What’s so bad about abortion?

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 7th, 2009 9:06 pm

Sigh….

My biggest concern about rightwing pro-life activist is that their rhetoric, whether than drawing people to pro-life community repel them.

Mr. Harmonminer that was a powerful video championing pro-life for the sake of women. But then you used moral absolutist/judgemental rhetoric to declare that any one who is pro-choice is really pro-abortion! You call them liars, thieves, and murders. What would the pro-chocie people think? “What the heck, who is this right winger calling us bad names?” and they will shut thier mind. Is that what you want?

I’ve met many christians, yes Christians who are pro-choice, people who will never do abortion themselves, people who know it’s wrong, but people who respect another woman to make choice with God and her doctor. NO, I AM NOT ONE OF THEM, because I believe most abortion is ethically unjustifiable, but Mr. Harmonicminer, you should talk to them with patience, not accuse them.. of… gulp…of…lies and murder!

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 7th, 2009 9:10 pm

P.S. How would you feel if the liberal media calls you(as they already do anyway)
anti-choice! anti-woman’s right!
We are not anti-woman, nor are we anti-choice(adoption is a choice too) We happen to think people can’t choose to take away the life of another living being

harmonicminer says:
October 7th, 2009 10:16 pm

Jong Eun, “what will people think” style arguments don’t sway me much. That’s because people will think exactly what they WANT to think, and normally for reasons that don’t have much to do with either logic or “thought” as such, but rather with an inability or unwillingness to accept the consequences that flow from accepting some position they find uncomfortable, because to accept it will place demands on them they don’t want to honor.

Very simply: it is HONEST use of language to call “pro-choice” people “pro-abortion” in exactly the same sense as people who are “pro-choice” about gun ownership are called “pro-gun” whether or not they own one themselves, or would use it if they did. It is simple logic.

On the other hand, it is DISHONEST to refer to an anti-abortion person as “anti-women’s rights”, because it assumes two things: that abortion is a “right” and that FEMALE fetuses don’t have a share in “women’s rights.”

If you kill unjustly, you ARE a murderer, are you not? If you lie about what you’re doing, or exactly what you are supporting, you are a liar, correct? And finally, if you support the use of government money to fund abortion (which you DO if you voted for Obama, whether or not you will admit it) then you are in favor of the theft of money by the government to do evil.

People who find any of this uncomfortable to discuss in such stark terms are people who are not yet ready to release their grip on the option to do or support evil, for whatever reason. There is hope for these people… their discomfort proves it.

People who are truly lost are those who don’t care about the terms of the discussion, they just want what they want, and that’s that.

So I am in no fear of rhetorical excess if I simply tell the unvarnished truth… which I just did to the best of my ability.

I do not recall Jesus “sugar coating” his teaching in the least offensive rhetoric he could summon. So I am following his example, I think, as best I can.

“Pit of vipers” comes to mind…..

harmonicminer says:
October 7th, 2009 10:24 pm

And I think you took my comment out of context: here it is, again:

If you consort with abortionists, or pro-abortion politicians, you are consorting with liars, thieves and murderers.

Fundamental English interpretation is that abortionists and pro-abortion politicians are liars, thieves and murderers. The sentence doesn’t precisely say that those who consort with them also fit that description.

Although if you lie down with dogs….

enharmonic says:
October 8th, 2009 6:08 am

Abortion is modern day ‘child sacrifice’. The Mayan empire (among others) regularly sacrificed an innocent baby to the fire to appease the ‘gods’. What gods were they trying to appease? The gods of prosperity, good health, and a bright future; who could be against that? And if killing a little baby would bring that about, doesn’t that make the killing a good thing? Nothing has changed.

enharmonic says:
October 8th, 2009 6:15 am

A fun little exercise using the statement by Mr. Jong Eun Lee:

“But then you used moral absolutist/judgemental rhetoric to declare that any one who is pro-{German concentration camp} is really pro-death! You call them liars, thieves, and murders. What would the pro-{German concentration camp} people think? â€œWhat the heck, who is this right winger calling us bad names?â€ and they will shut thier mind. Is that what you want?

