A Catholic Nun Perfectly Explains the Major Hypocrisy of the "Pro-Life" Argument

Apr 30, 2017 1:48 AM

rossonerinho

Views

225772

Likes

5279

Dislikes

407

Sister Joan Chittister - "I do not believe that just because you're opposed to abortion that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is."

https://www.popsugar.com/news/Catholic-Nun-Quote-Abortion-43096831

My first post that has gone viral. I wish it had been on a more whimsical subject.

Personally I think abortion is a terrible thing. But if I had a daughter who was so desperate that she resorted to having an abortion, I'd want it to be safe and legal.

I consider overpopulation a more than good enough reason to cull unborn children that no one (parents or government) wants to care for.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Too many disadvantages stacked up against such a child and too small a chance for their lives to be meaningful or felony free. We should

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

care for the lives that already exist before considering unwanted new additions. Barbaric, but to do otherwise wouldn't be capitalistic.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

v

9 years ago | Likes 433 Dislikes 6

And it was...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sith your ass down

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

v

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

Well that's a new and rather good gif I've never seen before. +1

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

How have I never seen this before

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 1

Idk but I got you now fam

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Thank you for bringing this to more people's attention, my first time seeing it too.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I prefer this one v

9 years ago | Likes 76 Dislikes 0

Was about to say that I like the Kylo gif better... then I saw. Then I saw...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

yo, wtf XD

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Now that's my kind of chair!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Safe, legal, and rare. Nobody wants people to use abortions instead of birth control, its a horrible emotional thing to go through.

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 1

It wasn't emotional for me, but it was EXCRUCIATINGLY painful. I screamed. Either way, you're still right: no one *wants* to have one.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It was painful? I thought they'd have people on anesthetic. virtual hugs to you :(

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Apparently general anaesthetic is standard in other countries, but not in the US. I was offered twilight sedation and/or a couple tylenols.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I appreciate that you support the rights even though you don't like them. You are cool beans

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Pro-lifers also seem to be against birth control insurance coverage, despite it being the most effective means at preventing abortions.

9 years ago | Likes 58 Dislikes 10

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted May 14, 2017 4:36 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

You understand their true motivation.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Majority of pro-lifers are part of religions that oppose birth control. The others seem to think birth control will make women sluts.

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 1

and some of them it seems are spiteful that they got knocked up and had all those kids, you should have to as well.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Morality has no place in politics"-Machiavelli, like 500 years ago. (Not a direct quote)

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I don't think that this is an argument in favor of abortion. I think it's an argument in favor of expanding care for children.

9 years ago | Likes 582 Dislikes 18

it's not an argument in favour of abortion, it's just giving them another "point in their favour" to why you can't have one. more bullshit.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I agree.I think what she says could be something like:if you educate and provide good life conditions for all thr' would be no reason 4abort

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

Yep. Literally comes down to "I'd rather die than be poor."

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Abortions are not a good thing, though sometimes they are necessary.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

You have deviated a few micrometers away from the 'all abortions are good' position. You shall be punished.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Exactly. People think this is such a major statement against abortion but it's really just how real pro-life people feel about it

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

It's an argument for having depth to your morals instead of painting everything black and white.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It's an argument for separating 'pro-life' from 'anti-choice'. In the US, most anti-choicers are not pro-lifers, but they claim to be.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 3

That's a wildly bold statement. Maybe among politicians but not among the populace

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Bollocks. Nearly 50% of the country votes both against abortion and against accessible reproductive healthcare.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

K 1) you've clearly got your own personal definition of "prolife" that involves preventing pregnancy 2) is there a yearly abortion vote?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Reproductive healthcare isn't just contraception.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No one is in favor of abortion, unless they feel the world is overpopulated. What we all want is a World where they aren't necessary.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 7

This....this is a very good point.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Making access to contraceptives easier, providing actual sex education, and having a social safety net for underprivileged parents (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Would drive abortion rates down farther than trying to make it illegal ever would, imho (2/2)

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

I think its an argument about what pro-lifers should really be worried about & how their anti-abortion fervor is misplaced. Butwhatdoiknow

9 years ago | Likes 125 Dislikes 14

As a pro-lifer who gets into arguments about this with people at church, yeah it's annoying and logically inconsistent.

9 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 2

Something I find makes the debate easier is oversimplifying the opposing argument. Just be really presumptive. Then, everyone's a hypocrite.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Alas, the human condition. Caint nobody agree on nuffin.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The base argument is about the morality of people not taking responsibility for their actions. If you don't want kids, don't have sex...

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 7

Sex is a basic animal need, its not like "if you dont want calloused fingers, dont play the guitar". Gross over simplification of the issue.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

Agreed, but the anti-abortion cause is a way of influencing those actions considered immoral (out of wedlock sex) by upping the risk

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

And thats assuming that all people need to be governed by the morality of a given group who believes themselves to be right and that their-

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

So i understand what you're saying and that prolifers have the right to feel as they do, however i disagree with them & how they go about it

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Children are birthed with unready/unfitting parents, yet the state and society refuse to provide abortion or support. Seems fitting to me.

9 years ago | Likes 63 Dislikes 11

Right, but claiming it as a pro-abortion argument is really misleading. It's not.

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 3

nobody claimed it was a pro abortion argument

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

True, though it is a topic that overlaps. The real question is: Why do we sabotage basic healthcare for the average citizen to begin with?

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 3

Because Morons/racists/bigots, think the world revolves around them and They "earned" everything they have and use.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

v

9 years ago | Likes 213 Dislikes 8

I was deeply disappointed that this did not end with "OP is a faggot"

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I'm confused but aroused.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

What movie is this from?

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 6

David Copperfield: the last spoonbender

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Chain Reaction.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Keanu

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Tusk

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Matrix

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 3

Thank you!

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Youre welcome. I see too many people reply with the wrong answer intentionally and i just like to help out

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

an upvote for the helpful servant of cthulu!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sandstorm - Darude

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Bill and Ted's Existentialist adventure

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 1

Now thats a good movie

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm sorry I try not to be mean but.....how have you not heard this phrase and what it's from before in your life? How old are you?

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

It came out and was THE thing when I was in HS but I've only seen it once and wouldn't have gotten the reference w/o help.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I haven't seen the movie in about 15 years so I don't remember every detail :) I'm not a huge movie buff my b

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Alright. You've saved yourself...for now

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

This reminds me. I had a buddy once that said he lost a ton of respect for me because I hadn't seen The Goonies, and he was fucking serious.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

My favorite matrix scene hands down

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I gotta say, I like it when they fight milli vanilli

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Can you explain why? I've never seen the movie

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Just watch the movie

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Get ye to blockbuster. Stat!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Because it is when Neo begins to realize that the barriers that have been limiting his power don't actually exist.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Their hypocrisy runs deeper than that. They're not about Pro-Life, they're about Pro-Slutshaming. They wish to punish women who refuse to->

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 3

->submit to their REpressive, REactionary, REligious social and sexual mores. Don't believe me? Ask them about their stances on ->

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

->contraceptices; things that would preclude the need for abortions in the first place.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

You mean to say that asking everybody to pay for their own contraception is "Slutshaming"? Maybe you could explain that for us.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Did I say that? No I did not. I am saying that they're against contraceptives in the first place. Misconstruing my stance like that is a->

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

->form of lying.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Oooooo I wish I could upvote this a million fucking times, I've been trying to say this for years fucking years!!!!!!!!

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I don't think she was saying she was pro-choice, though; it just sounds like a call to arms in fixing the social issues after the birth.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Nobody likes abortion. What pro-lifers and pro-choicers need to do is work together to help reduce the amount of abortions via access (1)

9 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 10

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Feb 9, 2021 6:27 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Great bit and actually considerate of both opinions on the matter without being too self righteous about the other. "I mean they believe (1)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's actually murder. MURDER! Give them a fucking break!" An interesting point from a comedian on the opposite side of the debate haha.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It isn't a matter of not "working together"; those are things that people who are pro-choice support, and many pro-lifers refuse to.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

There is nothing wrong with abortion. It is not more evil than any other medical procedure and there should not be guilt for having one.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

There is nothing wrong with illegal harvest of human organs. It is not more evil than any other medical procedure and there should /1

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

not be guilt for taking one. /2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

to birth control, and proper sex education (i.e. use a fucking condom). (2)

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 4

Yeah, because condoms are So hard to find in the U.S.!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

People would rather risk it and have sex without one. I asked my friend once why he does that. He said that it feels too good. It's bad.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Many pro-lifers are against those sensible ideas.

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

What other kind of condom is there?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Good luck getting the left and the right to work together on anything.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

That's what Jimmy Carter tried to do. "I'm not aginast Roe v Wade but I don't want abortions to be common"

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The very concept of not liking abortions but still thinking they should be allowed is illogical. It's either something wrong and 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 23

I don't like you, but I don't think you're existence should be illegal.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

You don't understand the word choice or consent do you?

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

And having a 20 week abortion due to severe abnormalities?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

shouldn't be allowed to happen, or it's nothing at all and doesn't matter. You can't disagree with a serial killer but still think they 2/3

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 19

should go on a rampage.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 11

I don't like shooting people dead but I think that it should still be legal to shoot armed home invaders. Sometimes situations are shitty.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

The real comparison would be you invited someone into your home then shot them in the face. But that's just me

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 10

You can not want to get one yourself without wanting to force everyone to your view.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

But that misunderstands what's wrong with it. Why feel bad about abortion at all? Why dislike it? Is it because there's something 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

inherently wrong with it? If not why care at all about it? Something can't be half wrong.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

Should we add Tolerance and Diversity to the list of words you don't understand?

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Right because actually caring about the unborn must mean I'm racist to right? Idiot

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Wrong. Thank you for the confirmation that you don't understand the words Tolerance and Diversity.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

You know, you can be pro-birth AND pro-life...

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

Then you are not being addressed by her message...

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

I may be in the minority on this one, but sometimes abortion is the right answer, sometimes it's the only answer. Even when it feels wrong.

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 1

Yup.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

i know i'd be a horrible mother, i'd do it if i had to. thankfully I have birthcontrol (mostly for horrid menses) and BF is snipped.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I upvoted her comment and then downvoted when you said abortions are terrible. It is too big an issue for you to dismiss as terrible.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Preach it Sister!

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

How is that news to anyone? How does an alleged 1st would country even has to debate that topic on such a low level?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

The weird thing about saying a potential life is a life is there's a potential life constantly. Basically it's like saying if you are not 1)

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

Completely false equivalency. A fetus is life underway. Barring medical issues, it WILL become a child.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

currently making a baby you are denying a person their life. Anyone not getting pregnant right now is taking a potential life. 2)

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

Look up the quiverfull movement.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I've never met anyone Pro-Life. Pro-Fetus and Pro-Birth, yes. But they usually tend to hope people on food stamps die. Praise Jeebus

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 4

Ironically, if people on food stamps could abort their babies or be sterilized, they all would indeed eventually die.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Dat straw man tho

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

On that note, I hate how so many Christians aren't fervently opposed to the death penalty. Can't save souls if they're dead.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Death penalties are in the bible. As is war, homophobia and the oppression of women. It's very conflicted on love and peace.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It is. But like any source with varying authors and perspectives, the bible isn't always of one logical perspective. The only thing I

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

think unites christians is their belief that god made heaven and lets us in for free, and we don't deserve it, but by knowing and accepting

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

it, we are in. Trying to prevent someone else from having that seems to be the worst thing you could ever do.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Huh, never thought of that. Missionary folk did try to convert dying people in historical times

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Sure, lets go in the completely other direction. Temporally sterilize everyone and have them apply to be parents.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

I would actually advocate for this. Poor people should not reproduce. Even though making it so infringes on too many rights in the US.

9 years ago | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

I honestly wish this would happen but... know it won't

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

even just needing a medical procedure to be able to have children would severely lower the rate for unwanted pregnancies.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Come up with the way to do that and people would jump all over it.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Religious beliefs should not be a basis for law

9 years ago | Likes 666 Dislikes 101

prolife =/= religion

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"Cough" gay marriage " cough"

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Fun fact, hate on that comes from the basic rule of "If you can't get pregnant from it, its bad" Yes this includes oral, and not creampieing

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I disagree. Religion should not be THE basis for law. in areas where it happens to overlap with rationality, it's fine to base laws on it.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

Why involve religion at all then?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I'm not sure why I posted that, I take it back

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

how the hell do you have 84 downvotes? this is common sense man

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Laws are made from what people think is right or wrong. Each person has a say regardless of what they base it on

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 4

Sure as long as you're not expecting people to make sense.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

Should morality not be a basis for law? The same moral reason for Left policies drives Right abortion views. Open your mind

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But moral code should.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

How about personal ideals?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But laws (and their abstractions, rights) are just objectively agreed interpretations of ethics, so it's greyer than that.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As a statement in isolation this comment should have a thousand more points than it does

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well, not really. For the most part, religion has formed the core basis of our morals, and morals are what dictates laws, so.....

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bunch of people disagreeing with you until any non-Judeo-Christian tries to pass a law based on their religion.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 3

I have no issue with this if that is the belief of the majority of people in their country and doesn't violate human rights. You (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

wanna force your people to wear head scarves? Go right the fuck ahead. Just miss me with that shit.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

You just proved my point. But your view as to the majority religion runs counter to the very foundation of the US Constitution. I realize

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You may not be American, but the counter-majoritarian ethos of the US in regard to fundamental rights is one that I personally believe

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

I don't think philosophically that makes any sense. Human thought/divine inspiration is the foundation for law and religious beliefs (1)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 6

and simply disqualifying a "religious" basis for law seems like an oversimplification.(2/2)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

I guess some people do not understand how morality works. O.o

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Watery tarts throwing scimitars should be no basis for a system of government

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

All your basis should now belong to us.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You don't wield supreme authority just because some watery tart lobbed a sword at you

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Eh, it comes down to same way they get Creationism in schools. Strip out any mention of God etc, but have all the no-abortiony stuff there

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Tell that to the Irish government

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

We're not that bad anymore. On a couple of things, yeah, but for the most part, we're pretty good on most things.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

True DAT.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

So murder should be legal? Most big laws comes from religion

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

Fundamentals of both law and religion originate from the same basic roots that given all of our behavior. They will be similar.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

She doesn't sound particularly religious in this quote, sounds more like she's using morality, like any human being should, religious or not

9 years ago | Likes 183 Dislikes 9

Wasn't really talking about her, just in general

9 years ago | Likes 53 Dislikes 2

The abortion divide doesnt nessicarily mean a religious divide. I'm not religious but lean more towards the pro-life argument.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 6

Why?

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Because i think every person has a righr to live, and no one but the person hisherself can make that choice for them. The right to live 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 15

and "pray tell" it sounds u think religious ppl can´t be moral? Or that u think sane moral views can´t be religous?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

i think he means we dont live in a fucking theocracy where rules from a higher power that arguably doesn't exist influences government

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

we do not? I like that idea but unless you are from france or another secular nation, that is only true in the letter & 4ever Contested

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

as long as you are pretty much inelegible for office without saying "God bless" in the US...... if you from the US I mean

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I think he was commenting on people thinking abortion shouldnt be illegal cuz of religion

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

*Should

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Whoops my bad lol

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I know, and I replied that not all people who think abortion is morally wrong are religious.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

wanting more humans to have a chance at life should be the basis for most laws. I mean, it's why murder is illegal

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 17

Sad how people view the enforced slavery of half the human race as "wanting more humans to have a chance at life" except for women. Amirite?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

not really sure how "I want more people to be alive" translates to "we should enslave half of humanity" have fun in your own world though.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Its a common refrain, talk about "babies" and make the woman invisible. Women, who cares what they want, they're just incubators with legs.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

I neither said nor implied that the mother has to take care of the kid. Ideally, the kid is raised in a family, but there are other options.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

People who haven't been born yet, who cares what they want, they are just mindless parasites on women anyway. That circular never ends.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Yeah that's a nice platitude you got there but obviously, since >90% of people are religious, they're gonna be the basis for law.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 11

Let's not make sweeping assumptions about the world based on you growing up in Alabama.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I didn't grow up in Alabama, and I'm making observations, not assumptions, based on easily-accessible statistics.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

In America maybe, nowhere near that many in Europe.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

No, but still a majority, and I was referring to the world as a whole anyway. Interesting that you immediately assumed I was referring (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

to the United States though.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Even then you are still basing the laws on a moral framework from a school of thought, even if it's an atheistic one.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I think 'enlightened self-interest' is nearer the mark. I don't want other people doing bad things to me, therefore I don't do it to them.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

It's impossible to wholly separate what one defines as their belief/ideas and "religion". Secular humanism is technically a religion.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 13

Any societal standard that rejects religion must be a religion in and of itself! Tell the Atheists and Agnostics how they're wrong, LOL...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

...How?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Humans are inherently "homo religiosis" and will fervently hold onto any deeply held belief such as secularism or religion as a religion.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Pro-life is not a belief based on religion

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 13

The idea that a single cell is a person is definitely based on faith or fantasy, not fact.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 3

When it comes to scientific fact, we don't really have a good definition at all for what a person is.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

1) Sure we do. We can tell that a person no longer exists when it doesn't have the structures needed for higher brain function. So we can

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

2) also tell when a person doesn't exist yet- when the structures necessary for higher brain function haven't formed.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

well, that is a hard and fast definition, but there are fuzzy edges. Are coma patients people? Would a brain in a jar be a person?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A person is developing. A person doesn't suddenly come into existence the moment it pops out of a vagina. The vagina isn't the bestower 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's correct. I don't see where anyone said otherwise.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

of person hood. Deciding what is a person based on your convenience is the same argument for slavery

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's not. Determining when a person has come into existence is not at all the same as deciding which fully-developed people are human.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And it's not in any way based on "convenience", it's based on facts which are already used to determine whether a person is alive or not.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The issue occurs when the religion teaches that abortion is literally murdering a baby. If you believed that wouldn't you fight it?

9 years ago | Likes 53 Dislikes 9

I mean, logic and science also say that abortion is murder. considering that life begins as soon as the sperm finishes fertilizing the egg,

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 11

Actually life began before that as both the sperm and the egg are alive. END MASTURBATION! MENSTRUATION IS MURDER!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

2/2 Anything beside that is your own personal bias, not scientific fact.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The only solid declaration of when an embryo is considered a full human life that science has made, is ~24-26 weeks into pregnancy.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

except that it became alive at conception, and we know it's human, therefore, it is a human life. this is literally as simple as 1+2=3

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Bluntly, that's just your opinion, man. Don't confuse opinion with scientific fact.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Circular reasoning is fun for the whole family!

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

what circle? it's a simple concept. life begins at conception. after that, do your best to take care of it, or find someone else who will.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 6

Life begins at conception? Where did you find science that declares that that is the case?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

To be fair, it also says stuff about helping the sick and poor...

9 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 3

It also had a talking donkey and zombies.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Yet for some reason the christianright wing in our country is against food stamps, a minimum wage, welfare, etc. idgi

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 4

The "Christian Right Wing" believes in charity and is very generous... Charity vs Govt is the debate. Min Wage debate is due to the (1)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Economic effects of having a minimum wage (it causes a loss of jobs) Really though it requires an understanding of economics to be able (2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I live as an agnostic in the south, the belief is that people should do these things anyway, why have the gov get involved.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The problem then is that they vote that the gov should do these things, and then those same people tend to not do anything for those in need

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I don't think it's actually proper to call them christian, they're just rich bigots using religion as a smokescreen to justify themselves.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

And that isnt really a religion thing. Most people would agree that at some gestation it becomes a human, so why not have a reasonable 1/

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 10

2 discussion about exactly when it becomes a baby (immoral) instead of screaming "my body, my choice". Clearly theres more to it

