Jump to content

Catholic Bishop: Abortion Is the 'Preeminent Evil in Our Culture.


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, california boy said:

So can you tell me when an egg becomes a chicken? 

When it is fertilized it becomes a chicken in the earliest stages of development.  It is a new Gallus gallus (chicken) at that very point.  Just as a fertilized human egg becomes a new Homo sapien (human being) at that very point. 

5 hours ago, california boy said:

Because I ate a lot of fertilized eggs and never once made the mistake of thinking I was eating a chicken.

You were making a mistake to think you were not eating a taxonomical chicken.  

This is only 18 days after fertilization of a duck egg:  Mmm....balut!  It is actually quite delicious once you can get past the ick factor.  I never made the mistake that the embryo I was eating was not a duck, even within just 18 days after fertilization.

Quote

It consists of a fertilized duck egg that has been incubated for approximately 18 days; a period of time which results in the formation of a partially developed embryo within the shell.

Balut: A Filipino Delicacy Not Many Have the Stomach to Digest - STSTW

Edited by pogi
Link to post
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

OK

As I just said as shown in Tacenda's post it is an aesthetic issue

It hinges on the way different people think about different issues

My point was an analogy, and just a question and I think your answer helped me think it through. 

What I do know is that "mistake" is certainly the wrong word for decisions people make about their preferences.

I guess one man's "gross" is another man's "tasty"!   I would not call it a "mistake" for him to have that preference.

The implication is that there is "one true preference".

My BELIEF is that abortion is murder, just as I am willing to say that "God exists".   You may disagree with that belief but not call it a "mistake" unless you can prove your preference is the "correct one".

And so obviously there are all kinds of implications to that.

So you would never eat a farm fresh egg?  For thousands of years, people ate fertilized eggs.  For the most part, they were the only eggs available.  If there is just ONE rooster, there is a strong likelihood the egg is fertilized.  Egg farms where hens are isolated in little cages are really a pretty modern way of collecting eggs.  To say you would never eat a fertilized egg is really silly.  You can not even tell if the egg is fertilized for the first 5 days.  And that is only if the hen has roosted on the nest to keep the eggs warm or they have been incubated.  If the eggs are taken directly from the nest and put in the refrigerator, the chicken never develops and there would be no blood spot, or any other visual sign the egg was fertilized.  So how would you even know if you were eating a fertilized egg?

 

You are entitled to your belief, but it is just a belief.  Others have a different belief.  Do you think you have a right to force others to yield to your belief even when that belief is held by a minority in this country?  How do you justify that kind of force?  It would seem far more logical for you to never engage in an abortion because of your beliefs and let others follow their own beliefs.  

When you start forcing others to yield to a belief that is not shared by the majority of Americans, where does that end?  Can the Supreme Court made up mostly of Catholics decide they can force you to embrace certain Catholic religious beliefs?  

Link to post
1 hour ago, pogi said:

When it is fertilized it becomes a chicken in the earliest stages of development.  It is a new Gallus gallus (chicken) at that very point.  Just as a fertilized human egg becomes a new Homo sapien (human being) at that very point. 

You were making a mistake to think you were not eating a taxonomical chicken.  

This is only 18 days after fertilization of a duck egg:  Mmm....balut!  It is actually quite delicious once you can get past the ick factor.  I never made the mistake that the embryo I was eating was not a duck, even within just 18 days after fertilization.

Balut: A Filipino Delicacy Not Many Have the Stomach to Digest - STSTW

This is pretty misleading to the point I am making.  At 5 days, it is almost impossible to tell the difference between a fertilized egg and a non fertilized egg.  There is no feather, no eyes, no beak no NOTHING that resembles a chicken.  It is still an egg.  Scramble it up and you nor anyone else would know whether it was a fertile egg or not.  And that is at 20% of its gestation period.  

No one is saying that the fertilized egg is not a chicken, given enough time.   If you scrambled one egg for each of the 21 days it takes a chicken to hatch,  at what point could you tell that the egg is no longer just an egg.

It is for this reason that the majority of Americans do not consider early abortions murder.  There is a reason.  It might not be your belief, but there are reasons.  You are entitled to your belief.  The question is, can a minority of Americans force their beliefs on the rest of us?  

