We've heard this refrain before. It ended badly ...
Exactly!
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Leftists want to be the God in which they don’t believe. What a quandary!
Just as it was compassionate of the Nazis to end Jewish suffering by gassing and burning them, so it is an act of compassion to keep a child from potentially suffering in the future by tearing them limb from limb in the womb. /s
It is NOT compassionate. It is murder.
If this is allowed how long until it becomes policy regarding adults? And who will determine whom is suffering?
No thank you!
Why not just kill off the entire human race because they *might suffer*, then?
As if suffering were always a bad thing.
Judas yesterday: “For this perfume might have been sold for a high price and the money given to the poor.”
Judas today: “By opposing abortion, you must not care about those children who are suffering.”
I wonder if those who claim dismemberment and death is “compassionate” would like it if someone decided to be “compassionate” to them?
Some of our “ethicists” seem to be channeling Sophocles’s Oedipus: “Never to have been born is best of all.”
Ultimately any moral calculus based on philosophical hedonism (even without embracing coarse hedonism) is anti-human.
Somebody come out and advocate snuffing kittens and puppies and listen to these cold-blodded baby killers scream cruelty, and worse!
murder
Noun:The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
Verb: Kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation.
To all the unbelievers, call it anything else but "it is what it is" - I call it murder!
This is my opinion only, your mileage may vary.
Whatever the reason is for an abortion is, plain and simply, premeditated murder.
The woman plans to murder her child.
The woman arranges with someone to kill that child.
The woman has that child killed and pays the killer.
Plain and simply premeditated murder for whatever reason.
And in all the above steps, the child is totally innocent and couldn’t possibly have caused “potential suffering” in any way possible.
Why stop at abortion, let us kill any one who might have complications. In grown toenail, you die so as not to suffer.
The idea of murdering to eliminate “potential” suffering is absurd. No one is God who can predict a person’s life. The preposterous concept that the murder of an innocent unborn human being is somehow justified by a merely potential eventuality that may not even become reality is simply dreadful.
Also - Christians - at least Catholics - have always looked upon suffering itself as having merit. We are imitating Christ’s suffering on the cross. St. Paul tells us in Col. 1:24: ...what is lacking of the sufferings of Christ I fill up in my flesh for his body, which is the Church. Suffering isn’t automatically the worst thing ever; killing someone as a justification to prevent it is a tragic premise.
But do that to, say, a dolphin. Then see how far you'd get with the freedom of choice folk.
This is what happens when people lose their belief in God.
We've heard this refrain before. It ended badly ...
It actually exacerbates more problems. 1) The potential risk for Breast cancer goes up dramatically.
2) The mental health issues the woman and the child's father *(assuming he knows) also increases.
For me it comes down to this: God put that child here with those parents for a reason. I am not even going to try and guess what that reason might be, but He is in charge and knows what he is doing. I trust in Him above all else.
Anyone who’s born will experience suffering sooner or later. Far from being compassionate, it’s yet another step along the slippery trail being blazed by Belgium.