to "block" the rapists, thieves and murderers.
They need to be tempted, so they can learn to resist.>>

I have not yet seen the government who cares about the spiritual welfare of rapists, thieves and murderers, nor do I even expect it to happen in the next 1000 years.

People are essentially motivated by two things: Love - or Fear.

Governments are not formed out of love, but out of fear. As such, they attempt to protect their citizens from rape, theft and murder, desirous of getting the perpetrators out of the way, no matter how and at what cost. There's no love in there nor care, only fear.

So long as we lack the courage to remove all laws, we should at least keep them to the minimum.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Tuesday, 3 December 2013 1:01:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy