Any pro-life people here able to defend their position?

treeplanter said:
No, I consider myself
{and most every other human being on earth, for that matter}
to be superior to God

Why?
Because we all understand that it is immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon others

God, who is supposed to be all knowing, doesn't seem to know this...

Or, if He does know it, He just doesn't care

Either way, how can we possibly consider Him worthy of our devotion?
Click to expand...
A more simple reason is that existing people are "superior" to those that don't exist.
 
Crazy Ivan said:
That’s absolutely false. Even my radical pro choice liberal cousin who is pregnant posted a photo of her enlarging belly with a caption saying “Baby Weiland” (Weiland is her last name).

No mother walks around saying, “my fetus just kicked.”

Please.
Click to expand...
You are quoting people who are glad to be pregnant and naturally use such language. Abortion should be discussed using precise language, because ambiguity leads to misunderstanding. Anything that is a barrier to understanding should be avoided.
 
glenlogie said:
Since God has created the world and all that is in it, please list your puny list of accomplishments
Click to expand...
1. Creatorship does not confer ethical and moral impunity

2. My accomplishments are immaterial

What are you suggesting? Because God did this and that great thing, He is, therefore, impervious to being judged for doing wrong?
Simply because I, myself, have not done anything that qualifies as great, I am subject to being judged for doing wrong?
 
Crazy Ivan said:
That’s absolutely false. Even my radical pro choice liberal cousin who is pregnant posted a photo of her enlarging belly with a caption saying “Baby Weiland” (Weiland is her last name).

No mother walks around saying, “my fetus just kicked.”

Please.
Click to expand...
The use of the term "baby" is aspirational in these scenarios.
 
treeplanter said:
1. Creatorship does not confer ethical and moral impunity

2. My accomplishments are immaterial

What are you suggesting? Because God did this and that great thing, He is, therefore, impervious to being judged for doing wrong?
Simply because I, myself, have not done anything that qualifies as great, I am subject to being judged for doing wrong?
Click to expand...
+a
 
treeplanter said:
1. Creatorship does not confer ethical and moral impunity

2. My accomplishments are immaterial

What are you suggesting? Because God did this and that great thing, He is, therefore, impervious to being judged for doing wrong?
Simply because I, myself, have not done anything that qualifies as great, I am subject to being judged for doing wrong?
Click to expand...
Ok then tell me your standard and tell me why I should accept it.
 
Temujin said:
Not really. Imaginary beings, however wonderful, are not real. Why do you consider poor people to be less real than rich ones?
Click to expand...

Since you are a human of a limited number of years your opinion is not worth more than the opinion of others.

And you were the one who brought up the topic of some people being worth more than others. I was just trying to see what your limits were.
 
Temujin said:
You are quoting people who are glad to be pregnant and naturally use such language.
Click to expand...
And you are just another person with an opinion.

Abortion should be discussed using precise language, because ambiguity leads to misunderstanding.
Click to expand...
Like you implying abortifacients, which you couldnt even spell properly are contraceptives.
Anything that is a barrier to understanding should be avoided.
Click to expand...
then you need to stop posting, listen and learn ;)
 
glenlogie said:
Ok then tell me your standard and tell me why I should accept it.
Click to expand...
You mean my moral standard?
I already told you, but am happy to repeat it!

It is immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon another
Anything else, in my estimation, is either moral or, at the very least, morally neutral

Why should you accept it?
You already do!

You know full well that it IS immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon others

{You likely also believe that additional things, that do not fit the description above, are also immoral - i.e. taking the name of the Lord in vain, etc - but that is irrelevant to our shared standard}
 
treeplanter said:
You mean my moral standard?
I already told you, but am happy to repeat it!

It is immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon another
Anything else, in my estimation, is either moral or, at the very least, morally neutral

Why should you accept it?
You already do!

You know full well that it IS immoral to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon others

{You likely also believe that additional things that do not fit the description above are also immoral - i.e. taking the name of the Lord in vain, etc - but that is irrelevant to our shared standard}
Click to expand...
Why does your standard carry any weight?
 
glenlogie said:
Since you are a human of a limited number of years your opinion is not worth more than the opinion of others.

And you were the one who brought up the topic of some people being worth more than others. I was just trying to see what your limits were.
Click to expand...
I think you mistake me for someone else. I think all actual people are equally valuable. Actual people do not include the imaginary, the dead or the not yet born.
 
glenlogie said:
Whom is "we">
And I need to see the results of that vote.
Click to expand...
"We" is you and me and every other human being who is not a true socio/psychopath

Are you saying that you disagree?

If so, you can clear this up right here and now

Answer the following question with a simple YES or NO

Is it morally acceptable to consciously and purposefully inflict needless harm upon another?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top