Here we go round the merry go round - Was Conflict of interests dilemma

[Guest guest]

Ok, Michael, you might want to shoot me just now .......

>>The issue is what/who deserves the right to live.

No, thats your issue. I see the issue as being the freedom of choice and you are denying women that freedom.

>>Do you believe that the unborn are lesser life forms than non-human animals, even though they are the same species as you?

I believe all life forms are equal - >>Freedom of speech is worlds apart from freedom to kill. You cannot seriously compare the two.

I didn't - I mentioned freedom of choice - and yeah, if that choice is kill or be killed, then thats the choice which has to be made.

>>You have no more or less right to your life than your own mother had, but she had the legal right to kill you if she had wanted to (depending on how old you are and whether abortion was legal at the time).

My mother is from rural Ireland where the Priests told them it was their duty to have children - so hmm, lets see, is abortion legal in Ireland....

 

>>It is definitely psychopathic reasoning to be defending the right to kill, you are a bit like an animal-eater who defends their right to choose what to eat, when in fact you are both defending the right to kill.

 

If animal eaters want to defend their right to kill, then thats fine by me - I cant change them and so there is no point in trying - if they are ready to change then they will - similarly for women who want to have an abortion - You cant impose your will on others, but you are constantly doing your damdest to do just that -

and actually I wouldnt say meat eaters are psychopatic.

 

>Just remember exactly what you are defending the right to do here.

 

ahhm, I'd defending the right to freedom of choice.

peace and harmony,

Joeann

 

 

Get personalised at My .

[Guest guest]

Nice dodging of the real issue.

Exactly how far do you take this right to choose?

Would you repeal all laws against murder for instance?

That would be consistent with your seemingly absolute freedom of choice stance.

If you support laws against murder, why is the murder of a born person different from killing an animal or an unborn person?

Is it OK to steal, to beat up gay people? What is permissible? I'm curious...

 

Lesley

 

 

joeann cantillon [goosy_gander]27 March 2002 23:12 Subject: Here we go round the merry go round - Was Conflict of interests dilemma

Ok, Michael, you might want to shoot me just now ....... >>The issue is what/who deserves the right to live. No, thats your issue. I see the issue as being the freedom of choice and you are denying women that freedom. >>Do you believe that the unborn are lesser life forms than non-human animals, even though they are the same species as you? I believe all life forms are equal - >>Freedom of speech is worlds apart from freedom to kill. You cannot seriously compare the two. I didn't - I mentioned freedom of choice - and yeah, if that choice is kill or be killed, then thats the choice which has to be made.

>>You have no more or less right to your life than your own mother had, but she had the legal right to kill you if she had wanted to (depending on how old you are and whether abortion was legal at the time).

My mother is from rural Ireland where the Priests told them it was their duty to have children - so hmm, lets see, is abortion legal in Ireland....

>>It is definitely psychopathic reasoning to be defending the right to kill, you are a bit like an animal-eater who defends their right to choose what to eat, when in fact you are both defending the right to kill.

 

If animal eaters want to defend their right to kill, then thats fine by me - I cant change them and so there is no point in trying - if they are ready to change then they will - similarly for women who want to have an abortion - You cant impose your will on others, but you are constantly doing your damdest to do just that -

and actually I wouldnt say meat eaters are psychopatic.

 

>Just remember exactly what you are defending the right to do here.

 

ahhm, I'd defending the right to freedom of choice.

peace and harmony,

Joeann

 

 

 

 

Get personalised at My . ~~ info ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Please remember that the above is only the opinion of the author, there may be another side to the story you have not heard.---------------------------Was this message Off Topic? Did you know? Was it snipped?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Guidelines: visit <site temporarily offline>Un: send a blank message to -

[Guest guest]

> Ok, Michael, you might want to shoot me just now .......

 

Yup, you realized that you should have added an OT but didn't.

We live and learn, do we not?

 

Actually I did want to tackle the following anyway...

