CDZ Abortion: Moral or Immoral

[Bonzi]

What's the difference between a person and a human? This may be the disconnect.

Not sure what makes a living human being less human for the simple fact that it is nourished by their mother inside her body instead of outside of it

What's the difference between a human, whose life we value, and an animal we can kill for any reason we choose?

If I catch someone killing animals for no reason then I will be gunning for that person.

Well there it is... "for no reason" - of course, that would make the person unstable in many ways....

 

[alang1216]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

 

[Bonzi]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Says who?

 

[alang1216]

What's the difference between a human, whose life we value, and an animal we can kill for any reason we choose?

well besides the one you just cited they are many and I am sure you know most, or at least I would hope you do...to name them would be folly for answering your question if you have already made up your mind that you do not see a difference between an animal and a human life and couldn't care less how great the difference is.

The question is an honest one but let me rephrase it. What is it about a human life that makes us value it more than we value other animals?

 

[alang1216]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Says who?

History.

 

[Bonzi]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Says who?

History.

not good enough. We all have our own internal moral code. We follow laws only to avoid jail or punishment

 

[alang1216]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Says who?

History.

not good enough. We all have our own internal moral code. We follow laws only to avoid jail or punishment

I'd say we conform our morality to the society for the benefits we get, not solely for the punishment we receive. We in the US have come to regard racism as an evil. Not everyone I know but it is the majority opinion I think. There is no punishment for racist thinking but, at least in my circles, racists would be ostracized.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

What's you position, and why?

Abortion just won't fit into a yes/no category. Generally, it is immoral; however, in cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother, non-abortion may be even more immoral. In any case, I am deeply skeptical about making a government (legal) decision. Women's bodies aren't state property.

If You've Heard of Someone, Don't Listen to Him


If abortion is immoral, it is also immoral in the cases of rape, incest, and saving the life of the "mother." Neither your power-hungry preachers nor their power-hungry opponents bring that up. Those ambitious imbeciles have no right to dominate the public forum on any issue at all. The truth is forced to hide in the shadows of the artificial light shone on the pompous morons the ruling class picks as the only two choices we are brainwashed to follow.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Says who?

History.

not good enough. We all have our own internal moral code. We follow laws only to avoid jail or punishment

I'd say we conform our morality to the society for the benefits we get, not solely for the punishment we receive. We in the US have come to regard racism as an evil. Not everyone I know but it is the majority opinion I think. There is no punishment for racist thinking but, at least in my circles, racists would be ostracized.

Boasting Bots

Race traitors are brainwashed by the degenerate media and don't have what should be called "opinions" any more than ventriloquists' puppets have them. You are inanimate.

 

[alang1216]

Boasting Bots

Race traitors are brainwashed by the degenerate media and don't have what should be called "opinions" any more than ventriloquists' puppets have them. You are inanimate.

No offense, but you sir, are a moron. Thankfully an anachronism.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

What's the difference between a person and a human? This may be the disconnect.

Not sure what makes a living human being less human for the simple fact that it is nourished by their mother inside her body instead of outside of it

Another Point the Ruling-Class Tyranny Never Allows to Be Brought Up

The Catholic Church views sperm cells, or at least the one that is predestined by God to fertilize, as living human beings. So why don't you argue against that opinion with a devout Catholic and see what it feels like to be Pro Choice?

 

[Chuz Life]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Like the moral aspect of defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. Right?

 

[Wry Catcher]

What's you position, and why?

amoral, a medical procedure based on a number of variables, i.e. the health of the fetus, the health of the mother, the circumstance of the pregnancy, the law, etc.

 

[Chuz Life]

What's you position, and why?

amoral, a medical procedure based on a number of variables, i.e. the health of the fetus, the health of the mother, the circumstance of the pregnancy, the law, etc.

With full acknowledgement of the fact that there are moral components to things like laws and medical decisions. . . I agree. In many cases, the procedure itself is "amoral."

 

[alang1216]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Like the moral aspect of defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. Right?

Exactly. In many cultures it is defined as one man and many women. Were these cultures evil?

 

[Chuz Life]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Like the moral aspect of defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. Right?

Exactly. In many cultures it is defined as one man and many women. Were these cultures evil?

You are making mine and Bonzi's point.

The answer to your question depends largely on who you ask.

Our "society," through a democratic process, decided that marriage is defined as "one man one woman." This was decided by majorities in several States and still, a minority of activists with enough left leaning judges have managed to change that definition. . . DESPITE the majority moral views of our society. So, clearly those who demand and support "gay marriage" do not get their "morality" from the society in which they live.

 

[alang1216]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Like the moral aspect of defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. Right?

Exactly. In many cultures it is defined as one man and many women. Were these cultures evil?

You are making mine and Bonzi's point.

The answer to your question depends largely on who you ask.

Our "society," through a democratic process, decided that marriage is defined as "one man one woman." This was decided by majorities in several States and still, a minority of activists with enough left leaning judges have managed to change that definition. . . DESPITE the majority moral views of our society. So, clearly those who demand and support "gay marriage" do not get their "morality" from the society in which they live.

On the contrary, it is America that has changed.

In Pew Research Center polling in 2001, Americans opposed same-sex marriage by a margin of 57% to 35%.

Since then, support for same-sex marriage has steadily grown. And today, support for same-sex marriage is at its highest point since Pew Research Center began polling on this issue. Based on polling in 2017, a majority of Americans (62%) support same-sex marriage, while 32% oppose it.

 

[Chuz Life]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Like the moral aspect of defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. Right?

Exactly. In many cultures it is defined as one man and many women. Were these cultures evil?

You are making mine and Bonzi's point.

The answer to your question depends largely on who you ask.

Our "society," through a democratic process, decided that marriage is defined as "one man one woman." This was decided by majorities in several States and still, a minority of activists with enough left leaning judges have managed to change that definition. . . DESPITE the majority moral views of our society. So, clearly those who demand and support "gay marriage" do not get their "morality" from the society in which they live.

On the contrary, it is America that has changed.

In Pew Research Center polling in 2001, Americans opposed same-sex marriage by a margin of 57% to 35%.

Since then, support for same-sex marriage has steadily grown. And today, support for same-sex marriage is at its highest point since Pew Research Center began polling on this issue. Based on polling in 2017, a majority of Americans (62%) support same-sex marriage, while 32% oppose it.

Yeah, that explains why the courts had to be used to overturn the State laws, alright.

The polls had Hitlary winning the election by a landslide too.

 

[Bonzi]

To me, morals at self defined

No, morality is set by the society/culture in which you live.

Like the moral aspect of defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. Right?

Exactly. In many cultures it is defined as one man and many women. Were these cultures evil?

What's perceived by some as, not sure evil, put perhaps, discriminatory, to not permit same sex to get married. It's the exclusivity to man/woman only they find issue with

 

[Bonzi]

Ok so a loud minority fight for a right, and eventually people cave in and accept it thinking it's just modern times and they just have to accept it. Sad