OK, I believe we have somewhat of an understanding of each others points and they're not that different after all. I DO have to say that you appear to be missing my point on my comparison of abortion and war. The soldier's willingness to go isn't what I'm questioning. It's the high value that some put on the life of an 18 day old fetus vs. the seemingly low value that they place on an 18 yr. old. BTW, I've had two soldiers, at different times, move in with us because they were homeless and had health issues from battle wounds(when our own government pretty much refused to help) so I think our military is pretty special too.

Turns out we're not that different in opinion after all. Thanks for the conversation either way.

My brother served in Vietnam. We enlisted at 17 because his birthday put him number one in the draft and he no chance of a deferment. Trust me, I put every bit of value in his life as a fetus. You are parroting arguments made over and over and not throught through. To assume that I don't care about an 18 year old's life who went to war (he died 41 years ago, on the 18th) is offensive. You don't have any idea how people feel about such things.

So we, as a society, need to grasp, once and for all, before God Almighty, that by far, without a doubt, that the people who are really most important of all to the world are all who are unborn? If so, why not treat each fetus as a God?

That's just ridiculous. You're making up stuff now. Oh, it's Bunty. Step away from the bong and let the air clear a bit.

Read carefully, PQ. There ARE reasons and situations where an abortion is the more humane thing to do. THAT is what I'm arguing. I'm not saying to kill all the kids. I'm merely countering your side that says that there is NEVER any good reason to abort a fetus.

If you're a believer in the "God loves the little children" idea then don't you think He should do something besides facillitating their birth and then leaving them to whatever may happen to them. I do consider some of the cases I've seen and heard of where kids lived a torturous and loveless life to be much worse than never making it out of the womb. I find it kinda strange than many of the same folks that get all enraged at abortion clinics don't mind at all sending an eighteen year old off to possibly get killed in war. Many of those same people are also very much in support of the death penalty. Didn't God make that murderer or that Iraqi too? Aren't we snuffing out His creation without his permission?

I did read the exchange with PQ. I think we may have some common ground, but not when it comes to your assumptions of KNOWING that some people would have been better off aborted. That is a really desperate reach to support abortion. I also agree that there are some very, very limited legitimate reasons for abortion, but the old worn-out "save them from a life worse than death" and "avoid the dangerous back-alley abortions" are passe'.

That's just ridiculous. You're making up stuff now. Oh, it's Bunty. Step away from the bong and let the air clear a bit.

But I do get the impression that some people who passionately support banning abortion because life begins at conception most certainly do worship the fetus and that it should have as much or more rights than the woman.

I did read the exchange with PQ. I think we may have some common ground, but not when it comes to your assumptions of KNOWING that some people would have been better off aborted. That is a really desperate reach to support abortion. I also agree that there are some very, very limited legitimate reasons for abortion, but the old worn-out "save them from a life worse than death" and "avoid the dangerous back-alley abortions" are passe'.

I don't pretend to know the future of a fetus. Those types of arguments are a "hindsight is 20/20" thing. We can't decide until the nasty deeds are done, which is too late. I reserve the right to have those kind of opinions on these cases as a rebuttal to the whole "God's children" argument. If He loves them, He needs to protect them from human frailties. I don't support abortion like it's a choice of clothing, I just want to see the option left open in cases of extremes.

But I do get the impression that some people who passionately support banning abortion because life begins at conception most certainly do worship the fetus and that it should have as much or more rights than the woman.

Guess again. Put down the roach and let your head clear. Your assumption is very poorly formed and does not follow logic. You inject too much of your pre-conceived (pun intended) notions and projections.

I don't pretend to know the future of a fetus. Those types of arguments are a "hindsight is 20/20" thing. We can't decide until the nasty deeds are done, which is too late. I reserve the right to have those kind of opinions on these cases as a rebuttal to the whole "God's children" argument. If He loves them, He needs to protect them from human frailties. I don't support abortion like it's a choice of clothing, I just want to see the option left open in cases of extremes.

Now you presume to tell God, who is all powerful and all knowing what He should do. His ways are not our ways and His thoughts not our thoughts. This may be hard to follow if you are not a believer. Truly not trying to be a religious snob as that is so phony but using your own reasoning, "we can't decide until the nasty deeds are done", once aborted, the whole potential of an unborn person is snuffed and countless brilliant minds, gifted artists and fearless leaders will never see their first day or draw their first breath.