If we are not going to just argue over this issue, but try to understand the other persons position, showing a duck that is well past half way though development as being compared to a 5 day old fertilized chicken egg is really not fair is it.  That is like comparing a day after fertilized human to one that is in the fifth month of the pregnancy.  63% of Americans believe Roe v Wade should be legal.  Only 25% believe there should be no restrictions.  Most people see a huge difference from the example you are giving.  

I have absolutely no problem with people who believe that abortion is murder the second that egg is fertile.  They should never get an abortion or participate in an abortion.  What I have a problem with is when they impose their belief on the majority of the country that doesn't share that belief.  How do you justify that?

Link to post
1 hour ago, california boy said:

This is pretty misleading to the point I am making.

The point you are making is misleading.  You also misunderstood my point.  You are right that it doesn't look like a fully developed chicken.  That is because it isn't a fully developed chicken...but, it is still a living entity of the chicken species - just like all other chickens.  The only difference is time and amount of development.    

Quote

 

Myth 4: "A single-cell human zygote, or embryo, or fetus are not human beings, because they do not look like human beings."

Fact 4: As all human embryologists know, a single-cell human zygote, or a more developed human embryo, or human fetus is a human being, and that that’s the way they are supposed to look at those particular periods of development.

 

1 hour ago, california boy said:

 At 5 days, it is almost impossible to tell the difference between a fertilized egg and a non fertilized egg.  

 Not impossible.  They look similar to the naked eye, but they are VERY different creatures - if you believe science, that is.  It doesn't seem you do.  (I just had a long frustrating conversation where the person actually does accept the science but made it seem like they don't.  So, PLEASE save me the effort and time and just tell me now if you accept the science, or not.  Is a new fertilized egg a new living creature that belongs to the chicken species?  Yes, or no?  Should be easy to answer.  I  AM STRICTLY SPEAKING FROM THE BIOLOGICAL/SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE.  Hopefully it won't take YOU 10 pages to finally get you to admit it.) 

1 hour ago, california boy said:

  No one is saying that the fertilized egg is not a chicken, given enough time.

The "given enough time" is my beef.  The new form of life starts AT FERTILIZATION.  Science says that it is a new living, independent, creature of the chicken species at fertilization. 

1 hour ago, california boy said:

It is for this reason that the majority of Americans do not consider early abortions murder.  There is a reason.  It might not be your belief, but there are reasons.  You are entitled to your belief.  The question is, can a minority of Americans force their beliefs on the rest of us?  

I agree that is their reason.  Their reason is not based in science however.  It is based on the fact that it doesn't "look" human.  Well, that is how it is supposed to look.  

1 hour ago, california boy said:

showing a duck that is well past half way though development as being compared to a 5 day old fertilized chicken egg is really not fair is it.  

 It is totally fair.  The only difference between the two is 13 days of life.  They are both new creatures of the same species  They sure grow up fast, don't they!

1 hour ago, california boy said:

That is like comparing a day after fertilized human to one that is in the fifth month of the pregnancy.  

Exactly!  The only difference between the two is how long they each have developed.  They are closer together in developmental time than me and my parents.

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I have absolutely no problem with people who believe that abortion is murder the second that egg is fertile.  They should never get an abortion or participate in an abortion.  What I have a problem with is when they impose their belief on the majority of the country that doesn't share that belief.  How do you justify that?

I am not arguing that it is murder.  That is not my point.  Murder is however the law defines it.  A human being (or a chicken) is however science defines it.  You are flat out scientifically wrong to believe that a fertilized egg is not a new creature  of whatever species it belongs to.  It doesn't matter that it doesn't look like a fully developed chicken  It is not supposed to! 

Edited by pogi
Link to post
5 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

It appears you would count them as "chickens" then- if the egg was fertilized?

It seems to be common sense to conclude that that describes the situation.   I sure would not eat a fertilized egg.

Gross!  And so it seems to me that the time of fertilization- just by the logic we use in ordinary language- would dictate that a fertilized egg is thought of as the creature it will grow to be.

That would seem to be what the paper quote above says.

Link to post
1 hour ago, california boy said:

I have absolutely no problem with people who believe that abortion is murder the second that egg is fertile.  They should never get an abortion or participate in an abortion.  What I have a problem with is when they impose their belief on the majority of the country that doesn't share that belief.  How do you justify that?

What a terrible argument!

What about those in the Third Reich who agreed with the holocaust?

