Abortion-Killing: The Silent Genocide: 2 Billion Deaths Victims Worldwide.

[Deesse23]

Hitler and National Socialism was voted in to power by a Christian nation.

Yes, but Hitler clearly wasnt particularly christian (although influenced by christian culture and having been raised in it). Himmler was clearly non christian, but adhered to a crude mix of germanic cult stuff. Himmler wanted to eradicate christianity.

As much as i think Hitler is a bad Argument for NX, he (fascism in Germany) is almost as bad an argument for people opposing christianity/religion and blaming christianity for him.

[The Grand Nudger]

Obviously christianity wasn't responsible for hitler. That'd be his mommy and daddy. It was, however, extremely involved in the matter of creating a german psyche which would see, in the jew, a suitable boogeyman for all ills real and perceived. The overt and intentional propagandization to thoroughly common and utterly christian prejudices cannot be ignored there. They may well have waged an industrial war of territorial ambition - and perhaps with the support and service of it's many jews and other undesirables, but that christendom had already done the work that hitler and company would merely exploit, and what would ultimately undo them.

Ironically, this may be one of the more practically beneficial things that christianity ever accomplished, in that specific instance. If his christianity hadn't taught him to hate the jew and the other, then the ardent german nationalist would have went to war with the fully realized potential of all of germany's sons and daughters.

[h4ym4n]

This thread is to discuss the Manifest Evil of Pre-Natal Infanticide, or so-called Abortion, or Abortion-Killing. Is it right or wrong, and how do we know? First, the Biblical Prohibitions and those in the Didache for e.g. "The Lord’s Teaching to the Heathen by the Twelve Apostles … The second commandment of the Teaching: “Do not murder; do not commit adultery”; do not corrupt boys; do not fornicate; “do not steal”; do not practice magic; do not go in for sorcery; do not murder a child by abortion or kill a newborn infant.” (The Didache, First Century A.D. Oral Tradition); And why? Because, as the Didache, which comes from Christ's Apostles, continues, “this is the way of life” while “there are two ways, one of life and one of death; and between the two ways there is a great difference,” and it implies that the way of death leads to a culture of death and to perdition if unrepented, which is what we've seen sadly come to pass in our time. Some 2 BN children have been killed worldwide by Abortion.

But the wrongness of Abortion can also be proven, through Mere Reason/Natural Law, especially when Medical Science has now clearly proven that Babies, from around 6 weeks in the Mother's Womb, have discernible beating human hearts. Let's make a few Scientific Arguments against Abortion.

1. The First Argument Against Abortion - Abortion kills Babies by stopping their Beating Hearts, and stopping the Beating Hearts of Babies is wrong.

Premise I: It is wrong to kill babies with beating hearts.
Premise II: Abortion kills babies with beating hearts.
Conclusion: Therefore, Abortion is something clearly wrong. 

Generally, atheists or other Pro-Choice Liberals don't disagree with any of these premises per se, because they are Scientific and Moral Facts, but if anyone here wants to, let them, and then we'll see; rather, Atheists/Liberals generally say, since the Mother gave birth to the Child, and the Child now lives in her Womb, therefore she can kill him/her. Which brings us to the 2nd Argument against Abortion, which is also a response to that.

2. The Second Argument against Abortion - it is true that children are dependent upon their parents, their Mother when they're in the womb, but also their Parents, when they're very young, for food and other things pertaining to the sustenance of life itself; it's also true that, later on in the cycle of life, very often Parents will mostly be dependent on their children again, especially in very old age. If therefore, it's moral and lawful for Parents to kill Children in young age, it should be Perfectly Fine also for Children to kill dependent Parents in old age. But it isn't. Therefore, neither is it moral or lawful for Parents to kill children when very young, either before or after birth. So, likewise, it is not right for children to abandon their parents, or neglect to care for them when they, who cared for us all our life, now need our help in old age. These are good, solid, traditional moral values, affirmed by Christians, Hindus, Muslims, people of all religions, and even some Atheists. Why do others disagree? What reasoning/scientific and moral principles can they give, in order to justify their beliefs and behavior on this point. Let's see if it can hold up to Reason and Scrutiny, or it was a silly idea invented by some godless men like Marxists, and some liberal Racist women like Margaret Sanger.

Interestingly, the Hindu Scriptures, which also speaks against Abortion-Killing, compare Abortion to the Crime of killing one's own Parents, who gave birth to us, who loved us, and cared for us; see how Good Values ought to be promoted; first, Parents ought to care, and have the Objective Moral Natural Obligation to care for the Children they brought into the world. Second, Children in turn, having been the recipients of that care all their life, but especially in infancy, when most vulnerable should also care for their Parents all their life, but esp. in old age, when most vulnerable.

Which brings us to the third point:

3. Racist Margaret Sanger, foundress of Planned Parenthood, promotes Black Genocide: “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the N [racial slur; African American] population". This is not just "inartfully written", as Liberal Washington Post idiots claimed. This is Pure Racist Black Genocide, which is what the foundress of Planned Parenthood, a famous abortionist organization, aimed for. That's what Abortion is. The Genocide of a people. How sad, some liberal christians, some liberal atheists, and other leftists/liberals, don't see the evil intent behind it.

One more fact on this point, hardly known in the West. So, if indeed, as I said, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, [conservative, traditional and orthodox, i.e.; some adherents of all these religions may not adhere to their Scriptures on this point] are all against Abortion, and much of the world is either Christian, Hindu or Muslim, then who on earth first promoted Abortion as some kind of Panacea? Ah yes, the Communists/Marxists.

Wiki: "The Soviet government was the first government in Europe to legalize abortion. In October 1920 the Bolsheviks made abortion legal within the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic". Sigh.

You know, the same Bolshevik Stalinist Atheists, who killed some 10 MN Poor Ukrainians, most of whom were Christians (Ukraine is a 90% Christian Country), these are the same persons who promoted Abortion-Killing, for their own Racist, Anti-Humane and Christophobic Reasons.

So, who are we going to listen to? Morality, Science, Conscience, Reason, or those like Godless Commie Thug Jo Stalin who killed some 20 MN?

[For a source, in 1989, the NYT Reported: "A Soviet weekly newspaper today published the most detailed accounting of Stalin's victims yet presented to a mass audience here, indicating that about 20 million died in labor camps, forced collectivization, famine and executions."]

Thoughts?
Let's Debate.
Serious Issue.
Regards,
Xavier.

Do the souls of the aborted fetus go straight to heaven to be with Jesus for all eternity?

Never to be judged?

Never a chance to piss off yahweh who will send that soul to hell?


Serious question and I’d really like to know what you think X

[Bucky Ball]

Hitler was not a Christian, he was an Apostate from Christianity.

Then you should have no difficulty naming the Pope who excommunicated him.

On the contrary, The Roman Church apologized for it's complicity in WWII. 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/p...342b63455/

[Disagreeable]

Premise I: It is wrong to kill babies with beating hearts.
Premise II: Abortion kills babies with beating hearts.
Conclusion: Therefore, Abortion is something clearly wrong. 

My counterargument:

Premise 1: It is wrong to force a woman to go through a pregnancy that she doesn't want to go through.

Premise 2: Not allowing women to abort forces a woman to go through a pregnancy that she doesn't want to go through.

Conclusion: Therefore it is wrong to not allow women to abort.

[Fake Messiah]

Wiki: "The Soviet government was the first government in Europe to legalize abortion. In October 1920 the Bolsheviks made abortion legal within the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic". Sigh.

And then you stopped because you are nothing but a liar and it didn't fit the alternate world you live in because in 1933 abortion was banned in Soviet Union.

Communists banned abortion not just in the Soviet Union but also in Romania with dire consequences.

In 1960s Nicolae Ceausescu made abortion illegal in Romania as well as all contraception and sex education were banned. Government agents known as the Menstrual Police regularly rounded up women in their workplaces to administer pregnancy tests.

Within one year of the abortion ban, the Romanian birth rate had doubled. These babies were born into a country where, unless you belonged to the Ceausescu clan or the Communist elite, life was miserable and these children would turn out to have particularly miserable lives.

On December 16, 1989, thousands of people took to the streets of Timisoara to protest his regime. Many of the protestors were teenagers and college students. Days after Ceausescu and his wife were captured, given a crude trial, and, on Christmas Day, executed by firing squad.

Just imagine of all the Communist leaders deposed in he years bracketing the collapse of the Soviet Union, only Nicolae Ceausescu met a violent death. It should not be overlooked that his demise was precipitated in large measure by the youth of Romania--a great number of whom, were it not for his abortion ban, would never have been born at all.
Nicolae Ceausescu learned the hard way (with a bullet to the head) that his abortion ban had much deeper implications than he knew.

Then take American crime in the 1990s, but this time story is a reversed. While Ceausescu was biting his bullet crime in US was just about at its peak. In the previous 15 years, violent crime had risen 80%. It was crime that led the nightly news and the national conversation.

When the crime rate began falling in the early 1990s, it did so with such speed and suddenness that it surprised everyone. It took some experts many years to even recognize that crime was falling, so confident had they been of its continuing rise. What caused its fall was Roe v. Wade in 1973. In the early 1990s, just as the first cohort of children born after Roe v. Wade was hitting its late teen years—the years during which young men enter their criminal prime—the rate of crime began to fall. What this cohort was missing, of course, were the children who stood the greatest chance of becoming criminals. And the crime rate continued to fall as an entire generation came of age minus the children whose mothers had not wanted to bring a child into the world. Legalized abortion led to less unwantedness; unwantedness leads to high crime; legalized abortion, therefore, led to less crime. So new criminals simply weren't born.

Also legalization of abortion in the United States had myriad consequences. Infanticide fell dramatically. So did shotgun marriages, as well as the number of babies put up for adoption.

When a woman does not want to have a child, she usually has good reason. She may be unmarried or in a bad marriage. She may consider herself too poor to raise a child. She may think her life is too unstable or unhappy, or she may think that her drinking or drug use will damage the baby’s health. She may believe that she is too young or hasn’t yet received enough education. She may want a child badly but in a few years, not now. For any of a hundred reasons, she may feel that she cannot provide a home environment that is conducive to raising a healthy and productive child.

[Deesse23]

When a woman does not want to have a child, she usually has good reason. She may be unmarried or in a bad marriage. She may consider herself too poor to raise a child. She may think her life is too unstable or unhappy, or she may think that her drinking or drug use will damage the baby’s health.

In NXs world this also NEEDS to be punished. Its involuntary manslaughter, at least. But NX will never acknowledge this, because that would expose the absurdity of his position, at least of the notion that fetuses should have the same rights as persons aka. born fetuses.

[Nishant Xavier]

Just passing through and on my phone. Paleophyte, as I have mentioned before, it has been primarily Jewish Scholars, God Bless them, like Pinchas Lapide, who've shown the Catholic Church saved nearly 1 MN Jews during the Holocaust; Lapide puts the number at 860,000 - Jewish Lives Saved I.e. - by the Catholic Church under Pope Ven. Pius XII in the Nazi Period. They've cleared up and even refuted the false Commie Propaganda that Pope Pius XII was allegedly a Nazi-Sympathizer, which they first put forth, non-seriously, in one of their Leftist Plays in the 1960 or so, which somehow caught on in the MSM. Meanwhile, read the writings of those like Real Jewish Rabbis in the 1940s who expressed gratitude to the Catholic Church for the Vaticans efforts to save Jewish Lives.

This is from the Jewish Virtual Library: "The vindication of Pius XII has been established principally by Jewish writers and from Israeli archives. It is now established that the Pope supervised a rescue network which saved 860,000 Jewish lives - more than all the international agencies put together.

After the war the Chief Rabbi of Israel thanked Pius XII for what he had done. The Chief Rabbi of Rome went one step further. He became a Catholic. He took the name Eugenio."

Eugenia Pacelli was Pope Ven Pius XIIs birth name.

[Bucky Ball]

According to the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, (reference available on request), as long as a person honestly lives according to ("the dictates of") their conscience, they are saved. NX is an uneducated amateur, simply full of shit.

A woman or couple may honestly decide that they are unable to fully care for and support the real complex needs of a child, or another child at the time, and that they are doing the best thing for their family at the time in limiting their family. Thus, even according to the Moral Theology of the Roman Church, making the difficult decision to prevent a pregnancy (ie using birth control), or preventing a potential child from developing further, ... is in fact the moral thing to do.

In any case, in Moral Theology most Christian traditions, "intent" is always the ruling factor in a determining whether an act is sinful. The Roman Church has always had this ridiculous fiction that "Natural Family Planning" is somehow "moral" even though the "intent" is clearly to prevent a pregnancy. They are total hypocrites.

The Pontifical Commission, set up by Pope John XXXIII, inside the Roman Curia, was given the job, back in the 1960's, to determine the impact of "artificial" birth control on the Roman Church. The disagreements within the commission ultimately led to the publication of the Papal Encyclical, Humanae Vitae, by Paul VI.

When birth control finally arrived, and gave women control over their reproductive systems, with the first oral contraceptives in 1960, dissenters in the Church argued for a reconsideration of the Church positions, on the subject and, in 1963 Pope John XXIII established the above commission, consisting of six European non-theologians to study questions of birth control and populations. After he died in 1963, Pope Paul VI added theologians to the commission and expanded it to 72 members from five continents (including 16 theologians, 13 physicians and five women without medical credentials, with an executive committee of 16 bishops, including seven cardinals).

The commission produced a report in 1966, proposing that ("artificial") birth control was not intrinsically evil and that Catholic couples should be allowed to decide for themselves about, or if, they wished to employ (any) method of birth control. According to the majority report, the use of contraceptives should be regarded as an extension of the already accepted cycle method:

Quote:
"The acceptance of a lawful application of the calculated sterile periods of the woman--that the application is legitimate presupposes right motives--makes a separation between the sexual act which is explicitly intended and its reproductive effect which is intentionally excluded. The tradition has always rejected seeking this separation with a contraceptive intention for motives spoiled by egoism and hedonism, and such seeking can never be admitted. The true opposition is not to be sought between some material conformity to the physiological processes of nature and some artificial intervention. For it is natural to man to use his skill in order to put under human control what is given by physical nature. The opposition is really to be sought between one way of acting which is contraceptive and opposed to a prudent and generous fruitfulness, and another way which is, in an ordered relationship to responsible fruitfulness and which has a concern for education and all the essential, human and Christian values."

Paul VI chose to reject the Majority Report, and issued Humanae Vitae, (and disregard the opinions of his OWN eminent theologians and experts), inexplicably.

There is evidence in the Vatican archives, and elsewhere, that Pope JohnPaul I, during his brief reign, was about to reverse the ban, or at the very least, downgrade it to a non-serious matter, and indeed the night before his death, (murder), the papers doing so were seen lying on his desk, in the "appartamento pontifico", in the Apostolic Palace, and have since disappeared, and never been found. The fact that the events observed by the Benedictine nuns in the Papal household, during the evening hours the night before, and during the night of the murder, were sealed forever, and lost to history, by the insistence of the Cardinal Camerlengo, (the Cardinal who stands in for the Pope after his death, during the "sede vacante"..the period of the "empty chair" http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/SV1978.html ), Jean Cardinal Villot .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marie_Villot..... is very suspicious and dishonest.

Thus not only terminating a pregnancy but preventing it in the first place are, according to the Roman Church, judged by INTENT, and the principles of their OWN MORAL Theology, very possibly qare not only moral acts, but if ignored by a woman or couple would be IMMORAL, as their circumstances may dictate that the moral thing to do is to care for the lives they are already responsible for, including their own, in the very best way they can.

[Bucky Ball]

Just passing through and on my phone. Paleophyte, as I have mentioned before, it has been primarily Jewish Scholars, God Bless them, like Pinchas Lapide, who've shown the Catholic Church saved nearly 1 MN Jews during the Holocaust; Lapide puts the number at 860,000 - Jewish Lives Saved I.e. - by the Catholic Church under Pope Ven. Pius XII in the Nazi Period. They've cleared up and even refuted the false Commie Propaganda that Pope Pius XII was allegedly a Nazi-Sympathizer, which they first put forth, non-seriously, in one of their Leftist Plays in the 1960 or so, which somehow caught on in the MSM. Meanwhile, read the writings of those like Real Jewish Rabbis in the 1940s who expressed gratitude to the Catholic Church for the Vaticans efforts to save Jewish Lives.

This is from the Jewish Virtual Library: "The vindication of Pius XII has been established principally by Jewish writers and from Israeli archives. It is now established that the Pope supervised a rescue network which saved 860,000 Jewish lives - more than all the international agencies put together.

After the war the Chief Rabbi of Israel thanked Pius XII for what he had done. The Chief Rabbi of Rome went one step further. He became a Catholic. He took the name Eugenio."

Eugenia Pacelli was Pope Ven Pius XIIs birth name.

Then why did the Church apologize for what he did ?
LOL. No no and no.
Eugenia (obviously) is a woman's name.

His name was Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Pacelli