Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

False labels

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • False labels

    When we buy boxes and cans of products in the store we know what we are buying because of the labels on them. We can rely on these labels to tell us what is in the containers because there are laws requiring that labels give accurate information.

    But there are times when we can’t rely on labels. Groups of people who are trying to promote some believe often give themselves names that don’t accurately show who they are. One example of this is found in the debate about abortion. Those who believe abortion is wrong and are trying to end it call themselves prolife. Those who favor abortion and believe it should be permitted say they are prochoice. How accurate are these labels?

    Those who are prolife believe that everyone has a right to life, and that right extends even to unborn babies. It seems to me that they are telling the truth when they say they are prolife.

    Supporters of abortion call themselves prochoice because they think that any pregnant woman has the right to choose whether she will give birth to her baby. But what about the rights of the baby? Doesn’t he have a right to be born so he can make choices? A woman who aborts her baby is exercising a choice but she is denying her child the right to ever choose anything for himself. Only a living person can choose anything so in reality it is the prolife people who are prochoice.

    We can’t stop anyone from calling themselves whatever they choose, but we can and should refuse to use the false labels they apply to themselves. When speaking of the sides on the abortion issue we should always call them prolife and proabortion rather than prolife and prochoice.
    God wants full custody of is children, not just visits on Sunday.

  • #2
    Originally posted by theophilus View Post
    When we buy boxes and cans of products in the store we know what we are buying because of the labels on them. We can rely on these labels to tell us what is in the containers because there are laws requiring that labels give accurate information.

    But there are times when we can’t rely on labels. Groups of people who are trying to promote some believe often give themselves names that don’t accurately show who they are. One example of this is found in the debate about abortion. Those who believe abortion is wrong and are trying to end it call themselves prolife. Those who favor abortion and believe it should be permitted say they are prochoice. How accurate are these labels?

    Those who are prolife believe that everyone has a right to life, and that right extends even to unborn babies. It seems to me that they are telling the truth when they say they are prolife.

    Supporters of abortion call themselves prochoice because they think that any pregnant woman has the right to choose whether she will give birth to her baby. But what about the rights of the baby? Doesn’t he have a right to be born so he can make choices? A woman who aborts her baby is exercising a choice but she is denying her child the right to ever choose anything for himself. Only a living person can choose anything so in reality it is the prolife people who are prochoice.

    We can’t stop anyone from calling themselves whatever they choose, but we can and should refuse to use the false labels they apply to themselves. When speaking of the sides on the abortion issue we should always call them prolife and proabortion rather than prolife and prochoice.
    Calling a fetus a "baby" or "child" is a egregious case of false labelling. Another one is calling the pro-choice side "pro-abortion". It equivocates between the right to abortion and abortion themselves.

    Why not "forced birth" and "voluntary birth" ?



    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by theophilus View Post
      When we buy boxes and cans of products in the store we know what we are buying because of the labels on them. We can rely on these labels to tell us what is in the containers because there are laws requiring that labels give accurate information.

      But there are times when we can’t rely on labels. Groups of people who are trying to promote some believe often give themselves names that don’t accurately show who they are. One example of this is found in the debate about abortion. Those who believe abortion is wrong and are trying to end it call themselves prolife. Those who favor abortion and believe it should be permitted say they are prochoice. How accurate are these labels?

      Those who are prolife believe that everyone has a right to life, and that right extends even to unborn babies. It seems to me that they are telling the truth when they say they are prolife.

      Supporters of abortion call themselves prochoice because they think that any pregnant woman has the right to choose whether she will give birth to her baby. But what about the rights of the baby? Doesn’t he have a right to be born so he can make choices? A woman who aborts her baby is exercising a choice but she is denying her child the right to ever choose anything for himself. Only a living person can choose anything so in reality it is the prolife people who are prochoice.

      We can’t stop anyone from calling themselves whatever they choose, but we can and should refuse to use the false labels they apply to themselves. When speaking of the sides on the abortion issue we should always call them prolife and proabortion rather than prolife and prochoice.
      But in the final analysis MURDER IS MURDER, and while the "example" is always the poor defenseless 13 year old girl gang raped by several motorcycle clubs, the real fact is the the majority of Baby murders are brought to the contract killers in order to avoid the BOTHER, and expense of raising a child, and not because of any "traumatic reason".

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by theophilus View Post
        When we buy boxes and cans of products in the store we know what we are buying because of the labels on them. We can rely on these labels to tell us what is in the containers because there are laws requiring that labels give accurate information.

        But there are times when we can’t rely on labels. Groups of people who are trying to promote some believe often give themselves names that don’t accurately show who they are. One example of this is found in the debate about abortion. Those who believe abortion is wrong and are trying to end it call themselves prolife. Those who favor abortion and believe it should be permitted say they are prochoice. How accurate are these labels?

        Those who are prolife believe that everyone has a right to life, and that right extends even to unborn babies. It seems to me that they are telling the truth when they say they are prolife.

        Supporters of abortion call themselves prochoice because they think that any pregnant woman has the right to choose whether she will give birth to her baby. But what about the rights of the baby? Doesn’t he have a right to be born so he can make choices? A woman who aborts her baby is exercising a choice but she is denying her child the right to ever choose anything for himself. Only a living person can choose anything so in reality it is the prolife people who are prochoice.