Should we allow murder because a majority may agree with it?

There is no right to be a serial murderer 

If one sees this as murder one has a duty to stop it.   We all have our favorite sins... this is like saying that Bundy had a right to his preferences as well.  We are talking murder here!!

Justify it?   Are you kidding?  How does one justify what one believes is murder?   Honestly I am surprised that you are intolerant of beliefs other than yours- I am sure you have been through the worst one can experience from others who do not agree with your personal values.   You should understand it better than anyone else

Link to post

oops I did it again....  ;)

Perfect teaching moment.....

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to post
1 hour ago, pogi said:

The point you are making is misleading.  You also misunderstood my point.  You are right that it doesn't look like a fully developed chicken.  That is because it isn't a fully developed chicken...but, it is still a living entity of the chicken species - just like all other chickens.  The only difference is time and amount of development.    

 Not impossible.  They look similar to the naked eye, but they are VERY different creatures - if you believe science, that is.  It doesn't seem you do.  (I just had a long frustrating conversation where the person actually does accept the science but made it seem like they don't.  So, PLEASE save me the effort and time and just tell me now if you accept the science, or not.  Is a new fertilized egg a new living creature that belongs to the chicken species?  Yes, or no?  Should be easy to answer.  I  AM STRICTLY SPEAKING FROM THE BIOLOGICAL/SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE.  Hopefully it won't take YOU 10 pages to finally get you to admit it.) 

The "given enough time" is my beef.  The new form of life starts AT FERTILIZATION.  Science says that it is a new living, independent, creature of the chicken species at fertilization. 

I agree that is their reason.  Their reason is not based in science however.  It is based on the fact that it doesn't "look" human.  Well, that is how it is supposed to look.  

 It is totally fair.  The only difference between the two is 13 days of life.  They are both new creatures of the same species  They sure grow up fast, don't they!

Exactly!  The only difference between the two is how long they each have developed.  They are closer together in developmental time than me and my parents.

I am not arguing that it is murder.  That is not my point.  Murder is however the law defines it.  A human being (or a chicken) is however science defines it.  You are flat out scientifically wrong to believe that a fertilized egg is not a new creature  of whatever species it belongs to.  It doesn't matter that it doesn't look like a fully developed chicken  It is not supposed to! 

Well I am pretty much through here.  We can argue these points for another 50 years. I don't think either side will change their minds.  

I certainly get why you don't want to participate in an abortion.  But the fact of the matter is, others have a different belief which they feel just as strongly about.   I would like to see how you justify imposing your beliefs on those that don't share your belief.  

Link to post
15 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

What a terrible argument!

What about those in the Third Reich who agreed with the holocaust?

Should we allow murder because a majority may agree with it?

There is no right to be a serial murderer 

If one sees this as murder one has a duty to stop it.   We all have our favorite sins... this is like saying that Bundy had a right to his preferences as well.  We are talking murder here!!

Justify it?   Are you kidding?  How does one justify what one believes is murder?   Honestly I am surprised that you are intolerant of beliefs other than yours- I am sure you have been through the worst one can experience from others who do not agree with your personal values.   You should understand it better than anyone else

So now, having a different belief about abortion is comparable to Nazi Germany or a serial killer when you KNOW not everyone shares your belief that abortion in its early stages is MURDER.  

My intention is to help you and others see that there is a different side to this argument.  I am not asking you to agree with that point of view, I am only asking you to understand that not everyone shares your belief.  

And so the argument will continue for another 50 years.  Neither side willing to admit that the other side has a point of view that should also be respected.  The only problem comes when one side decides that their view should be forced on everyone else.  If not, then they are just like holocaust victims. 

And I am not the one that is intolerant of beliefs of others.  I am more than willing to allow any person who does not want to be involved in an abortion to not do so.  This is just like gay marriage.  If you don't want one, then marry someone of the opposite sex.  If your church doesn't want to perform gay marriage, then don't.  So yeah, I have been through this kind of intolerance before.

Probably not much more can be talked about.  Looks like those that want to reverse Roe v Wade are not open to understanding a different point of view.

Edited by california boy
Link to post
3 minutes ago, california boy said:

Well I am pretty much through here.  We can argue these points for another 50 years. I don't think either side will change their minds.  

I certainly get why you don't want to participate in an abortion.  But the fact of the matter is, others have a different belief which they feel just as strongly about.   I would like to see how you justify imposing your beliefs on those that don't share your belief.  

I told you just above....

Murder cannot be justified.   

How would you feel about justifying the Third Reich's position on your life style?  Could you justify that?  I hope not!

It cannot be justified.  If that ever came to pass I would defend you or even give my life to ensure that we never have euthanasia in this country- but who knows?

I don't think you understand the gravity of your situation nor the contradiction about how your own argument could, in another time or place, be used to justify YOUR death.

You are not getting it. 

Link to post
1 minute ago, california boy said:

So now, having a different belief about abortion is comparable to Nazi Germany when you KNOW not everyone shares your belief that abortion in its early stages is not MURDER.  

My intention is to help you and others see that there is a different side to this argument.  I am not asking you to agree with that point of view, I am only asking you to understand that not everyone shares your belief.  

And so the argument will continue for another 50 years.  Neither side willing to admit that the other side has a point of view that differs from their own.  The only problem comes when one side decides that their view should be forced on everyone else.  If not, then they are just like holocaust victims. 

And I am not the one that is intolerant of beliefs of others.  I am more than willing to allow any person who does not want to be involved in an abortion to not do so.  This is just like gay marriage.  If you don't want one, then marry someone of the opposite sex.  So yeah, I have been through this kind of intolerance before.

Apply this to YOU personally and see how it sounds.

I can argue the other side if you like, but I don't think you will like it, so I would never do so.

Link to post
7 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I told you just above....

Murder cannot be justified.   

How would you feel about justifying the Third Reich's position on your life style?  Could you justify that?  I hope not!

It cannot be justified.  If that ever came to pass I would defend you or even give my life to ensure that we never have euthanasia in this country- but who knows?

I don't think you understand the gravity of your situation nor the contradiction about how your own argument could, in another time or place, be used to justify YOUR death.

You are not getting it. 

Whatever.  This is an endless circle of hell.  

Link to post

When morals are disengaged from religious beliefs then almost anything can happen and any action can become acceptable. The only reason that abortion is not looked upon as murder is that our society has disengaged from religion and its teachings. Then a sufficient number of individuals came to accept a wide range of behaviors from free sex - the sexual act focused strictly on pleasure rather than creation - to abortion. Abortion lost its stigma and the child was no longer a child, but a mass of cells that was rejected by the mother for any reason they chose. 

Society's morals will nor return to those thought of as Christian until religion returns to preeminence within the society. Until such time, society will continue to focus almost exclusively on the individual and her/his rights over those of others and the community at large. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
50 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

When morals are disengaged from religious beliefs then almost anything can happen and any action can become acceptable. The only reason that abortion is not looked upon as murder is that our society has disengaged from religion and its teachings. Then a sufficient number of individuals came to accept a wide range of behaviors from free sex - the sexual act focused strictly on pleasure rather than creation - to abortion. Abortion lost its stigma and the child was no longer a child, but a mass of cells that was rejected by the mother for any reason they chose. 

Society's morals will nor return to those thought of as Christian until religion returns to preeminence within the society. Until such time, society will continue to focus almost exclusively on the individual and her/his rights over those of others and the community at large. 

This is such a difficult subject. If I had my druthers, I would only okay abortion for the life of the mother. But I know there are variables, that are in play. But certainly if a woman is having abortions and not taking precautions or being reckless, than certainly, shut that down stat. 

Link to post
9 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

It appears you would count them as "chickens" then- if the egg was fertilized?

It seems to be common sense to conclude that that describes the situation.   I sure would not eat a fertilized egg.

Gross!  And so it seems to me that the time of fertilization- just by the logic we use in ordinary language- would dictate that a fertilized egg is thought of as the creature it will grow to be.

You wouldn't know it was fertilized. Some places sell fertilized eggs. Unless you know what to look for ( white bullseyes spot), it looks like a normal egg. 

I know mine are not because I don't have a rooster. A rooster is pointless for me since I don't want mutt chicks and they are loud.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
3 hours ago, california boy said:

Whatever.  This is an endless circle of hell.  

Interesting perspective.

Link to post
1 hour ago, cherryTreez said:

You wouldn't know it was fertilized.

You are not getting it.   The comment only applies if you "BELIEVE" it is fertilized. Belief is everything.

Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...