Abortion is wrong, yet I am pro choice

unifiedscene

saveuplife wrote:

All of the above: The grey area is vast and engulfing. With certain moral criterion you actually need to step out of the vast grey hole of "it depends" and enter into some form of black and white... or else you'll have people murdering people with absolutely no repercussions.

Is war always wrong? Is it ok to kill in self defense?

bernmodi

saveuplife wrote:

People need rights and wrongs in order to function as a society. That's my point. Whether you agree with the concept or not, morals are typically black and white by definition.

Just because I think lying is always wrong... doesn't mean I don't do it. I skrew up sometimes, I'm human. I simply think that life for everyone is more orderly and better if no one lies, or lies are limited and frowned upon. If we, as a society, did not react negatively to lies, I think our society would be a hell of a lot worse. That's why lying is wrong.... because it hurts people.

Just one thought about the lying and the holocaust you mentioned before: Lying was so much needed to survive the holocaust for so many people. Anne Franks diary would consist of only 2 pages if the people you helped her and her family had not lied every day.
Yes, this is subjective, thank God it is!

saveuplife

unifiedscene wrote:

Is war always wrong? Is it ok to kill in self defense?

Think about it this way:

If no one murdered anyone there would be no need to kill in self defense. I think you may or may not understand what I mean. But, killing people is wrong IMHO.

That said, if I had to make a split second decision on my life or someone else's.... I don't know what I would do. But, I "may" kill them. And yes, I would consider myself wrong for having killed someone. I'd feel bad about it. But, I'd be alive.

That's the trick. I can say I'm wrong too. I'm not sinless, actually I probably sin right around the mean. Nevertheless, I still say that sinning is wrong. And I don't see why that's bad.

saveuplife

bernmodi wrote:

Just one thought about the lying and the holocaust you mentioned before: Lying was so much needed to survive the holocaust for so many people. Anne Franks diary would consist of only 2 pages if the people you helped her and her family had not lied every day.
Yes, this is subjective, thank God it is!

I don't think you understand my point. I don't think just because I say "lying is wrong", one can't make the decision to lie. They certainly can, and I guess sometimes it can certainly be beneficial. When murdering is the alternative, I suppose it is good to lie. That said, I won't say "lying" is ever GOOD because that can be mistrued. I'd say instead, sometimes one can make that decision if they think it will be beneficial to the whole. In the example, you presented, they may have decided that.... but, I would bet you that they still had a moral disdain for lying. Nevertheless, they chose admirably.

Abuskedti

unifiedscene wrote:

Maybe you just shouldn't start an abortion debate. Is there some reason why you HAVE to talk about abortion when first meeting your gf's daughter in law? That's kinda nutty man.

I certainly don't. But it is a big part of her life. She speaks about it regularly. I respect that. I am a man that will always speak the truth.. so I am merely attempting better understaning.. and a better way to present my view without sounding judgemental or angry or intollerant.

decides2dream

saveuplife wrote:

People need rights and wrongs in order to function as a society. That's my point. Whether you agree with the concept or not, morals are typically black and white by definition.

Just because I think lying is always wrong... doesn't mean I don't do it. I skrew up sometimes, I'm human. I simply think that life for everyone is more orderly and better if no one lies, or lies are limited and frowned upon. If we, as a society, did not react negatively to lies, I think our society would be a hell of a lot worse. That's why lying is wrong.... because it hurts people.

i don't think anything i have posted has at all disagreed with this point so i am unsure why you are directing it at me?

when someone asks me a question, i answer from my personal perspective, unless they actually request an objective view. obviously, i am well aware of what society needs, and what i need....and what society thinks, and what i think.....are not mutually exclusive.


btw - depends on the lie as to if they react negatively or not. and our society is not all societies....and what is acceptible here might not be elsewhere and vice versa....so again, social constructs. not saying unnecessary, merely...subjective.

saveuplife

Abuskedti wrote:

I certainly don't. But it is a big part of her life. She speaks about it regularly. I respect that. I am a man that will always speak the truth.. so I am merely attempting better understaning.. and a better way to present my view without sounding judgemental or angry or intollerant.

Why don't you let her bring it up? I think you may be surprised. Pro-life people typically don't go into meeting situations thinking about abortion.

By this post and the one before it, no offense, but it seems to me that you are trying to start a argument with her before you even met her. It doesn't make sense.

unifiedscene

saveuplife wrote:

Why don't you let her bring it up? I think you may be surprised. Pro-life people typically don't go into meeting situations thinking about abortion.

By this post and the one before it, no offense, but it seems to me that you are trying to start a argument with her before you even met her. It doesn't make sense.

I agree. It seems more like he's arming himself for a war of words. Don't bring it up. If she does, ignore it. It's Thanksgiving, let the politics go for the evening.

polaris

unifiedscene wrote:

I agree. It seems more like he's arming himself for a war of words. Don't bring it up. If she does, ignore it. It's Thanksgiving, let the politics go for the evening.

i think he's doing the right thing and preparing himself for it ... it's clear that his gf's family is important to her and him so he doesn't want to cause problems but being a person who is true to his ideals - he probably feels like he's not going to lie either if he gets asked ...

so, he's just putting it out there to see how to best deal with a potential situation ...

unifiedscene

saveuplife wrote:

Think about it this way:

If no one murdered anyone there would be no need to kill in self defense. I think you may or may not understand what I mean. But, killing people is wrong IMHO.

That said, if I had to make a split second decision on my life or someone else's.... I don't know what I would do. But, I "may" kill them. And yes, I would consider myself wrong for having killed someone. I'd feel bad about it. But, I'd be alive.