Truly not trying to be a religious snob as that is so phony but using your own reasoning, "we can't decide until the nasty deeds are done", once aborted, the whole potential of an unborn person is snuffed and countless brilliant minds, gifted artists and fearless leaders will never see their first day or draw their first breath.
And some aborted might have been the next Hitler or McMeigh, or welfare queen. And since my life hasn't been all that happy and satisfying, I wouldn't have minded, if I was aborted and so helps explain to some extent why I'm pro choice.

Oh Bunty.

And some aborted might have been the next Hitler or McMeigh, or welfare queen. And since my life hasn't been all that happy and satisfying, I wouldn't have minded, if I was aborted and so helps explain to some extent why I'm pro choice.

Yikes! Well that explains a lot.

Now you presume to tell God, who is all powerful and all knowing what He should do. His ways are not our ways and His thoughts not our thoughts. This may be hard to follow if you are not a believer. Truly not trying to be a religious snob as that is so phony but using your own reasoning, "we can't decide until the nasty deeds are done", once aborted, the whole potential of an unborn person is snuffed and countless brilliant minds, gifted artists and fearless leaders will never see their first day or draw their first breath.

That's because I don't believe in Him anymore than I do Gandalf or Zeus. Maybe we're on two different levels because of my lack of religion but that's it.

By the laws of chance, Leaders and criminals will happen. I don't necessarily think that abortion changes the percentages that much, it mainly disrupts the random order.

Women should be able to decide what is right for them concerning carrying a child. Considering the troubles and hardships they go through for the priviledge of being a mom, I think they more than earned the right to say.

Thanks for chiming in.... I enjoy discussion.

Ack! That isn't me - that is Hammondjam who has forgotten once again to log me out when he comes home from work. I'd tell him now but he is listening to loud Dave Matthews and reorganizing the subwoofer and the dog is howling.

Women should be able to decide what is right for them concerning carrying a
child. Considering the troubles and hardships they go through for the
priviledge of being a mom, I think they more than earned the right to say.

I don't understand why a woman should be allowed to have her child
murdered.

That's simply because you are a man rather than a woman. If you could wake up in the morning pregnant, then you could understand better what all goes in being a woman. What woman in this forum believes in a law to make it mandatory for all pregnant women to give birth as a means to putting a stop to abortion?

And some aborted might have been the next Hitler or McMeigh, or welfare queen. And since my life hasn't been all that happy and satisfying, I wouldn't have minded, if I was aborted and so helps explain to some extent why I'm pro choice.

Wow.

That's simply because you are a man rather than a woman. If you could wake up in the morning pregnant, then you could understand better what all goes in being a woman. What woman in this forum believes in a law to make it mandatory for all pregnant women to give birth as a means to putting a stop to abortion?

How does the way a woman feels being pregnant dictate whether or not a fetus is a full person with the right to life?

How does the way a woman feels being pregnant dictate whether or not a fetus is a full person with the right to life?

Because the woman gave life to that fetus and while within her has the right to decide whether to continue it. It's really no one else's business except for the father's. It's a shame a number of them are of no help in deciding what is best to do. Of course, at least much, perhaps most of the time the baby was wanted and choice never entered into it.

Because the woman gave life to that fetus and while within her has the right to decide whether to continue it. It's really no one else's business except for the father's. It's a shame a number of them are of no help in deciding what is best to do. Of course, at least much, perhaps most of the time the baby was wanted and choice never entered into it.

So say you. From what source do all of these rights come?

Here's what I've never understood about this argument.
If choice = murder then

Why does is War granted exception to the "Thou Shalt Not Kill?"
Debate over the language--kill vs. murder--but even in the Bible war seemed to pretty well get a pass. I don't think Jesus gave it one, but the OT was pretty full of warrior heroes--King David for example.

Why is it OK for a state to send soldiers against another state with the sole purpose to kill?
If all life is sacred, how come our wars have always been tolerated if not celebrated?
In all the churches I've gone to--48 years worth of Baptist, Presbyterian, and Disciples with the last being slightly less blood thirsty than the others--I've yet to find a congregation who didn't feel pretty well in favor of all the wars fought in my life time. Some of my Pastors have discussed their personal conflicts with me, but not from the pulpit. Pastor's understand, most of the time, what topics are taboo and speaking against war has never been a popular stance in any church I know of in Oklahoma except Mayflower Congregational.