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 10

dead at 0 or your choice suffering, neglected, addicted to drugs or a criminal for 80+? obviously these aren't the rule when it comes to 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

children born in poverty, as some rise against it, but I'm willing to bet more than 70% of them do grow up that way

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Because ultimately the issue isn't about the life of the baby but the right to autonomy of one's own body.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 4

Thiiiiiiis

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 5

So youre all for voluntary abortions up until birth? Not saying youre wrong, but I think a lot of people would disagree with you

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

you see that gets tried but pro-lifers always say "ITS ALWAYS A BABY" legally there is a point non medically needed abortions arent allowed

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 3

You have to realize that when you say "my body my choice" youre implying to a lot of people that up until the day it is born its your choice

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 5

Oh I'm arguing against both sides. Either side that doesnt come to the table to discuss the realistic morality of the issue are idiots

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

Its funny because there are a bunch of passages on the bible that are very clearly pro abortion but Christians just ignore thag

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 21

Yeah...definitely not...

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I replied to the other comment on this thread with what I was talking about

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Where?

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

I can explain them if you want

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

yeah, I'm waiting on the sauce too.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

(Exodus 21:22-23), (Numbers 3:15-16), (Numbers 5:21-21, 27-28)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

Exodus says that if someone causes a woman to miscarry, he should be put to death. Only an illiterate would say that that supports abortion.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

There are many laws that are based on religion in the US, and I think that some are good. Religion provides a moral compass for many people.

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 22

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 12, 2017 4:29 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 12, 2017 4:29 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Core basis of alot of laws, "Don't do X or X will happen", The difference is convincing people there is more punishment after death.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 12, 2017 4:28 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Don't confuse religion with morality. The first should have no place in law making, the second should never be absent

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

I'm just saying that it provides an artificial moral compass for a lot of folks, and that's better than nothing

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 12, 2017 4:28 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

If they don't want to help an old person cross the street but societal pressures make them, I think that's fine. But it can bottle up

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

No, religion makes people feel shame and guilt. The moral compass is given by society and ethics education. Not by those child molesters.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

I, as an atheist, encourage you to attend church. It's a very happy get-together, usually very uplifting.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Nothing wrong with community places where people get together. But I don't have to deny science to have a good afternoon.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

You don't, and denying science isn't a thing. They deny truth. Science is a method to find truth.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You can't explain religious morals except to say that god doesn't want you do to some things. That's not good enough reason for anything.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

There are a lot of folks who replace critical thinking with religion and think they're done.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

A lot of laws are based on the golden rule, people assume they're based on religion, and then propose future rules based on religion.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

True, but there's a reason most of them have been removed/ignored. One law was you would be arrested if a married man was in another (cont)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

womans home. This law was applied in a recent case. Woman used it to arrest her divorcing husband as he had gotten a new girlfriend.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So does basic human nature. Murder has been a big no-no for millennia

9 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 5

Not strictly true if you also believe in armies.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And yet human nature tells us plenty of people are ok with murdering someone.

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 1

Basic human nature is to serve only your own interests, actually.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

yet society wouldnt exist if absolutely everybody focused on their own interests... Humans are pack/tribal animals.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This. Until the advent of societal laws and morality of religions started, smashing someone elses skull was the efficient end of an argument

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

This is an old argument and there is absolutely zero evidence to support it. It's a baseless contention by the religious.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

Religion in itself is amoral, depending on the religion. Some religions could require murder or other heinous crimes. Still a religion.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

It's perspective driven to the participant of those religions, it is a moral duty. Those morals are inhand steeped into that societal fabric

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Western civilization for better or worse was heavily influenced by Rome after it was heavily Christianized so it have deep roots of morality

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't confuse correlation with causality.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But because god said so (whatever god) should not be a legal arguement

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

No, but the indoctrination of "thou shall not kill" has prompted a lot of people to think murder is bad. It. can be useful

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Followed closely by "my religious text promotes these ideas and looks down upon these other ones".

