RU 486
Monday, October 12, 2009
Model Of A Herpes Virus
What to say when it comes to abortion
RU 486
What to say when it comes to abortion RU 486
The recent decision of the Agency of Medicines on the RU486 (the abortion pill) requires a "refreshed" on abortion and especially with regard to how to respond to this crime, which often is presented as inevitable and believe the "conquest civilian. "Among the believers those who say they are anti-abortion (unfortunately not all!) often do not know what to say and possibly hold a discussion on this topic to defend the sacred principles of life.
ll-Way provides a schematic of the three paths - some "ideas" to be circulated.
These words were taken from an earlier circular (the n.85).
A note: Some of these objections are very trivial, but those that are more easy to feel around.
1. You have to be against abortion, but in some cases one can not do without.
Answer: Life human exists or does not exist. If not, there is unnecessarily complicated: it could be aborted if the motivation is serious if it is trivial. But if human life is, can a reason, however grave, justify the suppression of an innocent human being? What possible reason can be put before human life?
2. When you know that the child will suffer, because they do not prevent this suffering?
Answer: First of all, who can decide whether a human life is worth or not worth living? Furthermore, who determines what should be the criterion for determining the level of suffering? For some entity could be severe, less severe for other entity objectively, but subjectively, equally serious. For example, if you have an idea of \u200b\u200bthe corporate and athletic life already know that their child may have one arm or one leg shorter than the other can be a serious source of suffering. But we realize that, according to this reasoning, we go back to the ancient concept of the pater familias of ancient Rome? At that time, the deformed babies (and often girls too) after birth were thrown to the ground or exposed in public sewers, where they died of starvation or eaten by rats. Many are horrified: poor children! But where is the Unlike the modern abortion? The "poor" the Romans did (after) what they could not do before. If they had had an ultrasound or amniocentesis, too ... What hypocrisy! It legitimizes abortion because you do not see the baby (that's why he gave so much trouble and gives the documentary The Silent Scream of Dr. Nathanson where you can see, by ultrasound, the reactions of the fetus at the time of abortion), but if you saw ... When you make this claim, open your hand against your partner and say: "Here is my hand on a living fetus, crush them if you dare!" At 99 percent fail to do so ... and will change speech.
3. But if there were no legal abortion, there would be illegal, women still have abortions and, furthermore, risking more.
Answer: How would you feel if someone said: "Since the robbery, robbery by, risking their lives, we should legalize their misdeeds? An account is not criminally rage on those who decide for abortion, and another to legalize this crime.
4. It is right that the woman decides to become a mother when she wants to become one.
Answer: Whilst it may be so. "Not allowed", because it would be a speech, this, that would take us off-topic. We said: if it was that way, the woman becomes a mother in childbirth, but when she conceives. The woman, from conception, but he finds in himself that everything has changed. There are women who do not tolerate a particular food, then, after conception, they want that food (evidently the embryo and fetus after the first loss of the pulses that they need those nutrients), then after the birth, tastes returning as before. Therefore, if the mother becomes the mother from conception and not birth, then you understand why she can not refrain from being a mother when it already is.
5. But it is not injustice against women to force her to continue the pregnancy?
Answer: We just said if you are already mum and dad you can not refuse to do so. But why me and not others? We answer this by example. I'm on a car and I'm walking a deserted street, a street where cars pass every half hour. I'm going to an important event, which is crucial for my future work. Suddenly the roadside I see a man bleeding that needs to be urgently transported to hospital. If there was another car behind me, could I ask the courtesy to someone else to carry the poor fellow. But, knowing that others will not pass car for many minutes, I (meeting or not) will have to load and carry the poor fellow to the hospital. If it did, it would be terrible for me. At that moment I only (and not others!) I can save the life of man. So is the woman who is already mother: she only depends on the life or death of that child.
6. In cases of rape as it is possible to pretend that the woman takes a child that can constantly remember the trauma?
Answer: There is no doubt that she remains deeply traumatized victim of force. But let's ask-a-twist is just violence on those who do not have any guilt, or the child conceived? In addition, the woman who was raped is already highly traumatized, and just the thing to avoid is adding trauma to trauma. The woman who aborts, in fact, knows that life itself and he also knows that, ultimately, it was she to decide. This (as documented by now provided a scientific literature that talks about "post-abortion syndrome, depression) may aggravate, not alleviate, its already dramatic psychological situation.
7. The fetus is not a man because he has no possibility of conscious relationship with the environment.
Answer: The newborn baby is not able to relate consciously with the environment. The same can be said for the demented and the patient in a coma. Awareness is certainly a component of being human, but not the component. If so, we repeat, even after we kill the children were born, we kill the demented patients in coma. Logic is logic!
8. The fetus is not a man because it is not yet fully formed.
Answer: First of all it must be said that the organogenesis (the formation of organs) is completed in just sixty days after conception, which means when a woman knows she is pregnant for a month or so. Rather, this argument may hold true for the embryo. But-right- growth is not what gives human dignity. If so, we say that a man six feet tall man is more than one and a half feet tall. Or that an adult man is more of a child. You could also do this example: a milligram of gold is also gold than a ton of the same metal. The difference is quantitative, not qualitative!
9. The Church's anti-abortion is not credible, because its being against contraception means that many decide after that could decide first.
Answer: False. Statistically speaking, the areas in which Italy is the most popular contraception are also those where it is more widespread practice of abortion. Or, at most, there is no significant difference. Contraception implies a mentality in which man and woman assume the right to decide categorically on life. In this case: absolutely not! It 'clear that the technique when contraception fails (which can happen) you can move on to abortion as "ultimate contraceptive".
10. The Church is not credible because, if it were really pro-life, would approve all the techniques to encourage births. For example, in vitro fertilization.
Answer: Say "I want a son at all costs "or say" I do not want absolutely "the same thing. Before the mystery of life that man can only propose, not dispose of its being the second will to power.
11. The Law 194/78 has decreased the number of abortions, even illegal ones.
Answer: Nonsense! First of all abortions are illegal means that if you are not eligible. Second thing: it is not true that abortions have declined, even if we want abortions to those that occur with the so-called "morning-after pill" which, as because it is "morning after" does not prevent conception, but implantation of conception. That is to say that abortion is.
So either we are in the field of stupidity or that of voluntary blindness intelligence. Note: these reviews are not hard. Every errant always be entrusted to the mercy of God, but against the error can not be any mediation and hesitation. And it is against every error (and thus also against the error of abortion) they must speak up. To the Lord we must account for all of our compromise with evil ... so even with the terrible crime of abortion.
---------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
To read or download any previous round, you can go the site of The Way of the three paths (www.itresentieri.it).
Note also that you can visit the University apologetic Joseph oboedientissimus (www.studiapologeticijo.com), publisher linked to the Way of the three paths.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment