one person or a group of people to change things for the majority. At least
that is how I feel.
What scares me about that is, right now, statutory rape is a crime that says
a 30 year old man can't have sex with a 15 year old girl.
Well what would we think if teenagers start saying, "Hey wait, I should be
able to sleep with whoever I want to. I want to have a 35 year old boy/girl
friend."
And the opponents will say, "well you're not legal, you have no rights"
And they start rallying to change the stat. rape laws and change the laws
that says when a person is legal or not.
Or someone says, "And I want to have sex with animals if I want to" and they
start rallying to change the laws.
and so on.....
That is what bothers me, because you don't believe in something, you change
it for the majority.
For example, here is the defination of marriage: The legal union of a man
and woman as husband and wife. Why is a group of people allowed to change
that definition?
Can a another group change the laws regarding murder, if they decide they
want to stone people in their community who commit crimes.
Where do you stop?
how do you please everyone?
-----Original Message-----
From: Lyons, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 2:56 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Conversation Topic - Abortion
John,
I have some difficulty following your logic here. You're saying that if I
say I support a woman's right to choose, it imposes a moral viewpoint on an
anti abortion supporter. How so, I'm not forcing her to have an abortion. I
am expressing my viewpoint only, not strapping her to a table and
performing a D & C. In contrast the efforts of anti abortion supporters DO
impose their moral viewpoint on those with whom they disagree. There is a
difference here.
One way of looking at it is one group wants simply to be left alone as they
go through a difficult time while the anti-abortion group wants and does
interfere with others.
larry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 2:35 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Conversation Topic - Abortion
>
>
> >Just as supporting abortion rights is imposing different
> moral views on
> >others.
> >> no. If I get pregnant tomorrow nobody is going to tell me
> I *have* to
> have an abortion. You on the other hand seem to feel it would
> be ok if I
> *had* to have the baby.
>
> Yes (to your "no"). Expressing support for a womans right to
> choose is imposing radically different moral views than the
> pro-lifers own stances. I'm not telling you or anyone you
> have to have your babies, I AM saying if you choose to have
> an abortion that is medically unwarranted than I think you
> have killed/murdered your child.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 2:19 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Conversation Topic - Abortion
>
>
> no. If I get pregnant tomorrow nobody is going to tell me I
> *have* to have an abortion. You on the other hand seem to
> feel it would be ok if I *had* to have the baby.
>
> Dana
>
> >>> However, condoning abortion as murder, as some have done on this
> >>> thread,
> >is imposing moral views on others.
> >
> >Just as supporting abortion rights is imposing different
> moral views on
> >others.
> _____
>
>
>
>
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