Iâ€™ve met many christians, yes Christians who are pro-{German concentration camp}, people who will never {kill a Jew} themselves, people who know itâ€™s wrong, but people who respect another woman to make choice with God and her doctor. NO, I AM NOT ONE OF THEM, because I believe most pro-{German concentration camp} is ethically unjustifiable, but Mr. Harmonicminer, you should talk to them with patience, not accuse them.. ofâ€¦ gulpâ€¦ofâ€¦lies and murder!”

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 8th, 2009 8:14 am

gasp…. Mr.Enharmonic!!!!

you are back and you are using my words in a wrong way! The people the pro-life people often call pro-abortion is really three groups.

1. Abortion is necessary for society and I want more of it. That’s the “pro-abortion” position
2. I don’t care what others do with their baby one way or another. That’s “indifferent pro-choice” position.
3. I opposse aborton but I will not legally coerce women to follow my beliefs. “That’s anti-abortion, pro-choice position”.

I was refering to 3rd group. They oppose abortion, know it’s an unjustifiable murder of innoencent life, but for various reasons do not think legal ban is the right or realistic way to go about it. I am anti-concentration camp, but do you suggest we invade every country that engages in murdering its own people? Like had Germany not invaded Poland would Allies really invaded Nazi Germany? I don’t think so. 🙂
(But incase Mr. Harmonicminer has wrong idea about me, yes I beleive in global condemnation of genocide).
Mr. Eharmonic, have you never met any pro-choice Christians in your life?

harmonicminer says:
October 8th, 2009 9:35 am

Jong Eun, you probably should think of “pro-choice” as “pro-abortion on demand”… which is an exact description of all three of your categories above.

It’s difficult to see how “pro-abortion on demand” reduces to anything other than “pro-abortion.”

You are certainly NOT pro-choice for the child… who has NO choice. If you support democrats and their platform, you aren’t pro-choice for health care providers, who will be forced by FOCA, the ultimate “pro-choice” law, to be involved in abortion, or change careers. If you vote for democrats, you aren’t pro-choice for tax payers who don’t want to pay for abortion, since that is exactly where current law is heading if democrats get what they want.

The word “pro-choice” is a complete smokescreen to hide being “pro-any woman being legally able to have her unborn baby killed at any time in the pregnancy for any reason, or none”… and for that, the most succinct definition is “pro-abortion.”

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 8th, 2009 11:39 am

I am actually waiting to see how Mr. Enharmonic has to say to my rebuttal,
but to you Mr. Harmonicminer… “ah there you go again!” (Ronald Reagan).

You keep talking about FOCA, which won’t pass anyway(the number of votes in Congress just doesn’t add up). But yes, FOCA is pro-abortion because it subsidizes abortion, hypothetically speaking.

Pro-choice Dems also support pro-any woman being legally able to “give birth” to her unborn baby as well. She had the power to decide among her choices and if you are in the 3rd group of pro-choice, you perfer/assist woman to choose the “choice of life”.

Since you happen to think (and I as well) that child too has a right to life, that makes us, pro-life. But just because many on the pro-choice side is not willing to make such commitment give us the “right’ to jump to coclunsion and say “ah.. you are pro-death!”

Have I enlightened you of the other side, Mr. enharmonic?

harmonicminer says:
October 8th, 2009 2:49 pm

Jong Eun, again, I hope you’re right that FOCA will not pass. But doesn’t it trouble you to vote for a party which you hope will not realize one of its major goals?

I think the thing that is wrong with “pro-choice” as a term is that it is designed to hide the main issue, that “pro-choice” people want women to be free to kill their unborn child at any time in the pregnancy for any reason. And it’s especially a term designed to obfuscate when it is used by people who are not pro-choice on anything else, favoring instead the long arm of the government mandating everything under the sun “for the public good.”

