quote:

---

I do have a problem, however, with the apparent gradation of personhood in your view. If we only receive personhood as we develop more “fully,” then this can also lead to gradation and qualitative statements about the personhood of others that are “less fully developed” or have “less brain activity”. This is in very dangerous ethical territory when such individuals as those mentally and physically handicapped, those in comas, those with less IQs, those with psychological mental problems, those elderly or sick who exist in a state of apparent “non-existence” (the euthanasia dilemma), etc., are allowed to be viewed as less human or have less personhood because they aren’t at the point of full human development or capability. This is why I can not separate human life and human personhood.

---

quote:

---

If I kill someone, I’m a killer. That’s the way it works. Just so, if trosie’s arguments are hypocritical and illogical, she’s an illogical/dumb hypocrite

---

quote:

---

"... To force a person to do something they don't want to do is the way of the world, not the way of the Kingdom. "

---

quote:

---

I DO think it is possible to be pro-life in personal convinction, and pro-choice (to whatever degree) in politics.

---

quote:

---

The problem you're identifying is one of finding a common authority that everyone can agree upon. Religious authorities are not recognized by those outside the faith and many Christians will not recognize those who speak as secular authorities. Personally I think we need to find a compromise and allow doctors, who we can all agree are medical authorities, to decide when "personhood" begins. Here's a very half-baked vision: We all vote democratically on a panel of doctors who will make the determination about when we can reasonably say personhood begins. These doctors listen to consultants who include ethicists and religious leaders before making a decision. They then must come to a decision by majority on the issue. Once they decide, women should have the ability to seek legal abortions within the time frame given, but we should also have a system by which women can request help/support from others if they would prefer to carry to term (and have a means to disseminate this information in some way). *shrugs* I don't know if it would work, but it's an idea.

---

quote:

---

The problem with Roe v. Wade is that it nullifies any democratic decision on this issue, and in my opinion, as you state above, abortion is too complicated and murky to be decided by five or six individuals on the Supreme Court. Decisions like this are best made in a democratic fashion by way of a representative legislature.

---

quote:

---

Brett said:

quote:

---

The problem with Roe v. Wade is that it nullifies any democratic decision on this issue, and in my opinion, as you state above, abortion is too complicated and murky to be decided by five or six individuals on the Supreme Court. Decisions like this are best made in a democratic fashion by way of a representative legislature.

---

Brett, you rock! That is a great way to put it. I confess I have not read a single other thread on these topics on this board because I (wisely) didn't want to get embroiled in emotional issues in the past, but I gave into temptation this time (unwisely). But that means that I don't know what anyone else's position on this board is on these issues and am only now finding out; I don't know what you've already said on this issue! I would like to hear more about your ideas on a solution though; this sounds stellar! :)

---

quote:

---

I was stating what another person's post said, not stating my own views.

---

WHO was this poster who made the statement that you so freely decided to associate my name with? I am kind of thinking if it must have been Greg Boyd since that is who you were originally directing the post to. I must admit that I am a bit surprised that Greg Boyd would say such MEAN things about another person when he is always preaching to ascribe unsurpassable worth to other people (especially if they're not within the "circle")I am surprised that you, Terry, would so loosely associate my name to the name calling if the person hadn't done so. I think that wasn't the most sensitive nor respectful thing to do. BTW, I am NOT dumb nor ignorant and don't appreciate being called those things!

Miss E, thank you for your reply. I am TOTALLY getting sick of how RUDE people can be on this board! Rude DOES NOT equal living out the gospel message! You have shown differently, Miss E, so whether I agree with your views or not I totally appreciate the respect you've shown me. No one else who has posted since that has seemed to care a hoot about that name calling post. Thank you, Miss E.



Trosie







Edited by - trosie on 11/07/2002 4:09:53 PM

Edited by - trosie on 11/07/2002 4:11:44 PM

quote:

---

God knows I am, hands down, the worst sinner on this board if not in the Church! My priest can't even take in all my confessions!

