Replies

You come on this thread and spew your little rage and then expect polite discourse? Stick it. My opinon is clear as crystal and defined by numerous posts. If you can't understand simple concepts and can't post your questions without sneering, then don't bother. You are getting hysterical. I did not "spew" and I'm not in any kind of "rage" and I do not "sneer". And I have been polite. I asked a legitimate question and was immediately met with a condescending reply (I think you called me "smarty-mouth" or some such) which I felt was entirely unwarranted. FEY ... I was trying to have a legitimate debate with you.

Your position vis a vis "value" was not clear which is why I asked for a definition of what you consider "valueing human life" to go along with your premis.

Also, as another poster brought up, what time frame did this "devaluation" occur and what are the indications of life being devalued more now than it was then?

Post 66 qualifies as a rage. And I am not hysterical, merely tired of having to repeat myself. It is hard for me to believe that you need me to define "value."

Also, the time frame is in the article and also posted in italics in post 57. I could trace the devaluization of life beginning as a long-tern outgrowth of the protestant revolut, but that would be getting really off track. The article is dealing with the results of how contraception has lead to a loss of dignity for humanity--meaning that when "free sex" became the focus instead of family--it lead to abortion and other things that lead to a devaluing of our intrinsic worth from conception until natural death. The outgrowth of these being things I have already outlined for you.

"The fact is that contraception is not part of their culture and yet .... individual lives are NOT valued in the same way they are in our culture which does embrace contraceptives"

I questioned your assertion noted above:

Are you saying, "Let's hurry and kill all the babies in 3rd world countries before they die of malnutrition or something else?"

You then responded: No. I was making a different point: That contributing to the suffering of others and/or being indifferent to it are manifestations of "devalueing human life". I used that as a comparison that life is "devalued" in other cultures besides our own.

Lorraine, of course life is devalued in other cultures, but your "circular" argument is incongruous.

Please tell me how our society values human life more than other societies and cultures when we have legalized and conducted the murder of over 30 million babies? We have to be the leaders, tragically, in the dehumanization of life.

Please don't take offense when opinions and sentiments are attributed to you. It is the result of your very transparent argument. One manifestation of a transparent argument is the writer's insistence on turning the focus away from the crux of the article posted.

I will not hypothesize on your personal sentiments in the future, but I would rather you stay focused on the topic of this thread, or begin your own thread to discuss the object of your interest.

Regards