Multiculturalism

Of course that is certainly possible since those things are a matter of law. But civilized society has looked at various acts and decided which should be unlawful and which should be lawful.While what you suggest is certainly possible it is also as stupid an idea as almost all suggested by today's conservatives and the Christian Cult of Ignorance.But the fact is that abortion was examined and US society including US Christians did decide that in most cases it certainly is not murder. Fortunately many folk are capable of thinking beyond bumper sticker size sound bites.Edited by jar, : brain fart

Most cases? You mean sometimes it's self-defense? The baby is like those creatures in "Alien" that is eating its way through the woman's gut? All you are doing is what I already said: denying the reality that it is a baby that is being killed.If this simple obvious fact was recognized very few women would be willing to have an abortion.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You certainly do seem to love misrepresenting what people say as much as you love misrepresenting what the Bible says.Nowhere did I mention aliens or self defense (although self defense certainly is sometimes a reasonable and recognized justification for abortion).But again the reality is that society, including US Christians, realize that there can be times when an abortion could be unlawful and in fact have passed laws specifying such instances.Not everyone is so ignorant that they swallow your unsupported assertions, misrepresentation, attempts to redirect attention, moving goal posts and other attempts to con.

Oh right. It's unlawful if it's reached the stage where you can no longer deny that it is a baby. But even that wasn't recognized for a long time as "partial birth abortion" was allowed, which is violently killing a fully formed baby in the process of being born. Some civilization we have now that Christianity is dead.And then of course, if it's only a few weeks old you can call it a "fetus" and deny that it's a baby that way so there's no murder in getting rid of it.I would agree that the baby must be sacrificed for the mother's life in those extremely rare instances where a pregnancy is a real threat, but even then it's often possible to save both. How many of the fifty million abortions would fit this situation, however? Half a dozen?

Again with misrepresentation Faith. Christianity is certainly not dead and as I have said, society does recognize reality and so modifies laws. It is called a fetus because it is not yet a baby. Amazing isn't it? And yet more unsupported assertions. You do love them don't you Faith?

Not a good argument. The antiquated morality thought buying and selling people to keep in abusive servitude was just fine and dandy. Bought, sold or not, women were enslaved to their husbands along with his other wives.Moral credibility of zero there, Faith. I'm sure some women do, especially if they have a christian family that is out to destroy them for their choice. The latest studies, however, say that, in the following years, the majority of women are quite gratified at having made the right decision to abort.Keep up with the literature in the discipline, Faith. Your christian-apologetics and moral-hyperbole sites are not serving you well enough for debate.

Jesus wasn't:

quote:

---

Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

---

Talk about relativism: pretending to "worship" somebody you oppose diametrically.

as you do not accept the the legal definition of murder, I guess you are no longer in favour of capital punishment?

Yet as you noted just upthread, millions of women throughout history resorted to natural abortifacients and, less often, infanticide.It isn't that something was hidden from those women, or from women getting abortions now: they simply disagree with your notion that a fetus is a baby; there's not really much room for a propaganda conspiracy there.Thanks to anti-choice protesters outside clinics, and their aggressively intrusive, intimidating behavior--screaming, crowding, verbally abusing, shadowing, waving bloody posters--most women who have abortions are all too familiar with anti-choice sentiments.

As I also noted upthread, women who have abortions are often in denial, ready to accept any rationalization that will free them from the burden of the pregnancy, and yet in spite of themselves they know it's the killing of a child. This may come out in depressions and other emotional reactions, in my case a dream about a small child being driven away in a hearse. Even then I didn't grasp or admit the fact that it was a living child I'd aborted. I didn't mourn the child until many years later when I finally faced the truth.Women who get abortions are just fooling themselves. Some are hardened to it but many others couldn't do it if they faced the truth. I also "disagreed" with that idea, but that's what I'm calling denial and rationalization. It IS a child, that's the fact people are refusing to face. The desire not to be burdened with a child is enough of a conspiracy, especially when shared by others and the men in the women's lives.

That's odd, I heard that their leader actually attacked a group of entrepreneurs with a whip, and that his followers formed a communist society. It's all in this book called ... what is it? ... the Bibble, I think. You should definitely read it.

But Faith, it is your views on the morality of abortion that are new-fangled. Before some time in the 1970s, Protestants by and large based their views on Biblical teaching rather than Catholic dogma. The ‘biblical view’ that’s younger than the Happy MealHow abortion became an evangelical issueThis doesn't necessarily mean that their current views are wrong, but it does mean that they are not in fact That Old-Time Religion.

I'm not a "cultural relativist," but I think the problem wouldn't be that the objection isn't legitimate, it's that it's based on imposing our standards on someone else's culture instead of trying to uphold the standard in our own. That is, our attention to the shortcomings of other nations' laws and customs is a way of ignoring the shortcomings of our own.Do we fully recognize the personhood and value of women in Western cultures, or are we satisfied with the way they're treated because, after all, we don't whip them for wearing pants?

Right, because it is impossible to both note our own shortcomings and to also identify some short comings of others as being even worse.

Well, of course we're so noble we want to help other cultures with their even-worse shortcomings while we conscientiously continue to progress in every way possible. We'd be hypocrites if we didn't. Really.