Sermon and the drowning pool
so...my room-mate and I get into this debate over...well...quite a few things actually: murder, life, and what/who is considered "a monstrosity"
First, on murder: We picked 3 different things: abortion, crimes of passion, and "self-rightous suicides.
Abortion: We started talking about abortion.
She has the pro-choice view that it's not a life until the actual birth.
as long as it's inside the "bearer", then it is a full part of the woman,
and therefore she has a right to do with it what she will, like amputating
a limb. She argues the fact that the child is an "it" until birth, without
even without identity or right to existance, as if it was no more then a cereal
bowl.
I have the pro-life view that, upon conception, the egg and sperm become
a seperate genetic strain, and despite incubation, is at that moment an
individual entity and no one has the right to take away it's right to a full life.
I argued the fact of unique DNA and the development of seperate brain activity
and heartbeat of a fetus all day long.
so this came to the firey situation of a child concieved by rape, and if the woman has
a right to abort the child then....mind you, I had to fight to use the word "child"...and if she would have called it an "abomination" one more time...I would have completely lost it on her.
Her stand is that the woman shouldn't have to carry and bear an "it" that is a product of being victimized. She says that its an "abomination" and doesn't deserve to live, that ending it stops the FACT (not the chance mind you, but the ABSOLUTE FACT) that the child will only continue the cycle of victimization.
While I don't condone the act of rape, I also don't condone a rape victim MAKING a victim of the child. Now, before anyone says "Dave, your not a woman, you will never know what it's like." I want to stop you and explain something. No, I'm not a woman...and I'm not Arnold Schwartenagger in a very bad movie...so the chance of me getting preggers...ABSOLUTE 0..nadda...DENIED BEARING A CHILD. However, think of it this way: Someone kills one of your best friends, making them, and you, a victim. If you, in response to your victimization, turn around and kill someone else, are you justified because someone made you a victim?? You want to talk about carrying on a cycle of victimization? Rape victims that conceive, and carry out an abortion....thats "carrying on a cycle", because it's a victim CREATING another victim...your no better then the rapist at that point, becaue 8 times out of 10, he/she was a victim at one point too.
it's a very simple math: Rape Victims + Abortion = Victims creating Victims.
Crimes of passion: then this led into the "crimes of passion".
She argued that if she walked down an alley, and seen someone getting raped, and killed the rapist in a heat of anger, then it would be justified, and not murder.
I argued that, despite that she would have "blacked out", "fully aware of her actions", or "split second descisions", it doesn't change the fact that she took phsyically took life from another person, and that still constitutes murder. While she was possibally saving someone else, she still has a "victim" herself now, as she killed someone. Ask any cop who has had to shoot someone else. Thats a very spur of the moment thing...split second descisions. And even if the cop does it to save someone becoming a victim, and even proclaimed a hero, that cop, no matter how anyone justifies it, feels the pain from having to take another person's life. They had to do it...but they still know it's murder.
and the fact that it's still murder leads RIGHT into the "self-rightious suicide" idea.
Her stance is that if the person is in misery from constant, agonizing pain, then they have the right to end their own life, so they don't have to suffer anymore.
I argued that they don't have that right, no matter how bad the pain is, because that is a very selfish thing to do. All their "justified suicide" is going to do is cause the people that care about them pain as well. This is where she said that it doesn't matter, because their pain isn't the same as the person commiting the suicide.
flat out..to cut this short...it's going to be very simple.
VICTIMS DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO VICTIMIZE!!!!!!!
Abortion
Crimes of Passion
"self rightous suicide"
THEIR ALL MURDER...THEY ARE VICTIMS VICTIMIZING!!!!!!
First, on murder: We picked 3 different things: abortion, crimes of passion, and "self-rightous suicides.
Abortion: We started talking about abortion.
She has the pro-choice view that it's not a life until the actual birth.
as long as it's inside the "bearer", then it is a full part of the woman,
and therefore she has a right to do with it what she will, like amputating
a limb. She argues the fact that the child is an "it" until birth, without
even without identity or right to existance, as if it was no more then a cereal
bowl.
I have the pro-life view that, upon conception, the egg and sperm become
a seperate genetic strain, and despite incubation, is at that moment an
individual entity and no one has the right to take away it's right to a full life.
I argued the fact of unique DNA and the development of seperate brain activity
and heartbeat of a fetus all day long.
so this came to the firey situation of a child concieved by rape, and if the woman has
a right to abort the child then....mind you, I had to fight to use the word "child"...and if she would have called it an "abomination" one more time...I would have completely lost it on her.
Her stand is that the woman shouldn't have to carry and bear an "it" that is a product of being victimized. She says that its an "abomination" and doesn't deserve to live, that ending it stops the FACT (not the chance mind you, but the ABSOLUTE FACT) that the child will only continue the cycle of victimization.
While I don't condone the act of rape, I also don't condone a rape victim MAKING a victim of the child. Now, before anyone says "Dave, your not a woman, you will never know what it's like." I want to stop you and explain something. No, I'm not a woman...and I'm not Arnold Schwartenagger in a very bad movie...so the chance of me getting preggers...ABSOLUTE 0..nadda...DENIED BEARING A CHILD. However, think of it this way: Someone kills one of your best friends, making them, and you, a victim. If you, in response to your victimization, turn around and kill someone else, are you justified because someone made you a victim?? You want to talk about carrying on a cycle of victimization? Rape victims that conceive, and carry out an abortion....thats "carrying on a cycle", because it's a victim CREATING another victim...your no better then the rapist at that point, becaue 8 times out of 10, he/she was a victim at one point too.
it's a very simple math: Rape Victims + Abortion = Victims creating Victims.
Crimes of passion: then this led into the "crimes of passion".
She argued that if she walked down an alley, and seen someone getting raped, and killed the rapist in a heat of anger, then it would be justified, and not murder.
I argued that, despite that she would have "blacked out", "fully aware of her actions", or "split second descisions", it doesn't change the fact that she took phsyically took life from another person, and that still constitutes murder. While she was possibally saving someone else, she still has a "victim" herself now, as she killed someone. Ask any cop who has had to shoot someone else. Thats a very spur of the moment thing...split second descisions. And even if the cop does it to save someone becoming a victim, and even proclaimed a hero, that cop, no matter how anyone justifies it, feels the pain from having to take another person's life. They had to do it...but they still know it's murder.
and the fact that it's still murder leads RIGHT into the "self-rightious suicide" idea.
Her stance is that if the person is in misery from constant, agonizing pain, then they have the right to end their own life, so they don't have to suffer anymore.
I argued that they don't have that right, no matter how bad the pain is, because that is a very selfish thing to do. All their "justified suicide" is going to do is cause the people that care about them pain as well. This is where she said that it doesn't matter, because their pain isn't the same as the person commiting the suicide.
flat out..to cut this short...it's going to be very simple.
VICTIMS DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO VICTIMIZE!!!!!!!
Abortion
Crimes of Passion
"self rightous suicide"
THEIR ALL MURDER...THEY ARE VICTIMS VICTIMIZING!!!!!!