Mayflower is a good example of how murder in the name of country is encouraged. My family and I were looking for a new church and at a Methodist congregation we visited, the deacon/elder assigned to escort us stated in the first minute that he "used to be a congregationalist until Myers turned them communist."

Why is self-defense considered an acceptable loophole in "Thou Shalt Not?" Why are so many of the Christian right so hard core for gun rights? Something tells me Jesus wouldn't be in favor of killing even for self-defense. Argue that all you want, but "forgive them father for they know not what they do" seems like a pretty good example of Jesus' view on self defense.

FWIW, I am in favor of self-defense. I'm even more in favor of defense of the defenseless. There are few things I wouldn't do to protect my family from harm. There are few things I wouldn't do to protect a stranger I encountered being harmed. But, I would do this with full knowledge that I would have to prevail upon God to forgive me and feel mostly sure he would.
At the same time, I am not a gun owner but I've no beef with self defense or gun ownership. I like shooting and have never turned down the opportunity.

At the same time, I find the second amendment at the lowest end of my list of importance and find the emotion attached to firearms odd.

If the unborn are so sacred, why does our society tend to thing the already born's lives are far less important? Why do we do so little to care for our poor children?

Consider this: In a capitalist society, jobs tend to be compensated at the degree to which they are valued. Social Work--a primary profession for those trying to care for poor children--is the lowest paid college degree in the US.

Can you imagine what sort of job we might do to care for our children if we reversed the pay scale of social workers vs corporate executives? I know this is a fantastic concept, but just for the sake of debate, if 1/100th the resource/talent/intelligence spent trying to figure out new financial derivatives or some other similarly unproductive but highly lucrative activity were spent on child welfare?

What would we get? Something which approaches the supposed importance "life" has to the "pro-life."

How about capital punishment? I'm not against that either but it seems yet another socially accepted exception to "thou shalt not kill."

I could continue, but somebody explain why these are OK but terminating a pregnancy desearves special status in the Christian world view.

That's simply because you are a man rather than a woman. If you could wake
up in the morning pregnant, then you could understand better what all goes
in being a woman. What woman in this forum believes in a law to make it
mandatory for all pregnant women to give birth as a means to putting a stop
to abortion?
Not true. That may be an excuse for you but not for me. My wife and many
other women believe that abortion is murder, and that includes incest and
rape, and abortion shouldn't be a allowed. The influence of women is the main
reason I am anti-abortion.

It's going to be interesting to see how long it will be before you're back on
ignore.

Because the woman gave life to that fetus and while within her has the right to decide whether to continue it. It's really no one else's business except for the father's. It's a shame a number of them are of no help in deciding what is best to do. Of course, at least much, perhaps most of the time the baby was wanted and choice never entered into it.

Well that didnt answer the question at all.

How did you determine whether or not a fetus is a full human and has the right to life?

I also agree that there are some very, very limited legitimate reasons for abortion, but the old worn-out "save them from a life worse than death" and "avoid the dangerous back-alley abortions" are passe'.
Jimbo, I think you and I have found some common ground recently and that's cool. Please take this rebuttal with the respect I intend.

One huge problem I have with the anti-choice zealots is many advocate outlawing all procedures which could be used to terminate a pregnancy.

A D&C, for example, is the only way to prevent sepsis and other complications when a woman miscarries. My wife and I had to make the decision to do this many years ago vs. waiting until the immune system rejects the tissue and expels it. That is, in essence, a massive infection rife with all sorts of deadly probabilities.

Similarly, a complete ban on late term terminations would be a virtual death sentence to the mother of a third trimester stillbirth. In addition, the miscarriage of a wanted pregnancy is horribly traumatic and heartbreaking. My wife is a rock and our miscarriage during the first trimester haunted her for years. After 8 or 9 months, you might have to sedate me for a few years to and I'm not the one who would be carrying it.

I think most rational folks would agree that both these scenarios are acceptable.

However, first to about half way into the second trimester seem like no-body's business but the woman carrying the fetus. I've never made this decision and would never want to. However, I've been through it with many friends over the years and it remains a decision I respect.

That's my view and if God condemns it, God also forgives.

My primary point of contention with your post is:


the old worn-out "save them from a life worse than death" and "avoid the dangerous back-alley abortions" are passe'.

Abortion is as old as pregnancy. This is a sad but true fact of human existence. Women have always and will always do what they must.

One of my longest problems with the anti-choice argument is it is inherently discriminatory against the poor. Rich folks will always have save options. Doctors will go back to the pre-Roe practice of providing those who will pay a high price, safe procedures.

The poor, on the other hand, will not have that option and will die horrible and painful deaths.

That seems like justice to some, but not to me.

A D & C is farily standard following miscarriages, abortions or births that do not appear to have successfully resulted in expulsion of the afterbirth. In early abortions, they generally just scrape away the baby along with the endometrial lining. It is just a way to remove material that could cause septus and is incidental to an abortion and quite common for that and other procedures.

A third semester stillborn is certainly not a death sentence. I've known a number of people who have experienced that. My own grandmother had two late term stillbirths (full term pregnancies) and lived to tell the tale - and that was more than seventy years ago. My great grandmother had the same thing - 90 years ago. She lived until she was 91.

A late term abortion is a whole different question from a situation involving a stillbirth. If the baby dies, in utero, you aren't talking about an abortion, at all. Most doctors want the mother to expel the dead fetus, naturally, but will go in and remove it if that doesn't happen fairly promptly. But, again, that has nothing to do with abortion.

Well that didnt answer the question at all.

How did you determine whether or not a fetus is a full human and has the right to life?

Once again, it's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide that. Instead, it's the pregnant woman's. And it's not like a pregnant woman owns a human being like Southerners used to own slaves, because slaves were already born. Why, Caboose, do you absolutely refuse to grasp that? And if you feel so strongly and passionately that a woman's unwanted pregnancy is, indeed, your business, what are you going to do about it? Go to the waiting room of an abortion clinic and with tears running down your cheeks, beg each and every woman not to go through with their abortions??

lol, It's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide that. Instead, it's the pregnant woman's. Why do you so strongly and passionately refuse that as an answer??

Oh ok, so it's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide if a two month old infant is a life. Instead it is the birth mother's. Do you strongly and passionately refuse that?

Why should anyone be put to death without a trial by jury and all of the
appeals necessary to come to the conclusion that they deserve to be put to
death?

Why must people like Prunepicker so strongly and passionately believe that all fetuses must be totally regarded as complete human beings with every right imaginable?

Oh ok, so it's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide if a two month old infant is a life. Instead it is the birth mother's. Do you strongly and passionately refuse that?

Who really cares with heart and soul other than the pregnant woman?

Who really cares with heart and soul other than the pregnant woman?

So are you going to answer the question or not? What criteria did you use to determine whether or not a fetus is a life?

Once again, it's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide that. Instead, it's the pregnant woman's. And it's not like a pregnant woman owns a human being like Southerners used to own slaves, because slaves were already born. Why, Caboose, do you absolutely refuse to grasp that? And if you feel so strongly and passionately that a woman's unwanted pregnancy is, indeed, your business, what are you going to do about it? Go to the waiting room of an abortion clinic and with tears running down your cheeks, beg each and every woman not to go through with their abortions??

Bunty, how can you assert so strongly and passionately that "it's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide that"? How did you come to this conclusion? It is so very common that there is a difference of opinion on these threads, but you are projecting YOUR opinion here, stating it as though it were established fact, WHICH IT IS NOT!

In my opinion, the point of contention will always be that, will never be resolved with people like you who push their opinion as fact. I personally don't understand how anyone can see it the way you do. It comes down to a matter of a split second, I guess. Anytime before the "fetus", as you call the unborn infant, is actually born, it is up to the mother (possibly the father too) to decide whether he/she (it) lives or dies. This is the way I see it. The unborn child, in my mind, is a human being from the time it is conceived and should at least have the human rights of the very least in our society. If you saw a 2-year-old child being threatened by an animal or another person, what would you do? What if it was 1 year old? 2 months? 2 days? 2 hours? What if it was in the process of being born? Almost to be born? 2 months before birth? In this continuum there is no specific point in time where there is a reason to say that the child has stopped being a "fetus" and is now a human being.

Now go. I'm open to debate. Take your best shot.

So are you going to answer the question or not? What criteria did you use to determine whether or not a fetus is a life?
Of course, I'm not going to answer that question when a pregnant woman can do it much better from her point of view.