That's the trick. I can say I'm wrong too. I'm not sinless, actually I probably sin right around the mean. Nevertheless, I still say that sinning is wrong. And I don't see why that's bad.

I do think I understand what you mean, and it sounds like you are more consistent in your views than most. But we accept things like war or self-defense as being a necessity. Maybe not "right", but certainly understandable and forgivable based on the circumstances. What I was getting at is that a number of the people opposed to abortion are ok with capital punishment, killing in a war, or shooting someone in self-defense. This implies that even for them, killing is not clearly wrong in and of itself, that it is the circumstances in which the killing is done that matter.

Though I could take it one further and ask if you accept hunting or other practices, and if so how you decide that that "life" is less deserving of protection than a human life. The bottom line is that killing things that are alive is not uniformly deemed wrong in all circumstances and that we, as humans, are always considering surrounding factors when deciding that one form is socially acceptable or necessary and another is not.

unifiedscene

polaris wrote:

i think he's doing the right thing and preparing himself for it ... it's clear that his gf's family is important to her and him so he doesn't want to cause problems but being a person who is true to his ideals - he probably feels like he's not going to lie either if he gets asked ...

so, he's just putting it out there to see how to best deal with a potential situation ...

He could always answer "I'd rather not talk about this on a holiday, let's save it for Christmas."

polaris

unifiedscene wrote:

He could always answer "I'd rather not talk about this on a holiday, let's save it for Christmas."

sure ... but if someone pushes a topic on ya ... what's he gonna do? ...

saveuplife

polaris wrote:

i think he's doing the right thing and preparing himself for it ... it's clear that his gf's family is important to her and him so he doesn't want to cause problems but being a person who is true to his ideals - he probably feels like he's not going to lie either if he gets asked ...

so, he's just putting it out there to see how to best deal with a potential situation ...

How about saying, "sorry to divert your question (insert name), but I heard you do (insert career), given the state of the economy, how's your work holding up? Oh, and can you pass the turkey?" ,,,,.... instead.

In other words, just respect her opinion.... don't try to change it.... hope that she respects your interest in not arguing.... and move on to a different discussion. If she continues to pry after repeated attempts, state your opinion. I'm betting it won't get there though. I think he'd end up looking good by all accounts if he followed this advice. Alternatively, he can start an argument about abortion over Thanksgiving holiday.

polaris

saveuplife wrote:

How about saying, "sorry to divert your question (insert name), but I heard you do (insert career), given the state of the economy, how's your work holding up? Oh, and can you pass the turkey?" ,,,,.... instead.

In other words, just respect her opinion.... don't try to change it.... hope that she respects your interest in not arguing.... and move on to a different discussion. If she continues to pry after repeated attempts, state your opinion. I'm betting it won't get there though. I think he'd end up looking good by all accounts if he followed this advice. Alternatively, he can start an argument about abortion over Thanksgiving holiday.

maybe i missed something in this thread but from what i've read - it seems to me that he's just trying to gain a perspective on the issue to avoid any confrontation ... of course you guys are telling him to change the subject which is all fine and dandy but if she pushes it - at least he will be better prepared i assume ...

i just don't see the point that he is trying to pick a fight with her ...

saveuplife

polaris wrote:

maybe i missed something in this thread but from what i've read - it seems to me that he's just trying to gain a perspective on the issue to avoid any confrontation ... of course you guys are telling him to change the subject which is all fine and dandy but if she pushes it - at least he will be better prepared i assume ...

i just don't see the point that he is trying to pick a fight with her ...

Here you go...

Abuskedti wrote:

I was sort of arguing even with these premises because they are those held by the so called pro-life side. I am throwing these things out because my girlfriend's daughter-in-law is passionately pro-life and I will meet her soon, and we will have a conversation.

First, I don't think calling pro-life individuals "so-called pro-life" is very cordial, but that's another issue.

Second, he states that they "will have a conversation". To me, that means he's going to bring it up. But even if it doesn't, he's assuming that she's going to come in to someone she's never met before and she's going to bring up the subject of abortion.... to me that's a large-scale assumption.

polaris

saveuplife wrote:

Here you go...

First, I don't think calling pro-life individuals "so-called pro-life" is very cordial, but that's another issue.

Second, he states that they "will have a conversation". To me, that means he's going to bring it up. But even if it doesn't, he's assuming that she's going to come in to someone she's never met before and she's going to bring up the subject of abortion.... to me that's a large-scale assumption.

well ... i think his assumption is based on information he has that others may not ...

he also wrote the following:

so I am merely attempting better understaning.. and a better way to present my view without sounding judgemental or angry or intollerant.

that to me just sounds like he's not looking for a fight

saveuplife

polaris wrote:

well ... i think his assumption is based on information he has that others may not ...

he also wrote the following:

so I am merely attempting better understaning.. and a better way to present my view without sounding judgemental or angry or intollerant.

that to me just sounds like he's not looking for a fight

fair enough. only he knows for sure.

Sweet Emotion

know1 wrote:

It's a pretty hypocritical stance. If it's wrong, then it's wrong.

The whole "unwanted child" thing is pathetic, too. What if you decided you don't want the child after its born. Should you kill it?

You don't have to kill your children anymore because we have Nebraska.

unifiedscene

polaris wrote:

well ... i think his assumption is based on information he has that others may not ...

he also wrote the following:

so I am merely attempting better understaning.. and a better way to present my view without sounding judgemental or angry or intollerant.

that to me just sounds like he's not looking for a fight

Maybe you're an optimist. To me, that sounds like he's looking for tips to prepare for a debate he's looking forward to.

eyedclaar

Sweet Emotion wrote:

You don't have to kill your children anymore because we have Nebraska.

I'm not about to let Nebraska ruin my fun.