Hot Button: abortion

+Pro-life, Prochoice; what is in a name ? Life and death.

morals can not be regulated by legislation. However, acts that society considers criminal, which is to say, that infringes on the rights of others... largely speaking, can be and must be legislated for the protection of society

Question then is, is a fetus part of society ? Here is where the division is.

One side sees a Fetus as a mere clump of cells, non- human.

The other side sees a fetus as an separate human life .

Facts:

A fetus depends on his/her mother for life

A person already extant in the world depends on "mother" earth for life.

Ergo the dependency (read progression from conception) is not a functional devision that can be used to separate those who are born form those who are un-born.

So, next is the question of a soul.

One side believes man has no soul, is not created by God, that there is no God, therefore the child in a womb is a non-entity, whch can only gain entitlement to life by experience. Of course, being born is a requisite of gaining experience. It would seems that increasingly one must have the correct experience on the side of Pro Life, other experience is considered null and void. They will even kill a baby that has been born healthy if the mother says she does not want her child.

One side Believes the unborn have a soul, they have life that must be recognized and cherished. There are two proofs of this, one is scriptural (which requires a person to embrace God as opposed to the alternative) that is, " God formed me while i was yet in my mothers womb.

The other can be seen in nature, in the caring of mother animals for their young, how is this pertinent ? It is by definition. This intuitive caring proceeds form a-priori knowledge. This is knowledge that preceeds experience, that come before experience as opposed to ex-periori knowledge that coome out of experience. all living things have souls and are linked to God, source of a-priori knowledge. A perosn can only cut themselves off from this by hardening their heart and rejecting God, here is the crux of the issue, the two sides manifiest.

Care on this side, what should it look like ?

1.0 A place for a woman who has no home to live and recieve medical care, who 2.0 Counselling

3.0 help with adoption or

4.0 help to keep her child (such as training for a career, job placement, housing, an interim support.

Why does the Church not do this, they collect tithes, where are the tithes for the unborn, for the mothers of the unborn?

Now i will tell you a truth, these churches that fight for autocratic principles while stepping over, no that is not right, While stepping on these unborn and ther mothers andnot providing for them, even worse, for defrocking priests who do help the unborn and their mothers... scripture is very clear as to the ultimate end of these people, should they not repent and turn form their evil'... "it were better that a mill-stone be hung around their neck and they be cats into the sea" make not mistake i am not talking about the women who are vitcims of abortion here, i am talking about those charged with helping them, who know better... i am talking about that church which lives in darkness

The next is defines as a-priori knowledge, that which comes before experience... it is the natural care of a mother for her infant. Well, this can be abrogated by an intentional rejection at the time of decision or at least an unwitting acceptance of the status quo of "pro-choice" Horribly, for those who made this choice because they were asleep , have had their decision come back and torment them throughout their lives. You may not argue with me on this, i have seen it first hand, if you would argue, then you have not seen this.

But what is Pro-choice ?

If a woman with an unwanted pregnancy is looking for help, where does she go? By semantics a Pro_choice center seems reasonable. It implies there is a choice, yet nothing could be further form the truth. There is no option or aid for a woman to have her child there, there is only ONE OPTION: DEATH. So, PRO CHOICE is NOT ProChoice, it is correctly Pro Death. PERIOD, no debate exists beyond this truth.

What about Pro-Life ?

Is it really ProLife ? really ? so here is a woman for whom having a child is not possible, were are the Pro_life centers she can go to ? Well...? where are they? theyare no where, they do not exist. so where has all the money gone that is contributed to church and prolife organizations gone ? well, to throwing stones at Pro-choice !

This horrid rock fight is fought over the dead bodies of womens chidlren and the suffering of those women afterwards. The tears of the unborn ascend to Heaven abd cry out to God, the tears of these women, when they realize what they have dome or more precisely, what has been done to them also ascend to Heaven. These tears are unmourned by those who coldly fight fight of ego, while trampling over the boodies of the suffering.

Only one man i know of, Father Pavone, of Priests for Life, was doing anything to help women in distress from unwanted or unteneable preganacies

What did his bishop do ? What did Pope Francis do im honoring the request of Father Pavon's bishop. The de-frocked Father Pavone !

Now, who do you think stand justified before God ? Who do you think stand condemned before God. Care to guess?

Note, What right do i have to say these things since i am a scientist and an engineer? ia m also a theologian.