        We can’t stop anyone from calling themselves whatever they choose, but we can and should refuse to use the false labels they apply to themselves. When speaking of the sides on the abortion issue we should always call them prolife and proabortion rather than prolife and prochoice.
        I'm afraid that this is terribly false. The pro-choice side is not pro-abortion at all. Many of us are opposed to abortion; they merely think that the woman who is pregnant should have the choice of whether or not to remain pregnant. It is entirely about choice. And no, of course the fetus does not get a choice; for the majority of abortions it is not even capable of choice.

        As for the 'pro-life' side - if they were actually consistently pro-life, the label might be accurate. But they're not. Their position would be more accurately called 'anti-choice', for they are opposed to the woman having any choice at all in the matter. Once the baby is born, though - and there is an actual human baby to consider - any 'pro-life' stance disappears. All the things that enable life, particularly for the most likely choosers of abortion - low-income households - they are strongly opposed to. They are anti-any sort of free care for mothers or babies, anti everything that would help low income earners actually raise their children.

        You are right that the labels aren't accurate - but it's the pro-lifers' which needs to change.
        You can lead a conservative to facts, but you can't make him think.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

          But in the final analysis MURDER IS MURDER, and while the "example" is always the poor defenseless 13 year old girl gang raped by several motorcycle clubs, the real fact is the the majority of Baby murders are brought to the contract killers in order to avoid the BOTHER, and expense of raising a child, and not because of any "traumatic reason".
          And, by definition, abortion is not murder any- and everywhere it is illegal. No 'baby murders', no 'contract killers'. Just the usual inability of the 'pro-life' side to actually discuss the issue rationally.
          You can lead a conservative to facts, but you can't make him think.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mike McK
            But if somebody wants to shoot an atheist in the head I think they should have the choice whether or not they want to shoot an atheist in the head.
            Make shooting atheists in the head safe, legal, and rare.
            And sadly that's precisely why biblical morality is just man-made and changes as the needs of society changes, and why the bible commands genocide (Deut 7:16) and commands the abortions of adulteresses to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritance (Numbers 5:20-28), and why gun huggers wear guns to church and to bed because of a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state.



            Last edited by J regia; 01-05-2020, 07:46 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View Post
              And, by definition, abortion is not murder any- and everywhere it is illegal. No 'baby murders', no 'contract killers'. Just the usual inability of the 'pro-life' side to actually discuss the issue rationally.
              So YOU apply a FALSE LABEL to MURDER so that you can feel better about supporting it. Here in the Dallas area "Planned Parenthood" ONLY provides services to support mothers who want to murder their babies. True, they do provide Contraceptive assistence, but their only response to an existing pregnancy is contract murder.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post
                So YOU apply a FALSE LABEL to MURDER so that you can feel better about supporting it.
                It is not me who is applying the false label; it is you. By definition, abortion is not murder wherever it is legal.

                Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post
                Here in the Dallas area "Planned Parenthood" ONLY provides services to support mothers who want to murder their babies.
                Blatantly false and without support.

                Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post
                True, they do provide Contraceptive assistence,
                Immediately you show your own statement to be false. They do not ONLY provide the services you claim.

                Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post
                but their only response to an existing pregnancy is contract murder.
                Blatantly false.

                Murder:
                the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
                You can lead a conservative to facts, but you can't make him think.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View Post
                  Murder: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
                  Good that you brought this up, so abortion, since "malice aforethought" (against the victim), also makes it FIRST DEGREE MURDER. That the "United states of America" considers it legal, is totally unimportant. There's a higher law.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

                    Good that you brought this up, so abortion, since "malice aforethought" (against the victim), also makes it FIRST DEGREE MURDER. That the "United states of America" considers it legal, is totally unimportant. There's a higher law.
                    You ignore part of the definition and choose that which you like. Murder is unlawful killing. In the US, abortion is murder, which makes it not murder.
                    You can lead a conservative to facts, but you can't make him think.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View Post
                      You ignore part of the definition and choose that which you like. Murder is unlawful killing. In the US, abortion is murder, which makes it not murder.
                      Except that U.S. Law is totally unimportant, and higher laws govern.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

                        Except that U.S. Law is totally unimportant, and higher laws govern.
                        We are under US law. If you want to claim some higher law, go for it. But I can as easily claim a higher law that says that people named "Bob" aren't allowed to post on here. It's just like your "higher law" - unsupported.

                        Under the only law that is in evidence - US law - abortion is legal and therefore by definition not murder.
                        You can lead a conservative to facts, but you can't make him think.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Electric Skeptic View Post
                          We are under US law. If you want to claim some higher law, go for it. But I can as easily claim a higher law that says that people named "Bob" aren't allowed to post on here. It's just like your "higher law" - unsupported.

                          Under the only law that is in evidence - US law - abortion is legal and therefore by definition not murder.
                          O.K. so go ahead and murder your kids, since it's O.K. to do so. Personally, I'll allow them to be born, so that I have Children (and grand children and great grand children).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Bob Carabbio View Post

                            O.K. so go ahead and murder your kids, since it's O.K. to do so.
                            Even though the bible commands that disobedient children must be executed, where does the law say that you can murder children?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by J regia View Post
                              Even though the bible commands that disobedient children must be executed, where does the law say that you can murder children?
                              YOUR law (U.S. Law) makes murdering children O.K. just because you feel like it.

                              Biblical law sets some fences on such things.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X