The Town of Odyssey

Danielle Abigail Maxwell wrote:If they murder an innocent child, their choice. IT WILL AFFECT OTHERS. But it was STILL their choice. Who are we to condemn others or judge them?

In my culture we are allowed to kill each other. Anytime, for any reason. I just killed by best friend because I felt like it. Hey, you may disagree with me, but because that's what I believe, that's what I'll do.

We also believe that stealing is ok. I just stole your iPod, car, and toothbrush. Don't get angry at me, because that would be intolerance. I'm not tolerant of intolerance. I bothers me.

We're also allowed to kill our children. We usually only do it because their either unwanted, or we are so selfish we would rather not risk our own lives for our children. It's fine where I live. If you say it's wrong, you're being intolerant. I'm intolerant of intolerance. I can't tolerate it.

In my culture we are also allowed to disobey the Bible. It's fine here. No one minds. If you disagree with me, you're being intolerant... etc.

Ok, the first two were not real life examples, but the last two were. THAT is what relativism looks like. That, is what our country looks like, last time I checked.

Ozon wrote:

Guess Who! wrote:Do you (JED, DAM, any others who advocate the "abortion is murder" but "It's personal choice" argument) see a difference between "murder" in regards to abortion and "murder" in regards to say, a 20 year old mentally competent adult? Is there more than one kind of murder for you? Or do you believe all murder needs to be allowed, as "personal choice"? If there is somewhat of a difference between "murder" in the case of abortion and "murder" as commonly understood in the legal definitions of the USA, could you outline the exact differences of the two categories?

I do admit the position is somewhat confusing.

Thank you, Guess Who!.

Murder is murder is murder is murder. Murder is a sin. That is NOT a personal opinion. That comes straight from the Bible. In fact, because it seems some people here have forgotten, I will quote it for you:

Exodus 20:13 KJV wrote:Thou shalt not kill.

As far as I can tell that doesn't exclude babies and mentally ill people. And anyone else. The Bible doesn't say that it is a personal opinion, either.

So. Are you in or are you out?

Ozon, are you directing that "in or out" quote at me? Personally I don't consider abortion murder, I do not believe "personhood" is conferred at conception but only comes later, after the brain has some ability to "subjectively experience" the world. What differentiates a person from, say, a tree, is the former's ability to experience, and an embryo cannot. Once we get to the later stages of pregnancy, however, there is a good argument that the fetus does experience something, and that would be when I would have a moral problem in pursuing an abortion myself unless in the case of medical necessity. However, the case is still muddled by the fact that the fetus is living *inside* another person, whose rights still stand, and who should be allowed to make medical decisions regarding her body and personal decisions for what she wishes to use it for... I hope all women who want abortions can get them before the 8th week or so before there is any moral qualms, but this is a messy world and I'm more willing to cut people slack for inability to raise money, to transport themselves to a clinic, to find truthful information, talk things over with families, etc.

I would not consider abortion murder and truly have difficulty fathoming people who say they do... at the MOST it is negligent homicide or something, because murder requires the premeditated killing of another *person* with willful knowledge, and these women and their doctors (as well as me) do NOT consider the fetus a *person.* But... it's even odder the people who say abortion is murder but then ALSO say it should be legal. O.K... but are they talking a different kind of murder I haven't heard of before?

I'm pretty sure she's directing her question to JED and DAM.

btw, I think it's rather telling when a pro-choicer (Guess Who) sees the audacity of the position being debated here.

Danielle Abigail Maxwell wrote:If they murder an innocent child, their choice. IT WILL AFFECT OTHERS. But it was STILL their choice. Who are we to condemn others or judge them?

So I have the right to kill someone, like Hannah said. It is MY right, according to you. God will judge me, so let me run free and kill some more! Afterall, it is my right and no one needs to judge my actions!

Hey, and why don't I just do whatever I feel like and pay no consequences, afterall, it is MY choice!

*End, sarcasm.*

Seriously, if someone kills your Mom, would you say to them, "That's alright! I can't judge you! It's your choice!"

Guess Who! wrote:Do you (JED, DAM, any others who advocate the "abortion is murder" but "It's personal choice" argument) see a difference between "murder" in regards to abortion and "murder" in regards to say, a 20 year old mentally competent adult? Is there more than one kind of murder for you? Or do you believe all murder needs to be allowed, as "personal choice"? If there is somewhat of a difference between "murder" in the case of abortion and "murder" as commonly understood in the legal definitions of the USA, could you outline the exact differences of the two categories?

I do admit the position is somewhat confusing.

I see it as different because it is possible that it can be proved that life doesn't begin at conception but at birth therefore abortion is not murder.

That is not my belief though but I think that abortion and murdering an adult or child are two different things....

JED wrote:

Guess Who! wrote:Do you (JED, DAM, any others who advocate the "abortion is murder" but "It's personal choice" argument) see a difference between "murder" in regards to abortion and "murder" in regards to say, a 20 year old mentally competent adult? Is there more than one kind of murder for you? Or do you believe all murder needs to be allowed, as "personal choice"? If there is somewhat of a difference between "murder" in the case of abortion and "murder" as commonly understood in the legal definitions of the USA, could you outline the exact differences of the two categories?

I do admit the position is somewhat confusing.

I see it as different because it is possible that it can be proved that life doesn't begin at conception but at birth therefore abortion is not murder.

That is not my belief though but I think that abortion and murdering an adult or child are two different things....

That was what I thought... thanks for clarifying.

Guess Who! wrote:

Sherlock Holmes wrote:Not to mention, Obama's abortion policy goes far beyond simply "not forcing a religious belief on the general public" to espouse federal funding of abortion (which will have the effect of making it more widely available and affordable to obtain). Now, if my tax dollars are being used to fund this, wouldn't the more accurate question be why Obama is forcing a particular and controversial ideology on me (the taxpayer)?

My point is that Obama's abortion policy is not merely a passive one but an active one in direct contradiction to a wide variety of ethical principles (Christian or not). Anyone who attempts to believe otherwise would be forced to engage in no small amount of self-delusion.

You don't get to directly decide where your tax money goes. Millions of Americans opposed the war in Iraq. However, their tax dollars have funded it for 7 years now... Jehovah's witnesses pay tax, regardless of the fact that the government has programs for uninsured minor children which sometimes pay for blood transfusions... Thousands of Americans oppose the death penalty but their tax dollars still can go towards executions...

Point is, once the IRS collects tax, it isn't your money anymore. You cannot say "I have a moral (or practical) opposition to spending it here." Though you can support politicians who agree with your moral or practical stance. But abortion is a legal, health related procedure (early abortion is documented as safer than carrying to term) and it would make sense that insofar as the government does help with some medical bills (medicare, insurance for uninsured minors, etc) they would reimburse some abortions. Nothing earth shattering to see here, moving right along.

Admittedly, my comment was more principled than practical, but I think it is important to note that we can influence the distribution of our tax dollars through the officials that we elect.

Therefore, my argument is centered more around the moral obfuscation that apparently must occur in order for a person of strong religious convictions (who would otherwise consider abortion to be a morally repugnant act) to support a candidate who clearly supports the furtherance of that act. The responsibility still rests on the voter and a later argument that it doesn't matter because "I can't control where my tax dollars go anyhow" seems to skirt the issue.

So, again, I underline my original argument which is that one needs to either choose to adhere to morally consistent principles or eschew them when it comes to voting. The obvious inconsistency of the Christian populous on this issue is astounding.

JED wrote:I see it as different because it is possible that it can be proved that life doesn't begin at conception but at birth therefore abortion is not murder.

So you think that abortion is murder, but it's possible that abortion is not murder?

Well I think that is what JED is saying if you haven't picked it up in all the posts he has given...

In that case, I echo the sentiments of Professor Diggory:


"Oh! Why don't they teach logic in these schools!"

Smarties wrote:

JED wrote:I see it as different because it is possible that it can be proved that life doesn't begin at conception but at birth therefore abortion is not murder.

So you think that abortion is murder, but it's possible that abortion is not murder?

I think that he is trying to say that abortion may be killing but isn't murder. Killing of other humans is legally allowed both in the Bible and modern law, in war time, by accident or in self defense. Legally, murder is unlawful homicide, with premeditated intent to kill, a specific legal meaning. There are degrees of culpability for taking life, and given the special case of the fetus it would seem reasonable to legally treat it as a special case, independent of whether or not the fetus is "alive" or "human".

Smarties wrote:In that case, I echo the sentiments of Professor Diggory:


"Oh! Why don't they teach logic in these schools!"

Well said, Dr Watson. Or, well quoted, rather. I wonder that as well.

Actually the quote is:

What do they teach in school these days?

and I don't see why it's so hard for everybody to understand what JED is saying?

No offense but by all these posts it's so crystal clear of what he has been trying to convey that you have be very much dim witted for you to STILL not understand what he is saying.

Solo kid wrote:Actually the quote is:

What do they teach in school these days?

and I don't see why it's so hard for everybody to understand what JED is saying?

No offense but by all these posts it's so crystal clear of what he has been trying to convey that you have be very much dim witted for you to STILL not understand what he is saying.

He says both, mostly due to which adaptation you are reading/watching/listening to.
And no offense, but by all these posts it's crystal clear that everyone does understand what he believes, painfully clearly. They don't agree, get over it.

Obama forver !!!

Yes we can!!!!

Rodenyrathbone wrote:Obama forver !!!

Yes we can!!!!

Yes, we can!!






Wait, what can we?


Yes, we can become socialists!

lol

yes we can
eh really?

Getting back to the thread topic, I recently found this. Interesting.

Solo kid wrote:No offense but by all these posts it's so crystal clear of what he has been trying to convey that you have be very much dim witted for you to STILL not understand what he is saying.

Ok, first of all, you are completely out of line to call those you disagree with in this thread "dim-witted". Do not do it again.

Second, no, no, and no! In all actuality, what he's arguing is less clear than it was a few days ago, which I didn't think could be possible! "Abortion is murder but it's not murder but it is so it should be legal". Say what?!?!?

It is not crystal clear, it is incredibly murky. And hypocritical. And relativistic. Before you insult everyone else in this thread, you guys need to present a real and logical argument.

I don't mind you disagreeing but Darcie just gave you a good example trust me it is not hard to understand. Your are just claiming you don't understand


Edit: JED who was just looking over my shoulder told me to tell you guys that anything I say or do is not related to him in anyway therefore when he gets out of jail do not relate what I say to him