Chelsea Clinton Says It’s ‘Unchristian’ To End Legal Abortion. Claims She’s Deeply Pious

If you consider conception to be when the egg is fertilised and not when the fertilised egg implants on the uterine wall, that seems problematic. It means the majority of humans likely died before birth.

So you don't think the moment the egg is fertilized counts as conception?
 
I never said any such thing. I admitted sexism exists on the right and then pointed out that folks like yourself seem to have a high tolerance for sexism if it comes from the right place. Your unwillingness to even address the comment I was criticizing rather than deflect and make this about Trump seems to me to prove my point rather nicely.

The reason we are taking this short diversion from the thread topic is because a poster made an explicitly sexist comment from what seems to be a left perspective. Do you agree with that comment?
You seem to have a high tolerance of racism from the right so what you say about me is hypocritical. Also your avoidance on answering my question, which was first, says plenty.
 
So you don't think the moment the egg is fertilized counts as conception?

That's when it starts, but I don't think a woman has actually conceived until the embryo is implanted.
 
That's when it starts, but I don't think a woman has actually conceived until the embryo is implanted.

Interesting. It sounds like you and Alcorn have different ideas of what constitutes human life. You'd have no qualms about your wife taking birth control pills?
 
Interesting. It sounds like you and Alcorn have different ideas of what constitutes human life. You'd have no qualms about your wife taking birth control pills?

I don't know about no qualms, I'm generally not keen on the idea of messing around with your hormones as a matter of convenience, but I don't consider it murder.
 
On one side you have the vast majority of well-educated persons in highly developed countries.
On the other side, you have the rural poor, the ultra-religious, and majorities in the Middle East, and Africa.

My opinion? Go enjoy Saudi Arabia. They don't allow abortion and, icing on the cake, they hate ze juice.
Fun fact, abortion was relatively common in Egypt in the late 18th and early 19th century. Where did official pressure against abortion eventually come from? It came from the modernizing regime of Mehmed Ali, specifically from the French doctor he hired to run all the medical facilities and administration known as Clot Bey. What was Clot Bey's objection to abortion, that it was the unjust murder of an unborn life? Of course not, it was entirely from a nationalist perspective, specifically he thought it a crime for these women to potentially deprive the nation of potential future conscripts.

So the anti-abortion sentiment was brought to the Muslims by a Christian who justified it on the basis of the idea that the nation-state and its army was entitled to those bodies.
 
The obstacle I found in trying to plausibly deny the culpability of God in the Israelite atrocities, while at the same time remaining a believer in Jesus, was the fact that Jesus himself never presented such an argument.

Isn't it sort of impossible to maintain that such a "setting the record straight" about his Father to his Jewish brethren wouldn't have been a first order of business for Jesus??

It would have been scandalous for Jesus to just come out and say "my Father never ordered the Midianite and Amalekite slaughters". However, during the sermon on the mount he did say, "You have heard it said...But I say...". Clearly he was setting the record straight. Jesus quoted the OT many times but not once did he affirm a verse about slaughtering people. The NT says Jesus is the image of the invisible God. He and the Father have the same character. I can't read the Gospels and picture Jesus calling on people (including infants) to be slaughtered, and so I can't picture the Father doing it either.
 
@IngaVovchanchyn

You made a good argument that abortion is against Christian doctrine. But in defense of Chelsea Clinton here, do you think its fair to make a distinction between the personal choice to have an abortion and the political question of whether or not to allow it legally? That is, may it be unChristian to have an abortion on a personal level but also unChristian at the level of policy to deny a woman the legal ability to have an abortion if the sum total effect of doing so leads to increased suffering for women?
 
Fun fact, abortion was relatively common in Egypt in the late 18th and early 19th century. Where did official pressure against abortion eventually come from? It came from the modernizing regime of Mehmed Ali, specifically from the French doctor he hired to run all the medical facilities and administration known as Clot Bey. What was Clot Bey's objection to abortion, that it was the unjust murder of an unborn life? Of course not, it was entirely from a nationalist perspective, specifically he thought it a crime for these women to potentially deprive the nation of potential future conscripts.

So the anti-abortion sentiment was brought to the Muslims by a Christian who justified it on the basis of the idea that the nation-state and its army was entitled to those bodies.

Yikes. I cringe at the thought of an 18th century abortion.
 
Yikes. I cringe at the thought of an 18th century abortion.
I don't know too much about it but apparently the women justified it in part on the fact that it was safer than giving birth. So it couldn't have been that bad or else giving birth in the 18th century was that bad and then some. Probably the latter tbh...
 
Religious people only care about unborn babies.
These same people (subhumans) don't give a fuck about what happens to that same baby as soon as it's born.

That's a very uncharitable and false thing to claim.

The one's who gleaned such thoughts of right and wrong, or human or inhuman into your consciousness were religious.

As well, a lot of those religious people built your empire, guarded it, and took care of the children, that you might spew outrage at them in a comfortable room, a comfortable chair, a comfortable life built on the concept of humane, humanity, and charitable that was rarely a glimmer in time, let alone in our hearts until religion was gifted on the mind of the common mind and mediated on in high places of thought.

If you see man as meat though, enjoy and savor, but there is no reason you, or I can not be the main course in the future.

If there is no judge, then there is no one to appeal to but the appetites of nature, a Xi Jinping, a Putin, and a host of others have that hunger, and as the torch passes once or twice, if you burn the holy books you will find too late you burned the substance of good and right in the pyre of the same old, old cruelty.
 
Sexism has been a characteristic of the progressive movement for a long time now. But it is a fairly recent development that sexist views are flaunted as if they were some sort of virtue.
rofl
OK, sure, I'm sexist because I think women should make their own decisions about what happens to their bodies. prrrbbbbbbbbbbbbbt
 
@IngaVovchanchyn

You made a good argument that abortion is against Christian doctrine. But in defense of Chelsea Clinton here, do you think its fair to make a distinction between the personal choice to have an abortion and the political question of whether or not to allow it legally? That is, may it be unChristian to have an abortion on a personal level but also unChristian at the level of policy to deny a woman the legal ability to have an abortion if the sum total effect of doing so leads to increased suffering for women?

As a Christian who believes life begins at conception I immediately interpret your question as...would you consider it unChristian to prevent one person from murdering another? The answer to that is of course no.
 
rofl
OK, sure, I'm sexist because I think women should make their own decisions about what happens to their bodies. prrrbbbbbbbbbbbbbt
That's not what you said. You said men should not voice their opinions on the issue.

And whether you are a sexist or not, I cannot say. But certainly that was a sexist statement.
 
@IngaVovchanchyn

You made a good argument that abortion is against Christian doctrine. But in defense of Chelsea Clinton here, do you think its fair to make a distinction between the personal choice to have an abortion and the political question of whether or not to allow it legally? That is, may it be unChristian to have an abortion on a personal level but also unChristian at the level of policy to deny a woman the legal ability to have an abortion if the sum total effect of doing so leads to increased suffering for women?
I think this is a good question.

I think something for which Christians do not get enough credit is their ability to distinguish between what people ought to do and what people should be allowed to do. Freedom is a core tenet of the Christian faith. (Religious freedom more than political freedom. The Bible doesn't say altogether much about politics.) So from this angle, you could possibly craft a Christian argument for tolerating legal abortion at least in limited cases.

In terms of the sum total of suffering being greater for women if abortion is illegal, that kind of utilitarian argument isn't particularly Christian. The Christian view may view a course of action as wise or foolish based on its outcome, but issues like good and evil are considered intrinsic qualities that are not dependent on perceived outcomes. If something is sinful in the Christian view, then it is still sinful even if pursuing that course of action prospers.

Also, I am not making the argument that a Christian must actively and politically oppose abortion. Somewhere in this meandering thread I stated that opposition to abortion is not a major emphasis of mine. But the argument that to oppose abortion is anti-Christian still doesn't hold up well. A Christian who dedicates their time and energy to opposing what they see a moral evil is not being untrue to their religion.
 
No, of course the right isn't devoid of sexism.

But you rarely see it so explicitly stated as if it were virtuous. Look at the comment I was quoting. It directly states that men should not talk about this issue. He doesn't realize that this statement is exist. And no leftists can be counted on to criticize such a statement as sexist or similar statements as racist.

It's not that I think everyone or even most on the left are sexists or racists. I don't. But moderate leftists appear to have a very high tolerance for sexism and racism so long as it is coming from a left perspective.
That's not what you said. You said men should not voice their opinions on the issue.

And whether you are a sexist or not, I cannot say. But certainly that was a sexist statement.
LOL
I'll take recognizing hyperbole for $400, Alex.
 
It is very simple. Christians see a fetus as a human being. Thus, an aborted pregnancy results in the death of a human being. Outside of extreme cases which are a very small percentage of all abortions, they see the termination of these lives as murder. Thus they oppose it.

Those who support abortion tend to contend that a fetus is not a human being and thus the life of a fetus does not matter.

I still don't understand what the goal is.
 
I still don't understand what the goal is.
The goal of what? Opposition to abortion? I'd guess most groups opposed to abortion would like to see abortion prohibited in most cases. I'd guess they have interim goals like limiting how far into a pregnancy an abortion may be performed.

What exactly are you struggling with here?
 
Back
Top