Imagine what the same people would say about using the term “pro-choice” to describe those who think we should have the right to carry guns when we choose.

Old Cop says:
October 8th, 2009 3:21 pm

Jong Eun,
I just need to clarify:
1.

enharmonic says:
October 8th, 2009 3:48 pm

More fun with Jong Eun:

“The people the pro-life people often call pro-{German concentration camp}is really three groups.

1. {German concentration camps} [are]is necessary for society and I want more of it. Thatâ€™s the â€œpro-{German concentration camp}â€ position
2. I donâ€™t care what others do with {Jews} one way or another. Thatâ€™s â€œindifferent pro-{German concentration camp}â€ position.
3. I opposse {German concentration camps} but I will not legally coerce {Jew haters} to follow my beliefs. â€œThatâ€™s anti-{killing Jews}, pro-choice positionâ€.”

I was refering to 3rd group. They oppose abortion, know itâ€™s an unjustifiable murder of innoencent life, but for various reasons do not think legal ban is the right or realistic way to go about it. I am anti-concentration camp, but do you suggest we invade every country that engages in murdering its own people? Like had Germany not invaded Poland would Allies really invaded Nazi Germany? I donâ€™t think so.
(But incase Mr. Harmonicminer has wrong idea about me, yes I beleive in global condemnation of genocide).
Mr. Eharmonic, have you never met any pro-choice Christians in your life?

enharmonic says:
October 8th, 2009 3:51 pm

The rest:

“I was refering to 3rd group. They oppose {killing Jews}, know itâ€™s an unjustifiable murder of innoencent life, but for various reasons do not think legal ban is the right or realistic way to go about it. I am anti-{abortion}, but do you suggest we invade every {clinic} that engages in murdering its own {babies}? Like had Germany not invaded Poland would Allies really invaded Nazi Germany? I donâ€™t think so.
(But incase Mr. Harmonicminer has wrong idea about me, yes I beleive in global condemnation of genocide).
Mr. Eharmonic, have you never met any pro-{German concentration camp} Christians in your life?”

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 8th, 2009 6:51 pm

Mr. enharmonic you are playing with my words again!!

There are Christians, for whatever reasons, at various periods in time, felt they can’t forcefully overcome the present evil and tried to work around it(like you know..Germans who didn’t opposse Nazis but secretly hid some Jews in their house). Like…Paul! He knew in his time he couldn’t openly call for abolishing slavery. I know it’s a weak position, but still to put those Christians on same level with people really far out there, is a gross comparison.

Mr.Harmoniminer, No party is perfect. Are you always happy with the GOP? probably not. Dems are wrong with FOCA, yeah. So? I support them on other issues and disagree with them on that one. (This is what happens when you only have two parties).

You know…Mr. Harmonicminer, you copied my rhetoric just above. Yes, pro-choicers are only “pro-choice” on woman’s pregnency. I tell my colleagues, “look we Dems are all about telling people to live for what is just, and progressive, but we can’t stop people from commiting one of the biggeest tragedies in human history?” (I support gun control, and pollution control too).
So yeah… many progressives are so…inconsistent on abortion, which is why Mr. Jong Eun Lee is here to educate them. 🙂

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 8th, 2009 6:53 pm

Mr. old Cop.

No.1 group is the real pro-abortion people. They think having abortion empowers woman and stop over-population so they encourage abortion, like China’s one child policy. They have no moral guilt about that they promoting. Lord forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing!!

harmonicminer says:
October 8th, 2009 9:23 pm

Jong Eun, your comparison of what one nation can do about another nation’s internal evil is irrelevant to the discussion about what a nation’s citizens should be working for internally in terms of legal protections for the unborn. Surely you see the difference. And surely you see that we are FAR closer to being able to affect the legal situation within the USA than non-anti-Semitic Germans were to being able to affect the legal situation internally in Germany during the NAZI regime, let alone what anyone could do from outside of Germany.

“Pro-choice” people, given common political associations, are far more likely to refer to ME as “pro-death penalty,” when what I really am is pro-choice about allowing judges and juries to make decisions about punishment based on the facts of a case.

“Pro-choice” is smokescreen. Your discomfort with the logical necessity of the correct term, pro-abortion, to describe your position, is evidence of your discomfort with your position and its necessary association with MORE abortion, not less, in society.

Regarding “no party is perfect” rhetoric, you ignore the main point, and throw up yet another smokescreen. I am in agreement with virtually every significant position on a major topic that carries the agreement of the majority of the Republican party. I feel great frustration with the behavior and positions of certain INDIVIDUALS in the party… and there are times when the party is too weak in defense of its own positions… but the positions themselves are moral and correct on pretty much every major issue, as I understand them, from economic policy to foreign policy to social policy.

You, on the other hand, are in HUGE disagreement with the majority of your party on a very major issue. You claim to care about abortion, but you vote in favor of it every time you vote, it would seem. Do you know what the word “co-dependency” implies? It means a situation where each side in a relationship enables the poor behavior of the other.

You enable abortion, I’m afraid, as do all voters who vote Democratic, but it is especially sad when Christians do so.

And you never got anywhere near my question on another thread…. Socialism in its various forms has killed somewhere between 100 million and 150 million people in the last century, depending on how you count.

How many has capitalism killed?

And I am curious why you care so much about being labeled “pro-abortion”? I would think you would be proud, since you ARE for unfettered access to legal abortion, as I understand your position.

Old Cop says:
October 8th, 2009 10:55 pm

Jong Eun Lee,
I spent some time on a Progressive Christian( BLOG http://progressivetheology.wordpress.com ) tonight and I now have an understanding why you say what you do. There is no way we Christians will ever persuade you that you are wrong because we and Progressive “Christians” have nothing in common. We are as different as night and day. What I hate is the fact that you folks use the word “Christian” and people actually think you are Christians. As for me, I am kicking the dust from my sandals and moving on.

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 9th, 2009 10:30 am

Mr. Harmonicminer,
It was Mr. enharmonic, who began the comparison of abortion to Nazi genocide and I was obliged to point to the danger to his rhetoric. You are right that banning abortion is easier than stopping genocide, but as it is still a formidable political challenge, people do disagree on how to go about eliminating abortion.

I will accept you as “pro-choice on death penalty” if you can accpet that there are people who are ‘pro-choice on abortion” After all you don’t recommend judges for more frequent exercise capital punhishment, do you?

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 9th, 2009 10:36 am

and Mr. Harmonicminer….

I am not pro-abortion. I said it agian and I will say it not, I am pro-life on abortion. I believe 98% of abortion is wrong and should not happen and laws should affirm the sanctity of all human life, from conception to natural death.

I attended March for life 4 times, I took part in erecting Cemetry of the innocent on our campus 3 times, I was and still am a regular mebmer of por-life student groups on campus. I have also taken part in protest against Planned Parenthood in DC for their racism. Why are you discrediting my pro-life conviction?

As for…….disagreeemnt with the Demcoraitc party. FDR said so long as a person is with me 80% of the time, that’s fine wirth me. I think I am with the Dems more than 80% of the times 🙂

harmonicminer says:
October 9th, 2009 10:38 am

But Jong Eun, I am completely comfortable with the description “pro-death penalty.” Everyone understands that all that label means is that I want that option to be open when it is indicated by circumstances.

It is YOU and the “pro-choice” crowd who have so tortured the normal use of language (because you know you are supporting the legality of an evil thing) that you can’t stand to use the appropriate label.

“Pro-choice” doesn’t mean anything, because it doesn’t say what you’re “pro-choice” about. It is a term that was chosen for purely propagandistic reasons to hide from the truth of what is being supported.

I can easily own being called “pro-death penalty.” Why can’t YOU and the Left own being called “pro-abortion”, in an exactly parallel usage?

The answer is obvious, isn’t it….

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 9th, 2009 10:40 am

oh there’s a type error.

