Does anyone else find it weird that this OP has one thread going asking for help debating an SJW and then right after that, created a very SJW-ish thread?
First of all, the prolife movement is about protecting the lives of innocent children. Many people believe in that cause and have vastly differing views on all of those other issues, so saying, for instance, that the prolife movement is categorically against the legalization of marijuana is simply false. The prolife movement doesn’t take a position on the legalization of marijuana because marijuana has nothing to do with whether babies should or shouldn’t be killed before birth. The same goes for the other issues you mentioned. Furthermore, several of those issues, such as paid maternity leave, and fair immigration laws ARE frequent goals of prolife people. Some of the other issues you mention, such as a $15 minimum wage, that are opposed by some prolife people, aren’t opposed because they lack empathy, but because they believe such a measure would actually do more harm to society than good. It is not universally agreed by experts that things like single-payer healthcare, stregthened unions, expanded welfare, and especially raising minimum wage would actually benefit people in the long run and many people believe that some of those measures would actually cause harm to the very people they are designed to help and propose alternatives.
Secondly, no one in the prolife movment is lacking empathy for rape victims. The people who lack empathy for rape victims are those who allow them to continue to be used and trafficked under the guise of “privacy”, ignore their status as mandated reporters, offer them the only option of murdering their child, and then send them back out to continue being abused. Not allowing an innocent child, who is just as much a victim as the mother, to be murdered is not a lack of empathy. Killing the child doesn’t help the mother. It doesn’t undo the harm that was done to her. Many claim that it actually does more harm. And the child has done no harm to anyone and doesn’t deserve to die.
As someone who would generally agree a lot of the points OP made, even I find their coming in here and telling pro-lifers that they lack critical thinking skills to be in incredibly poor taste.
Do you mean to tell me that pathos is part of rhetoric?
Made healthcare single-payer, free, and government funded.
Well, you definitely don’t want to fund abortions.
But, so you know, almost 50% of pregnancies are funded by Medicaid.
It’s not like the pregnant woman is forgotten.
And we need some adoption procedures reformed.
(This post is not directed at/to SPXF.)
Agreed. No moral person in his right mind should fund intrinsically evil actions. It’s unfortunate that taxpayers in our modern times so often are forced to engage in remote material cooperation with evil, through no fault of their own.
Okay: Hypocrisy of the pro-choice movement. Claiming that pro-lifers are only pro-birth yet support killing unborn children that they claim pro-lifers aren’t interested in helping after their birth. Now, of course, it would unfair to judge a group of people with a wide variety of differing views based on a select view, but it happens quite often.
“…legalisation of marijuana was a terrible mistake.”
Compared to endless suffering under the drug war, I would rather have legalized marijuana.
My closest female friend was conceived as the result of a broken condom, and my mother was on contraceptives when she became pregnant with me. I’m glad you choose to keep your baby. God bless!
So if I’m pro- life, I’m also against taxing the rich and against raising minimum wage?
And I’m against marijuana legalization and immigration because I know the abortion is murder?
Pick a soapbox please…
One cannot support or commit an intrinsically evil act, even to bring about a greater good (St. Thomas Aquinas, De malo, q. 15, art. 1). One cannot legalise marijuana, whose recreational use is morally illicit, to “prevent suffering”.
@Sarsath, please stop spamming me with your links. The Catholic Church teaches that the use of contraception is intrinsically evil, and as a Catholic, I owe my assent of the will to this teaching. If you would like to promote your agenda, a Catholic forum is not the place to promote it. In fact, immorality should not be promoted anywhere. Enough has been said.
Guys, I really don’t think this OP is genuine. See the other thread he made.
We should stop replying.
Wow, look at the mental gymnastics. Or we could at least criminalize marijuana (which is not the same as legalization.
If I recall correctly, Aquinas said that masturbation was worse than rape.
OP seems to be implying people having abortions have NO CHOICE - they MUST MURDER babies since society hasn’t paid them enough $$
Talk about low expectations. To have such low moral standards of a group that the ONLY way to stop them committing murder is paying them?
I am curious what “movement” you are referencing here? Where did you find the definition, or platform?
Do you think that list you created in the opening post comprises the “root causes of abortion”?
Not to mention that, despite opening an account on July 29, the OP has no activity prior to these two threads.
But if this all is genuine (which I doubt), OP’s methods so far as been to come in aggressively with many talking points and constantly linking to YouTube videos and articles with next to no personal input. That’s generally a sign that no meaningful discussion will take place.
If it makes you feel better, instead of “pro-life”, I’ll call myself “anti-baby murder”.
Then I won’t be lumped in with the other bullet points you stated.
I am also curious why teaching sex education focused on abstinence is a problem? How is this not “pro-life”?
I am curious what “pro-life movement” you are referencing here. It is certainly not Catholic. And since it is not, I am curious why you are posting this on a Catholic forum?
This may come as a complete surprise to you, but there is nothing about health care that is “free”. In order to provide healthcare to persons who cannot afford it, the cost must be recouped elsewhere. “Government funded” is a contradiction in terms, as “free” just means it is paid for by tax dollars. The more “free” healthcare that is provided, the more “funding” must come from individuals who can afford it.
I didn’t create the OP. I think it is pretty evident that Pro-Life main focus is legal restriction of abortion rather that support of mothers and children. Am i wrong?