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Why? That seems more rhetorical sleight of hand than rational position.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 11

Because adding god to any explanation doesn't actually explain anything.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

In liberal democracy legislation has to protect religious freedom. Laws based on dogma without further rational bases do not.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Please actually state your assumption if you're going to use it.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

I'm sorry? It seems pretty clear. If a law is derived from dogmatic reasoning, without further rational bases, it fails to protect 1/

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You are conflating the coercive problem of democracy with your personal views on religion.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

people who do not follow that religion from having to adhere to its tenets. In a liberal democracy this is a problem. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Catholic charities have been leading the charge for food, housing and education in most cities for a century.

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 10

Let's see how that worked out in Ireland: http://www.thejournal.ie/human-remains-found-baby-home-tuam-3268465-Mar2017/

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

do religious people know?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

And failing miserably. Hence, social services...

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

How does this apply to people who believe in both? Why is hypocrisy assumed?

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Look around you at the people who are vocally pro-life.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Because it's actively promoted by a majority of those on that end of the political spectrum.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

Because a number of vocal "pro-birth" groups are not so solid on the "pro-life" bit. She's not talking about those who believe in both.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

It angers me when people have children that they cannot afford to give a full & meaningful life and education to. Parenthood is beyond birth

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 5

I may be in the minority for this, but I agree. Too many uncared for children growing into criminals that may as well be nipped in the bud.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Children need real direction, care and support. If couples can't offer that, then they should not have children, even if they abort one.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It angers me when people kill an innocent human being for their own convenience, and also when they engage in intercourse while 1/

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 14

Be angry all you want, but your philosophy only punishes the child so you're a hypocrite

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

they can not support a resulting child.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 9

So people that can't afford to raise a child shouldn't be allowed to have sex?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That practice has worked well for millions of people. What has also worked well is the father working extra jobs, that kind of thing.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I'd sooner sterilize a large portion of the population than to force them to care for a child they don't want. Not even the child wins there

9 years ago | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Have you ever heard of birth control?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Yeah, I heard it fails a lot.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

Yea that abstinence really works at stopping people from having sex. Oh wait...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They can still have sex if they really want to, just be aware it would be illegal to kill the resulting child.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Nobody gets an abortion for "convenience"

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

It's more convenient than letting your child live apparently.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

This is properly referred to as a strawman fallacy. No one has a stated goal of causing more children to go hungry, for instance. >>

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted May 2, 2017 5:57 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Your statement is based on the same false assumption that issues affecting born kids have NO other impacts on any aspect of anything.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Jun 19, 2017 2:43 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

There's ALWAYS a segment; we disagree on how big & influential it is. No one w real influence holds the strawman position this post whacks.>

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

For your claim to be valid, that person would have to be against all programs, govt, church, etc. Who holds that? Not even libertarians.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

For example: Virtually no one wants to eliminate all welfare, but reforming it may affect some kids. That doesn't make reform anti-life.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted May 2, 2017 5:57 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted May 2, 2017 5:57 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

When it appears to be so, it is a case of what the Church calls 'double effect,' which is also the case in which the Church allows abortion

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

One can disagree on whether the stated motive is actually achieved or worth the attempt, but what she claims here is dishonest.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's not a stated goal. It is however a part of many pro-lifers' worldview to spew hatred of the poor an basically wish death upon them.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Your statement is based on the same false assumption that issues affecting born kids have NO other impacts on any aspect of anything.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

A lot of people who wanna ban abortion to save unborn babies don't want to do anything to curb gun violence after umpteenth mass shooting.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 4

I lost any respect For Republican senators after Sandy Hook. Cry about abortion and then say these no gun problem when children are murdered

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Or protect our water or food, or guarantee a living minimum wage, or educate anyone, or do anything that even remotely helps other people.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They don't believe it will help or that it is worth the loss of what they view as a freedom and tradition.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sorry but I hate to say this, the 2nd amendment is that valuable. We need mental health reform and the stigma gone, not our rights reduced.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This is BS. Pro-lifers think that you shouldn't (in their mind) murder children out of convenience. Despite the arguments, most abortions 1/

9 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 25

No one is advocating the murder of children, Foetus' are legally fair game though...

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I don't agree with abortions out of convenience but I would never take away a woman's right to have one. 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

2/2 Coat hanger sales and back alley abortions would increase if abortion was ever outlawed. I'd rather provide abortions AND sex ed/contra

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I didn't say there was a feasible way to end abortions. I'm saying that liberals need to stop seeing the other side as being motivated 1/3

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

By hatred. Too much of politics is liberals assuming they have the moral high ground and screaming "bigots" at anyone who pokes holes in it

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

are not the result of rape or incest. Usually it is because people made a bad decision or had an accident while engaging in an activity 2/

9 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 20

that has a known possible consequence. They then have an abortion to avoid those consequences on their lives. That is completely in-line 3/

9 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 19

This is why we leave car accident victims to die on the side of the road, right?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

No. We save people who are in danger. As people who are trying to stop abortions believe they're doing

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

A fetus is a person only by applying tortured logic and making new definitions only applied to fetus. Till the 22nd week it cant feel pain.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

See, I think it's actually untrue to say "known consequence" for some (not all) cases, because of how bad sex ed is for most people.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

with the conservative belief that people should be responsible for themselves and their families. Further, most conservatives are not 4/

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 15

completely against the idea of supporting struggling families or paying for education, they just have problems with how shitty of a job 5/

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 14

these agencies do in their tasks and how pointlessly expensive it often is. The main goal of social programs need to be to permanently 6/

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 13

And if you loose your job due to illness or injury, fuck em they shouln't have gotten sick in the first place.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

So it comes back to punishing people for having sex.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

Having a baby is not punishment for having sex. It's the predictable biological result of sex

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That makes me feel better about being a pro choice Catholic. It's all or nothing, abort if unsure.

9 years ago | Likes 111 Dislikes 44

I am also a pro-choice Catholic. There are many of us. People are multi-dimensional, and it's ok to have beliefs that sometimes conflict

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

thats a poor basis to make a choice. my girlfriend got pregnant and you bet we were unsure. now we are married with 2 amazing kids.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 19

Completely retarded. By this logic I shouldn't save a drowning child's life if I can't put them through college? please think b 4 u post.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

You really think an abortion and a kid drowning are comparable? Did you get left under water a little too long yourself?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Both are the end of a life. What if a baby was drown right after its umbilical was cut. Would that be more comparable to you?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Jan 23, 2018 1:30 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

I know some Jesuits who will be very surprised that they're not supposed to question church doctrine.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

TIL disagreeing with one thing compromises an entire belief system. "You think pot should be legal? Just find a new country that fits this."

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Jan 23, 2018 1:31 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

You are so mistaken about religion.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

You... Like... Realize this applies to all catholics/abrahamic faiths right?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

Addendum. You said it yourself: "it's all or nothing" you can't be Catholic and pro choice.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 13

Yes you can, I am, my father is, my mother is (and she works for the catholic church), most catholics I know are pro choice on fait.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

TIL disagreeing with one thing compromises an entire belief system. "You think pot should be legal? Just find a new country that fits this."

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

That's not a thing. It's a mortal sin according to Catholic doctrine. You are welcome to join the other protestants of Church teaching.

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 44

That not really how religious belief works for most people

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sorry, but you have to accept that's not how belief works.

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

TIL disagreeing with one thing compromises an entire belief system. "You think pot should be legal? Just find a new country that fits this."

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

If every religion/denomination was all or nothing a lot of religions would have no people.

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 2

Please cite the relevant "Abortion = Mortal Sin" passage of the Bible...

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 3

Ppl go by what they want Jesus to have said, not what he said. Most Christians are Paulians.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

"Abort if unsure?" Seriously? Look at any biology textbook. Science has proved that there is life at very early stages of development

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 17

The biggest issue is defining life and when it starts

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That still doesn't define when "life" starts just the development process

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So it hasn't proved when life starts. It's a continuum that people can't figure out where to draw the line of when it starts

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Doesn't life begin at the beginning of the Development process?

9 years ago | Likes 0 Dislikes 0