“I am not pro-abortion. I said it again and I will say it again NOW., I AM PRO-LIFE ON ABORTION!”

However, I defend honor of many, many sincere faithful Christians who are pro-choice and unfairingly branded by their own brothers of being pro-abortion! That is why I asked Mr.Enharmonic to think back on all the pro-choice christians he has met and ask himself whether they deserve such heinous desciprtion.

harmonicminer says:
October 9th, 2009 10:44 am

As for being with the Dems only 80% of the time, when you vote for them, you affirm 100% of their agenda.

No part of the Republican agenda, as far as I can see, directly involves the death of about 1 million innocents per year.

You would do better to work for whatever “progressive” policies you like within THAT group, because of their anti-abortion stance and policies. There are certainly plenty of “progressive” Republicans… who drive my crazy, as far as it goes, but I’d rather have them in my party than the Dems, when it comes to organizing the government and setting policy.

What you’re saying by your vote is that socialism is more important to you than saving innocent lives in the millions.

I can’t really understand that.

Jong Eun Lee says:
October 9th, 2009 10:46 am

Mr. Old Cop,

I was disappointed when I read the so-called progressive Christian blog. The writer has a very shallow faith. Sadly, not all who calls themself Christiasn beleive in His word.

I am progressive evnagelical. I beleive Jesus is my savior and I beleive in the Word of God written on scripture. I beleive in his resurrection and his 2nd coming. So don’t be cocnerend that you were talking with a heretic!

to learn more about the real progressive evangelicalism, I suggest searching for the websites of Sojonours, Evangelcials for Social Action, Intl. Jsutice Mission, Matthew 25 network, and Consistent Ethics of Life .

In Christ,

dave says:
October 9th, 2009 12:06 pm

I spent some time on a Progressive Christian … There is no way we Christians will ever persuade you that you are wrong because we and Progressive â€œChristiansâ€ have nothing in common.

I love when people make a conclusion based on one random blog.

I really, really don’t think you want me to do the same to you based on a random “conservative Christian” website.

harmonicminer says:
October 9th, 2009 1:57 pm

Hmmm… Dave, the KKK website you linked indentifies itself on its front page as a “white Christian” site and organization, with clear racialist (if not outright racist) overtones from the top.

On the other hand, the site linked by Old Cop, http://progressivetheology.wordpress.com/, doesn’t on its front page say all that much that is objectionable in a direct way, unless you “get” the codewords it uses. In other words: KKK is racist, has always been racist, has racist roots, etc. But there are lots of “progressive Christians” just like the ones at the site linked here, and that observation is hardly based on “one random blog,” is it?

And between you, me and the fencepost… is there SO MUCH difference between you and the perspectives on that site?

dave says:
October 9th, 2009 2:05 pm

My point is that you cannot make a judgment about “progressive Christians” based off of one random blog. And you know it. To claim, because of that one blog, that progressive Christians are not truly Christians is complete and utter bs. If I dared to say that you were not a Christian in a similar way, you wouldn’t even post my comment.

And you know very little about my perspectives on faith.

Old Cop says:
October 9th, 2009 3:27 pm

Oh but I can and I have. In a search of Progressive sites, the main site was locked to non-members. The one I read had NO COMMENTS as to it being a non-representation of the Progressive Christian. If it is wrong, I suspect I will be reading you post, on that site, stating it is wrong and why. This is like someone telling me Islam is a peaceful religion but not condemning it’s actions.

Old Cop says:
October 9th, 2009 3:29 pm

BTW I am a Christian period. I don’t need any other adjective to describe my faith.

dave says:
October 9th, 2009 3:45 pm

The one I read had NO COMMENTS as to it being a non-representation of the Progressive Christian.

That is funny, because the KKK site had no such comments either. Therefore all white Christians must be racist, right?

To make a judgment about all Christians who also call themselves progressive, claiming that they are not really Christians, based on one blog is really, really silly. You are right that you can and have. And it is silly.

harmonicminer