 

> >>The issue is what/who deserves the right to live.

 

You see the trouble with people is that sometimes they are so

close to their belief that they don't really defend it as well as they

could because they get too caught up in their own reasons for

that belief.

 

So using my great empathic abilities I will attempt to explain the

anti-abortion position in two question? You see the anti-

abortionists are not against choice. But they are only interested

in the choice of the unborn child, and that it is being killed

without any concern for its interests. The pro-abortionists on the

other hand only care about the choice of the pregnant women

without regard for the child. Who is right? Can there be a right

answer?

 

>If animal eaters want to defend their right to kill, then thats fine

> by me - I cant change them and so there is no point in trying

 

Well what if I wanted to defend my right to murder other humans,

would I be allowed? Can you deny me that choice? And would

we not want to change the law to ban the killing of animals for

our own ends?

 

If you don't then fair enough, you are entirely consistent in your

beliefs and I can respect them.

 

But all laws of morality, whether they are decided by man or are

regarded as exisiting in the world like the laws of nature, involve

" imposing your will " (be it the will of the majority, of the

community, of one person whose job it is to come up with these

things etc.) on others.

 

As much as I am in favour of allowing abortion I have little

respect for most of the pro-abortion arguments because they

ignore the difficult questions and instead defend themselves in

attacking anyone who disagrees with them. Very sad.

 

Michael

The list owner who makes enemies on all sides

[Guest guest]

--- I'ts not about freedom of choice,ideally it would be! but sooooo

many people making the wrong choices that some one has to put their

foot down and say NooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO forever

oooooo!!!!

SP,

PS , I'm in agreement with the statememt below;

 

 

 

 

In , " Lesley Dove " <Lesley@v...> wrote:

>

> Nice dodging of the real issue.

> Exactly how far do you take this right to choose?

> Would you repeal all laws against murder for instance?

> That would be consistent with your seemingly absolute freedom of

choice

> stance.

> If you support laws against murder, why is the murder of a born

person

> different from killing an animal or an unborn person?

> Is it OK to steal, to beat up gay people? What is permissible? I'm

> curious...

>

> Lesley

>

>

> joeann cantillon [goosy_gander]

> 27 March 2002 23:12

>

> Here we go round the merry go round - Was

Conflict of

> interests dilemma

>

>

> Ok, Michael, you might want to shoot me just now .......

>

> >>The issue is what/who deserves the right to live.

>

> No, thats your issue. I see the issue as being the freedom of

choice and

> you are denying women that freedom.

>

> >>Do you believe that the unborn are lesser life forms than non-

human

> animals, even though they are the same species as you?

>

> I believe all life forms are equal -

>

> >>Freedom of speech is worlds apart from freedom to kill. You

cannot

> seriously compare the two.

>

> I didn't - I mentioned freedom of choice - and yeah, if that

choice is

> kill or be killed, then thats the choice which has to be made.

>

>

> >>You have no more or less right to your life than your own

mother had,

> but she had the legal right to kill you if she had wanted to

(depending on

> how old you are and whether abortion was legal at the time).

> My mother is from rural Ireland where the Priests told them it

was their

> duty to have children - so hmm, lets see, is abortion legal in

Ireland....

>

>

> >>It is definitely psychopathic reasoning to be defending the

right to

> kill, you are a bit like an animal-eater who defends their right to

choose

> what to eat, when in fact you are both defending the right to kill.

>

> If animal eaters want to defend their right to kill, then thats

fine by

> me - I cant change them and so there is no point in trying - if

they are

> ready to change then they will - similarly for women who want to

have an

> abortion - You cant impose your will on others, but you are

constantly doing

> your damdest to do just that -

> and actually I wouldnt say meat eaters are psychopatic.

>

> >Just remember exactly what you are defending the right to do

here.

>

> ahhm, I'd defending the right to freedom of choice.

> peace and harmony,

> Joeann

--

--------

> --

>

> Get personalised at My .

>