---

Hello Empiress,

HEY, no way!
God knows I AM worse!! I remember my priest just shaking his head...tsk tsk


THANKS for the flashback!

peace
selah

Then He showed me the river whose waters give life, sparkling like crystal, flowing out from the throne of God and of the Lamb. Rev. 22:1

Edited by - Selah on 11/07/2002 7:18:07 PM

quote:

---

Doc: Please tell me I'm missing a crucial something here. Either that, or this is surreal.

Snap shot: Terry gives a quote that is something about Trosie being dumb and ignorant. Trosie is angry at Terry and the entire board. Trosie can't find the quote. Empiress doesn't recall it. I never heard it. Terry explains he was defending Trosie. Though the quote is still not located, Trosie nevertheless suspects it was originally given by me, though this would make me a hypocrite since I preach love. I've posted (I think) at most four rather short posts... can't be too hard too determine if I said this or not. In any case, the suspicion stands and she's angry because of how rude the board is.

---

Here's the thing. Terry was replying to a post to YOU when making the comment about me. I have had NOTHING to do with this thread for a few pages so I was surprised when my name all of a sudden came up in this argument. I believe Terry must have changed his post from what he originally said because I can no longer find it on this thread Doc,it's nothing personal AT ALL but I was just trying to make a guess at who name called "people like me" and since Miss E. said she didn't make the comment you are the other person who Terry seems to be debating on this thread.

As far as being angry at the board? Okay, I am sorry for that. I overreacted because I felt hurt that someone freely name called me and no one seemed to think too much about it. I can almost bet you if I name called a minority group (which I NEVER would) I would have several people all over my post. But no one seemed to think twice to Terry calling me dumb, ignorant, hypocritical. Perhaps it goes WAY back to how NO ONE ever stood up for trosie when she was a little girl. Maybe I overreacted because I was totally caught off guard and found that no one seemed to care that a fellow poster was put down.... until I made a stink Perhaps a hologram flashed in my mind and I reacted in a way to protect the little girl. I have NEVER name called nor belittled anyone on this board so I was surprised that whoever the "mystery poster" is would have called me ignorant, hypocritical... just for expressing myself.

Sorry for the accusation and I guess from your post you are not the one who called me those names. Sorry.

trosie

quote:

---

I overreacted because I felt hurt that someone freely name called me and no one seemed to think too much about it.

---

I can totally relate; I'm going through the same feelings myself. I have not received any apologies and no one stood up for me despite the incredible accusations hurled my way against my deepest character. I hope the fact that no one defended me either helps you feel that it's not personal or that you're not alone in getting ignored in the midst of this name calling. I just don't think most people are paying much attention; I don't know because I think I was too stunned by own my pain.

And I very much respect your honesty. Thank you very much, you're a kind soul.

----------------

Selah said:

quote:

---

THANKS for the flashback!

---

Hey, you're welcome! But I'm still WORSE!

~E


Edited by - Empiress on 11/08/2002 01:56:59 AM

quote:

---

CieCie:
I haven't personally taken a hardline stance on this issue one way or the other. This thought comes to me often during the debate of when life actually begins, and it follows Trosie's line of thinking that she stated above. That prior to brainwaves existence is necessary for the life to begin. We were all those cells multiplying and dividing. We wouldn't be here if we were removed like an ingrown toenail. Isn't what those cells lead to important? It all leads to someone who is in the image of God? Is a baby "less than" an adult because their brainwaves are in the process of growing and connecting? Would it be "less" to kill a a baby than an adult because they haven't reached their full potential? I'm not just asking this rhetorically, I'd really like to know how this is reasoned out by those who see this as an option.

Thank you,
In Him,
CieCie

---

quote:

---

Yo...

Ok. This is not at ALL meant to sound holier-than-anyone.

---

SHELL: Is there a reason you tend to use the "holier-than-thou" disclaimer always in proximity to my posts....(just kidding)

No, I really do hope I don't come across that way...

Shell

quote:

---

You don't come off that way to me, Shell. Not at all. You're cool. I was just letting everyone know that I wasn't saying anything that I place myself beyond. That's all. But you have reminded me that impactful statements made are rarely easily forgotten. So, just to clarify, you and I are cool ALLLLLLL the way around. Love ya, sis. Straight up.

Mad love and vibes,

---

SHELL: