Legalize Abortion?

[scytheb_2501]

---

hahhaa.. mali.. mali... yan di ase log out

[scytheb_2501]

oist mali na account to ah...

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

These are my sources
Galileo affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Galileo Galilei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Trial of Galileoby Doug Linder (2002)The Trial of Galileo: An Account
Galileo Galilei
Channel 4 - History - Galileo Galilei

Ang dami palang trash sa internet, noh?

what about the 95 theses?

Back to the topic:

Both unintended and unwanted childbearing can have negative health, social, and psychological consequences. Health problems include greater chances for illness and death for both mother and child. In addition, such childbearing has been linked with a variety of social problems, including divorce, poverty, child abuse, and juvenile delinquency. In one study, unwanted children were found less likely to have had a secure family life. As adults they were more likely to engage in criminal behavior, be on welfare, and receive psychiatric services. Another found that children who were unintended by their mothers had lower self-esteem than their intended peers 23 years later. (WhenPregnancies are Unwanted, Nancy Felipe Russo, Ph.D., Arizona State University and Henry P. David, Ph.D., Transnational Family Research Institute 3/05/02)

I have a friend who did terminate her pregnancy on the 5th month and two friends who decided to keep their babies. These people are not teen-age girls that know nothing...well they are of legal age..

If you read stories in the internet about abortions you'll learn that many women who had unwanted pregnancy decided to keep their babies after going to an abortion clinic, what made them change their minds is not because of the person ho talked them out of it but actually those ultrasound picture of the baby, baby' heartbeat (they have to make sure the woman is pregnant so they run test..)

There are women who terminate their pregnancy without even realizing that, because they cannot yet grasp the reality. an actual picture or hearing the babies hearbeat make them realize that this is real. so many of them choose to keep it.

Abortion should be about one's personal choice. an unwanted pregnancy will have a bad result what more an unwanted child?

I dont like abortion, honestly. But I like to see people know their choices and make their own decisions at least they have no one to blame if things went wrong.

I think its a foul reason to keep the baby because you have no other choice and blame the kid for the rest of your life because it hindred you to do what you want with your life.

[mannyamador]

These are my sources
Galileo affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Galileo Galilei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Trial of Galileoby Doug Linder (2002)The Trial of Galileo: An Account
Galileo Galilei
Channel 4 - History - Galileo Galilei

This is strange. Some of our sources are the same. Have you actually studied and understood them? The "Galileo Affair" in Wikipedia, for example, does NOT say Galileo was excommunicated (as you claimed). In facf, the article agrees with everything I have said about the issue.

Let me quote some important points from it (note this is also one of YOUR sources):

The Church officials were willing to let heliocentrism be taught as a hypothesis and discussed in scientific circles, so long as the faith of the ordinary people was safeguarded. But Galileo insisted that it was proven fact, and therefore had to prove his theory.

. . .

Bellarmine found no problem with heliocentrism so long as it was treated purely as hypothesis and not as an absolute truth, unless there was conclusive proof. This put Galileo in a difficult position, as he had many powerful arguments but no "conclusive" proof for the truth of his position. In fact, his theories had gaps and errors, as is the usual condition of all radically new scientific work.

what about the 95 theses?

What about them? There was NEVER any Church doctrine that said salvation could be purchased. Luther protested against the ABUSE of indulgences. He was correct in doing so. But that had nothing to do with the doctrine of salvation.

Both unintended and unwanted childbearing can have negative health, social, and psychological consequences...

Abortion should be about one's personal choice. an unwanted pregnancy will have a bad result what more an unwanted child?

If we follow your reasoning about "unwanted" children, then we should also kill infants and young children too because they will still cause those negative effects. Unborn children, infants, and young children are all human beings in different stages of development. How do you justify killing one without killing the others since they all can cause the same negative effects?

The logic is inescapable. Once you begin thinking that human life is worth less than those so-called "negative effects", then you will have to kill ALL inconvenient persons.

Practically all productive human activity has some negative consequences -- some greater, some lesser. But that does not mean we can kill other persons just to avoid those consequences. We are talking about MURDERING INNOCENT PERSONS. That is not to be taken lightly, and neither should it be the decision of just a few people. If it were, then we could justify all sorts of murders.

[cottonmouth]

That's irrelevant. Respect for the sanctity of life cuts across religious boundaries. The law protects human beings. Science has clearly shown that the unborn are human beings form the moment of conception. And the Philippine Constitution recognizes that fact.

Abortion isn't evil because the Church says so. Rather, the Church says abortion is evil because abortion is objectively evil.

And who do you think coined the word "evil" isn't it the church? Outside the church, there is only benefit vs. no benefit. The matter of interest here is WHICH gives more benefit. Apparently, legalizing abortions offers added benefit than just sticking to "no-abortion". Pro-legal abortion offered smart reasons why there is benefit in legalized abortion. While you are just sticking to your guns of "evil" because it is evil, borrowed reasons and few altered pictures...all no-brainers.

So what is evil actually? Eventually, if you will answer this question you will go back to what your beloved priest told you. Then once again you become subjective...roll the dice again. Then, nobody is even arguing with you that unborns are not human after conception..we all know that. But what happens after this conception is the point of interest.

[mannyamador]

And who do you think coined the word "evil" isn't it the church?

Nope. Get your facts straight. And while you're at it, kindly provide your standard for determining what is beneficial (which is just another term for evil/wrong vs. good.right).

Pro-legal abortion offered smart reasons why there is benefit in legalized abortion.

You're really hilarious! Get out your clown costume. So far, the pro-aborts haven't offered a single benefit, only claims to solve other "evils" -- while ignoring a greater evil. Incidentally, ignoring evil is something you are quite good at. Must be a no-brainer at work.

Then, nobody is even arguing with you that unborns are not human after conception..we all know that. But what happens after this conception is the point of interest.

They are MURDERED with abortion, that's for sure.

The "reasons" offered for justifying murdering the unborn also apply to infants and children. Old people and invalids cause "negative effects" too. I suppose you want to murder them also? That';s insane but that's what your nutty reasoning leads to. The logic is inescapable. Once you begin thinking that human life is worth less than those so-called "negative effects", then you will have to kill ALL inconvenient persons.

But then rational thinking was never your strong suit, @cottonbrain.

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

Telling the Stories Behind the Abortions
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/health/06abor.html
Dr. Susan Wicklund took her first step toward the front line of the abortion wars when she was in her early 20s, a high school graduate with a few community college credits, working dead-end jobs.

She became pregnant. She had an abortion. It was legal, but it was ghastly.

Her counseling, she recalls, was limited to instructions to pay in advance, in cash, and to go to the emergency room if she had a problem. During the procedure itself, her every question drew the same response: “Shut up!”

Determined that other women should have better reproductive care, she began work as an apprentice midwife and eventually finished college, earned a medical degree and started a practice in which she spends about 90 percent of her time on abortion services. Much of her work is in underserved regions on the Western plains, at clinics that she visits by plane.

In her forthcoming book “This Common Secret: My Journey as an Abortion Doctor” (Public Affairs), Dr. Wicklund describes her work, the circumstances that lead her patients to choose abortion, and the barriers — lack of money, lack of providers, violence in the home or protesters at clinics — that stand in their way.

But she said her main goal with the book was to encourage more open discussion of abortion and its prevalence.

“We don’t talk about it,” she said in a telephone interview. “People say, ‘Nobody I know has ever had an abortion,’ and that is just not true. Their sisters, their mothers have had abortions.”

Dr. Wicklund, 53, said that at current rates almost 40 percent of American women have an abortion during their child-bearing years, a figure supported by the Guttmacher Institute, which researches reproductive health policy. Abortion is one of the most common operations in the United States, she said, more common than tonsillectomy or removal of wisdom teeth. “Because it is such a secret,” she said, “we lose sight of how common it is.”

But Dr. Wicklund acknowledges that abortion is an issue fraught with dilemmas. In the book, she describes witnessing, as a medical student, the abortion of a 21-week fetus. She writes that at the sight of its tiny arm she decided she would perform abortions only in the first trimester of pregnancy. She says late-term abortions should be legal, but her decision means she occasionally sees desperate women she must refuse to help.

Dr. Wicklund describes her horror when she aborted the pregnancy of a woman who had been raped, only to discover, by examining the removed tissue, that the pregnancy was further along than she or the woman had thought — and that she had destroyed an embryo the woman and her husband had conceived together. And she describes the way she watches and listens as the women she treats tell why they want to end their pregnancies. If she detects uncertainty or thinks they may be responding to the wishes of anyone other than themselves, she says, she tells them to think it over a bit longer.

On the other hand, Dr. Wicklund has little use for requirements like 24-hour waiting periods, or for assertions like those of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who said in a recent Supreme Court decision on abortion that the government had an interest in protecting women from their own decisions in the matter.

“It’s so incredibly insulting,” Dr. Wicklund said in the interview. “The 24-hour waiting period implies that women don’t think about it on their own and have to have the government forcing it on them. To me a lot of the abortion restrictions are about control of women, about power, and it’s insulting.”

Dr. Wicklund said she would put more credence in opponents of abortion rights if they did more to help women prevent unwanted pregnancies. Instead, she said, many of the protesters she encounters “are against birth control, period.” That is unfortunate, she said, because her clinic experience confirms studies showing that emphasizing abstinence rather than contraception may cause girls to delay their first sexual experience for a few months, but “when they do have intercourse they are much less likely to protect themselves with birth control or a condom.”

According to the Guttmacher Institute, about a quarter of pregnancies in the United States end in abortion. Dr. Wicklund says that is why she believes far more people favor abortion rights than are willing to admit it in polls. For example, she said in the interview, an abortion ban that seemed to have wide support in South Dakota was put to a vote and “when people got behind those curtains and nobody was watching it was overwhelmingly defeated. Unfortunately, people are not willing to say what they really think.”

One of these people might be a woman she recognized as one of the protesters who regularly appeared, shouting, outside a clinic where she worked. Only now the woman was in the waiting room, desperate to end an unwanted pregnancy. Dr. Wicklund performed the procedure.

And then there is Dr. Wicklund’s maternal grandmother, a woman she was afraid would disapprove of her work. But it turned out that she had a story of her own. “When I was 16 years old, my best friend got pregnant,” is how the story began. Her friend turned to her and her sister for help. They did the only thing they could think of — putting “something long and sharp ‘up there,’ ” according to the book. The girl bled to death, and the cause of her death was kept secret.

“I know exactly what kind of work you do,” the grandmother told Dr. Wicklund, “and it is a good thing.” One question Dr. Wicklund hears “all the time,” she said, is how she can focus on abortion rather than on something more rewarding, like delivering babies.

“In fact, the women are so grateful,” Dr. Wicklund said in the interview. “Women are so grateful to know they can get through this safely, that they can still get pregnant again.

“It is one of the few areas of medicine where you are not working with a sick person, you are doing something for them that gives them back their life, their control,” she added. “It’s a very rewarding thing to be part of that.”

[jofox]

dili man ko uyon ani kay pagpatay man pud ni sa mga ala intawn mga sala... i prefer mamatay ang nagpakuha kay maka sasala man xa..... peace

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

Excommunication is a religious censure used to deprive or suspend membership in a religious community.( Excommunication - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

According to the Catholic Church, excommunication, in the sense of a formal proceeding, is not a penalty at all but simply a formal proclamation of a pre-existing condition in a more or less prominent member of the Catholic Church. When such a person commits acts that in themselves separate him from the communion of the faithful, particularly when by word, deed, or example he "spreads division and confusion among the Faithful", (ibid)

In the Roman Catholic Church formal excommunication is normally resolved by a statement of repentance, profession of the Creed (if the offense involved heresy), or a renewal of obedience (if that was a relevant part of the offending act)
by the excommunicant; the declaration of the reconciliation itself, by a priest or bishop empowered to do this; and then the reception of the sacrament of Reconciliation.

Heresy is an introduced change to some system of belief, especially a religion, that conflicts with the previously established canon of that belief (ibid)

Catechism of the Catholic Church defines heresy as the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;

When it comes to Catholics who are formally guilty of heresy, apostasy or schism, the Church applies the penalty of excommunication.

This Code of Canon Law canon says that once a person willingly repudiates Christ, embraces a heresy, knowing it to be contrary to divine and Catholic faith, or refuses submission to the Roman Pontiff (or communion with the members of the Church subject to him), by virtue of the law itself they are automatically excommunicated. No ecclesiastical act is necessary and no public notice.
(Heresy)

Apostasy, heresy, and schism are all offences which incur a sentence of excommunication automatically.( Abortion and Excommunication - Catholic Christian Article)

Inquisition the trial of an individual accused of heresy.(wikipedia.org)

Galileo was ordered to Rome to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633, "for holding as true the false doctrine taught by some that the sun is the center of the world" (wikipedia.org)
a part of the sentence of the Inquisition:
• Galileo was required to recant his heliocentric ideas, declaring the immobility of the sun to be "absurd in philosophy and formally heretical", and the mobility of the Earth "to be at least erroneous in faith";

was he found guilty of heresy?


On the morning of June 22, 1633, Galileo, dressed in the white shirt of penitence, entered the large hall of the Inquisition building. He knelt and listened to his sentence: "Whereas you, Galileo, the son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, were in the year 1615 denounced to this Holy Office for holding as true the false doctrine....." The reading continued for seventeen paragraphs:

And, so that you will be more cautious in future, and an example for others to abstain from delinquencies of this sort, we order that the book Dialogue of Galileo Galilei be prohibited by public edict. We condemn you to formal imprisonment in this Holy Office at our pleasure.

As a salutary penance we impose on you to recite the seven penitential psalms once a week for the next three years. And we reserve to ourselves the power of moderating, commuting, or taking off, the whole or part of the said penalties and penances.

This we say, pronounce, sentence, declare, order and reserve by this or any other better manner or form that we reasonably can or shall think of. So we the undersigned Cardinals pronounce.

Galileo knelt to recite his abjuration:
....[D]esiring to remove from the minds of your Eminences, and of all faithful Christians, this strong suspicion, reasonably conceived against me, with sincere heart and unfeigned faith I abjure, curse, and detest the aforesaid errors and heresies, and generally every other error and sect whatsoever contrary to the said Holy Church; and I swear that in the future I will never again say or assert, verbally or in writing, anything that might furnish occasion for a similar suspicion regarding me....
I, the said Galileo Galilei, have abjured, sworn, promised, and bound myself as above; and in witness of the truth thereof I have with my own hand subscribed the present document of my abjuration, and recited it word for word at Rome, in the Convent of Minerva, this twenty-second day of June, 1633.
I, Galileo Galilei, have abjured as above with my own hand.
(Prof. Doug Linder, Trial of Galileo)

Yes, Galileo was not excommunicated, he stand on trial for heresy that is why he have to recant. isnt recanting simmilar to renewal of obiedience and statement of repentance which are resolutions for excommunication. he said "abjure errors and heresies.."--- i think that means Im sorry...

In 2000, Pope John Paul II issued a formal apology for all the errors of the Church over the last 2000 years including the trial of Galileo among others.(wikipedia.org)

[mannyamador]

Serbian Abortionist Who Aborted 48,000 Babies Becomes Pro-Life Activist
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111304.html
http://www.prolife.org.ph/article/ar...iew/1364/1/110

MADRID, The Spanish daily "La Razon" has published an article on the pro-life conversion of a former "champion of abortion." Stojan Adasevic, who performed 48,000 abortions, sometimes up to 35 per day, is now the most important pro-life leader in Serbia, after spending 26 years as the most renowned abortion doctor in the country.

"The medical textbooks of the Communist regime said abortion was simply the removal of a blob of tissue," the newspaper reported. "Ultrasounds allowing the fetus to be seen did not arrive until the 80s, but they did not change his opinion. Nevertheless, he began to have nightmares."

In describing his conversion, Adasevic said he "dreamed about a beautiful field full of children and young people who were playing and laughing, from 4 to 24 years of age, but who ran away from him in fear. A man dressed in a black and white habit stared at him in silence. The dream was repeated each night and he would wake up in a cold sweat. One night he asked the man in black and white who he was. 'My name is Thomas Aquinas,' the man in his dream responded. Adasevic, educated in communist schools, had never heard of the Dominican genius saint. He didn't recognize the name."

"Why don't you ask me who these children are?" St. Thomas asked Adasevic in his dream.

"They are the ones you killed with your abortions,” the Dominican saint told him.

"Adasevic awoke in amazement and decided not to perform any more abortions," the article stated.

"That same day a cousin came to the hospital with his four months-pregnant girlfriend, who wanted to get her ninth abortion - something quite frequent in the countries of the Soviet bloc. The doctor agreed. Instead of removing the fetus piece by piece, he decided to chop it up and remove it as a mass. However, the baby's heart came out still beating. Adasevic realized then that he had killed a human being,"

After this experience, Adasevic "told the hospital he would no longer perform abortions. Never before had a doctor in Communist Yugoslavia refused to do so. They cut his salary in half, fired his daughter from her job, and did not allow his son to enter the university."

After years of pressure and on the verge of giving up, he had another dream about St. Thomas.

"You are my good friend, keep going,” the man in black and white told him. “Adasevic became involved in the pro-life movement and was able to get Yugoslav television to air the film 'The Silent Scream,' by Doctor Bernard Nathanson, two times."

Adasevic has told his story in magazines and newspapers throughout Eastern Europe. He has returned to the Orthodox faith of his childhood and has studied the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas.

"Influenced by Aristotle, Thomas wrote that human life begins forty days after fertilization," Adasevic wrote in one article. Scientific advancements since Thomas’ time, however, have revealed that human life begins at the moment of conception. La Razon commented that Adasevic "suggests that perhaps the saint wanted to make amends for that error." Today the Serbian doctor continues to fight for the lives of the unborn.