Bunty, how can you assert so strongly and passionately that "it's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide that"? How did you come to this conclusion? It is so very common that there is a difference of opinion on these threads, but you are projecting YOUR opinion here, stating it as though it were established fact, WHICH IT IS NOT!

In my opinion, the point of contention will always be that, will never be resolved with people like you who push their opinion as fact. I personally don't understand how anyone can see it the way you do. It comes down to a matter of a split second, I guess. Anytime before the "fetus", as you call the unborn infant, is actually born, it is up to the mother (possibly the father too) to decide whether he/she (it) lives or dies. This is the way I see it. The unborn child, in my mind, is a human being from the time it is conceived and should at least have the human rights of the very least in our society. If you saw a 2-year-old child being threatened by an animal or another person, what would you do? What if it was 1 year old? 2 months? 2 days? 2 hours? What if it was in the process of being born? Almost to be born? 2 months before birth? In this continuum there is no specific point in time where there is a reason to say that the child has stopped being a "fetus" and is now a human being.

Now go. I'm open to debate. Take your best shot.
Well, if you care so dearly with your heart and soul over the helplessness of a fetus as an actual complete human being, and so want to make it your business, what are you going to do about it? Like what I asked of Caboose. Are you going into the waiting room of an abortion clinic and with tears streaming down your cheeks, beg each and every woman to change their minds and not do away with their unborn? How can you be so strongly against abortion, yet not think of doing such a thing? Ha, talk about not understanding how I feel about abortion.

Of course, I'm not going to answer that question when a pregnant woman can do it much better from her point of view.

So again, to sum it up.. you don't know.

So again, to sum it up.. you don't know.Why should it so strongly matter since I can't get pregnant? Besides, I value the opinion of a woman on abortion more so than a man's. Definately ladies first in that field of view.

Once again, it's not my business, your business, or the government's business to decide that. Instead, it's the pregnant woman's. And it's not like a pregnant woman owns a human being like Southerners used to own slaves, because slaves were already born. Why, Caboose, do you absolutely refuse to grasp that? And if you feel so strongly and passionately that a woman's unwanted pregnancy is, indeed, your business, what are you going to do about it? Go to the waiting room of an abortion clinic and with tears running down your cheeks, beg each and every woman not to go through with their abortions??

Where did I say I was against abortion? What does your sentence about slavery have to do with this? It didn't even make sense.

Whose business is it to decide whether or not a 2 week old infant baby is a full person with the right to life?
What logic makes it different for an unborn fetus?

Why should it so strongly matter since I can't get pregnant? Besides, I value the opinion of a woman on abortion more so than an man. Definately ladies first in that field of view.

Right, so then it also shouldnt matter to you what a woman does with her 3 year old toddler. If she decides to torture him with a curling iron, throw a cinder block on his head, then feed him to the dogs... what say do you have in it? After all, you are not capable of getting pregnant and giving birth to that child so you (nor the government local or federal..nor society in a general sense) have any understanding of the situation.

Well, if you care so dearly with your heart and soul over the helplessness of a fetus as an actual complete human being, and so want to make it your business, what are you going to do about it? Like what I asked of Caboose. Are you going into the waiting room of an abortion clinic and with tears streaming down your cheeks, beg each and every woman to change their minds and not do away with their unborn? How can you be so strongly against abortion, yet not think of doing such a thing? Ha, talk about not understanding how I feel about abortion.

"tears streaming down your cheeks" is a little dramatic, isn't it? You can't answer my questions, so you pose your own. Can you not answer what I've asked? You keep approaching this as though you have made a decision that a "fetus" is only relevant to a pregnant woman. So is a child only relevant to its parents? Where exactly do you stand on this? I think it is obvious but I don't want to put words in your mouth.

And for the record, I do care very deeply about this issue and have on many occasions spoken to women who were on the brink of making a decision. Some I have persuaded, some I have not. But I have NEVER one time felt it was a decision that should be awarded to anyone unless the mother's life was at risk. Whatever happened at birth would determine the outcome for the child.

Right, so then it also shouldnt matter to you what a woman does with her 3 year old toddler. If she decides to torture him with a curling iron, throw a cinder block on his head, then feed him to the dogs... what say do you have in it? After all, you are not capable of getting pregnant and giving birth to that child so you (nor the government local or federal..nor society in a general sense) have any understanding of the situation.

Good lord, get a grip on reality. There really is a huge, huge, difference between a fetus and a child of any age out of the womb. Please, Caboose, tell this forum why there can be not possibly be any difference, whatsoever. You too, RealJimbo.

Why must people like Prunepicker so strongly and passionately believe that all
fetuses must be totally regarded as complete human beings with every right
imaginable?
Because they are. Is it going to become a tomato? A squirrel? A fire
hydrant? No. It's a human being. That's what humans begat. The always
have and always will.

Good lord, get a grip on reality. There really is a huge, huge, difference between a fetus and a child of any age out of the womb. Please, Caboose, tell this forum why there can be not possibly be any difference, whatsoever. You too, RealJimbo.

Then tell us what it is, outside of one is in a womb and one is not.

Who really cares with heart and soul other than the pregnant woman?

I do. I'm not alone.

I also care about children that aren't mine. So do a lot of people.

And I care about old people who didn't raise me. So do other people.

Many fathers love their unborn children every bit as much as mothers with unborn children - but they have no say regarding whether those children live or die. Grandparents love unborn children. So do aunts and uncles, frequently. Or siblings.

And so who am I to judge an answer for this when I have already wrote that I respect a woman's opinion more on abortion than a man's.

Of course, I'm not going to answer that question when a pregnant woman can do it much better from her point of view.

So one pregnant woman says her child is a person from conception - does that bind another? So, according to your logic, whether a fetus is human depends on the mindset of the mother? What about a mother in a coma from a car wreck? A 13 year old mother? A 30 year old mother? You logic doesn't follow. She sets the "value" on the life of the fetus under the current law but she can't change facts or the science of life one way or the other.

So one pregnant woman says her child is a person from conception - does that bind another? So, according to your logic, whether a fetus is human depends on the mindset of the mother? What about a mother in a coma from a car wreck? A 13 year old mother? A 30 year old mother? You logic doesn't follow. She sets the "value" on the life of the fetus under the current law but she can't change facts or the science of life one way or the other.

Yes, in Bunty's world science and law are determined by the whims of 15 year old hormonal girls.

Good lord, get a grip on reality. There really is a huge, huge, difference between a fetus and a child of any age out of the womb. Please, Caboose, tell this forum why there can be not possibly be any difference, whatsoever. You too, RealJimbo.

OK, but you first. What is this huge, huge difference between a fetus and a child of any age out of the womb? What is it? Waiting......tick tock.

And so who am I to judge an answer for this when I have already wrote that I respect a woman's opinion more on abortion than a man's.

Bunty, answer the question. What is the difference between a fetus and a two month old baby?

Do you support abortions on the day before a woman's due date?

Where did I say I was against abortion?

It sure seems you are judging by your constant attacks on anyone who isn't.

So one pregnant woman says her child is a person from conception - does that bind another? So, according to your logic, whether a fetus is human depends on the mindset of the mother? What about a mother in a coma from a car wreck? A 13 year old mother? A 30 year old mother? You logic doesn't follow. She sets the "value" on the life of the fetus under the current law but she can't change facts or the science of life one way or the other.

Yes, it should be on the mindset of the mother. If she thinks human life started on the day of her conception, then fine for her. Of course, there's always going to be exceptions to the logic, due to coma and other problems, such as youth. But that's life and surviving it.

Yes, in Bunty's world science and law are determined by the whims of 15 year old hormonal girls.

But you have to account for exceptions to the logic. If you can't, then why the hell not? Not everything that comes about in life is going to be neatly cut from a cookie cutter just for you.

But you have to account for exceptions to the logic. If you can't, then why the hell not? Not everything that comes about in life is going to be neatly cut from a cookie cutter just for you.

Sounds to me as though you are a relative moralist. No absolutes in your world. The whim of the moment. Your world must be like living in a kaleidoscope. And I didn't even make any references to weed.

Absolutes are rarely absolute. Moral realtivity seems to be one of those phrases which only refer to other peoples' standards.

Morals rarely hold up in the face of pragmatic reality.

I tend to side with Ruth Benedict on "morals" being an exhaulted name for "customs."

In other words, what I do is moral, what you do is not because it is not what I do.

It always sounds good to moralists to point fingers at others and claim "relativism."

A good example of this is my earlier post about War being acceptable and often desired by those who tend to favor the single cell theory of "person hood."

My allergies are bugging me and I just sneezed. All that DNA being dispersed has made me murder millions of potential humans.

God just added me to his list...of allegy sufferers. I'll have to show some veneration to Saint Bernardino.

My condolances on the allergies. I never had them until I was forty-one and moved east. I blamed it on the trees. Now that I am back, I brought my allergic reactions with me. It is crap, I tell you!

Absolutes are rarely absolute. Moral realtivity seems to be one of those phrases which only refer to other peoples' standards.

Morals rarely hold up in the face of pragmatic reality.

I tend to side with Ruth Benedict on "morals" being an exhaulted name for "customs."

In other words, what I do is moral, what you do is not because it is not what I do.

It always sounds good to moralists to point fingers at others and claim "relativism."

A good example of this is my earlier post about War being acceptable and often desired by those who tend to favor the single cell theory of "person hood."

My allergies are bugging me and I just sneezed. All that DNA being dispersed has made me murder millions of potential humans.

God just added me to his list...of allegy sufferers. I'll have to show some veneration to Saint Bernardino.

Empathy for the allergies. I feel as though I'm just typing into the wind. The point I was making is dodged by those who would deny the term of moral relativism. I do have absolutes in my life that are constant in the lives of others. North is always north. Up is always up. Hot is always hot. and so on. To argue otherwise is to weasel out of a meaningful discussion of the topic.

It sure seems you are judging by your constant attacks on anyone who isn't.

I havent attacked anyone.

Empathy for the allergies. I feel as though I'm just typing into the wind. The point I was making is dodged by those who would deny the term of moral relativism. I do have absolutes in my life that are constant in the lives of others. North is always north. Up is always up. Hot is always hot. and so on. To argue otherwise is to weasel out of a meaningful discussion of the topic.
Your definition of absolute may extend to some degree beyond the space your conciousness occupies. However, everybody has different ways of defining the limits of thier own morality.

Even the parts we agree upon will vary wildly from person to person. Even the comandment "thou shalt not kill" seems, on the surface, obvious. But, does it mean "kill" or "murder?" Does it give exemptions for murder by warfare? Self-defense? The bible gives no loopholes so anything except "no killing" seems pretty well a matter of moral relativity.

Again, if one looks to historical absolutes, you will find enourmously different interpretations of virtually every moral standard from one era, society, generation, or even community.

What the individual thinks moral is virtually impossible to extropolate into any sort of universal value followed by human societies of all historical eras.

Your definition of absolute may extend to some degree beyond the space your conciousness occupies. However, everybody has different ways of defining the limits of thier own morality.

Even the parts we agree upon will vary wildly from person to person. Even the comandment "thou shalt not kill" seems, on the surface, obvious. But, does it mean "kill" or "murder?" Does it give exemptions for murder by warfare? Self-defense? The bible gives no loopholes so anything except "no killing" seems pretty well a matter of moral relativity.

Again, if one looks to historical absolutes, you will find enourmously different interpretations of virtually every moral standard from one era, society, generation, or even community.

What the individual thinks moral is virtually impossible to extropolate into any sort of universal value followed by human societies of all historical eras.

OK, now you're just yappin'

Jimbo, which of your "moral absolutes" do consider a permanantly fixed and universally recognized? If up is always up and hot is always hot, what are the moral equivilancies of these universal truths?

Jimbo, which of your "moral absolutes" do consider a permanantly fixed and universally recognized? If up is always up and hot is always hot, what are the moral equivilancies of these universal truths?

You don't rape four year olds. That's one.

You don't drag puppies behind cars at 40 MPH.

You don't eat squash unless it is grilled.

You don't rape four year olds. That's one.

You don't drag puppies behind cars at 40 MPH.

You don't eat squash unless it is grilled.

PQ, I'd agree with all those. Although I wouldn't put the limits on them you did.

There's the relativity for you.

You don't rape four year olds. That's one.

You don't drag puppies behind cars at 40 MPH.

You don't eat squash unless it is grilled.

So to go by your logic and morality when it comes to abortion and being pro choice you have no other choice but to believe that such people believe:

You don't rape four year olds, UNLESS you own them.

You don't drag puppies behind cars at 40 MPH, UNLESS they are your puppies.

You don't eat squash unless it is grilled, UNLESS if you grew it.