Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

You flit from one elephant to another with all the ease of a gnat at the zoo. I am a Christian and even a Catholic and, with my religious beliefs, I do not want abortion to be criminalized.

At the same time, I recognize that every voter must "vote their conscience" and that a conscience is not formed ex nihilo from first principles and reasoning in the case of any human being. If you have a solution to this "flaw in democracy," please let us know.

I'll stop there because I don't like having 3 things hurled at me when I had already discussed one, which got left by the wayside. It does not show a commitment to dialogue.

Peter Kirby

Originally Posted by Headache

How can we discuss when the argument is religious in nature?

You don't want marriage between two men because of your religion, but you want marriage to be between a man and a woman and then let men have civil unions. Isn't this religiously motivated?

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

That isn't my position. My position is that I want the government out of the marriage game (in name) entirely. Further, I want two men and two women to have the same right of man-woman pairs in establishing domestic partnership contracts in U.S. courts.

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

If just one person is not religiously motivated and wants to outlaw abortion, does that not affect your argument?

Peter Kirby

Originally Posted by Headache

Why?
Is there any reason besides religion for this? Esp. since marriage includes many benefits granted by the government.

If churches wants to have something that they claim is only for a man and a woman, then create a new institution that can only be awarded by the church and which is not recognized by anyone outside the church. Leave marriage alone, and let anyone who wants to venture into marriage do so.

What you suggest is just a weak religious stand. rather than actually standing behind what you really think, you have made up an intermediary position to avoid admitting that you don't want two men or two women to be able to get married due to religious dogma.
It's basically a cowards position.

Originally Posted by Headache

No, it doesn't, it doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of people opposing abortion do so purely on religious background.

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

I wouldn't think that possible; for in addition to the religious background, they must also give consent to the religious background's message, and then apply that consent to the application of law. If that process were sufficient and automatic, masturbation and condoms would be advocated to become illegal too and with similar ferocity. Since these and other religious-based ordinances are not pushed nearly as strongly to become law, this is evidence that there is something more at work here.

Originally Posted by pewforum.org

Some demographics and details about the AP-Ipsos poll and polling generally on attitudes about abortion. The AP-Ipsos results are taken from a poll of 1,001 adults conducted Feb. 28-March 2. The poll, conducted by the international polling firm Ipsos, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

ABORTION SUPPORT: Some 19 percent of those surveyed said abortion should be legal in all cases. But the number grows to 52 percent who think abortion should be legal in most cases. Also, 43 percent say abortion should be illegal most or all the time. Two-thirds of Democrats say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while two-thirds of Republicans say that abortion should be illegal in all or most cases. Two-thirds of white evangelicals say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, while 54 percent of Protestants felt that way. Half of Catholics said abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

Originally Posted by popline.org

Opposition to legalized abortion is related to religious preferences of a stratified national sample of entering college freshmen. Contrary to results of some studies, there are substantial differences between Roman Catholics and several large Protestant denominations, even if participation is controlled. Additional detail on denomination reveals that opposition to abortion varies widely within Protestantism. Categories of preference ranked from high to low opposition are: Latter-Day Saints, Roman Catholics, Adventist, small Protestant denominations, Baptist, Hispanic Roman Catholic, other religions (not listed), Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Muslim, Methodist, Presbyterian, Congregational, Episcopalian, Quaker, none/no preference, Jewish, and Unitarian. The relationship between attitude toward abortion and religious preference is not spurious when additive relationships of both with attendance at religious services, region and mother's education are controlled. However, significant 1st-order interactions of preference with attendance, region and mother's education are observed. Results suggest that the relationship between religion and opposition to abortion may be more complicated than previous research has indicated. Abortion attitude is related to both preference and attendance and the relationships are more than additive. In general, subjects identifying with anti-abortion religions are also more likely to indicate frequent attendance. Likewise, attendance is related to preference in the present study.

Originally Posted by book.google.com

The relationship among religious preference, church attendance and the consequence of religion are explored in terms of the acceptance/rejection of the legalization of abortion. The findings indicate that frequent church attenders tend to be anti-abortion, regardless of the degree of liberal ideologies normally associated with certain churches.

From the fact that opposition to abortion is associated with political conservatism, and from the fact that religious and political conservatism/liberalism are highly correlated, the authors hypothesize that more conservative churches will tend to oppose abortion, while the more liberal churches will tend to favor it.

Originally Posted by washingtonpost.com

Abortion is a key issue among the state's [South Carolina's] religious conservatives, an important voting bloc in the first Southern primary in the nation next year.

Originally Posted by medicalnewstoday.com

Joe Feuerherd: The U.S. Conference Catholic Bishops' promotion of the "idea that abortion trumps everything, all the time, no matter what, is both bad religion and bad civics," Feuerherd, a former correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, writes in an opinion piece. According to Feuerherd, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) will be "deemed worthy of support" by the bishops because of his "antiabortion voting record," although he likely will not make an abortion ban his top priority if elected. The bishops "seem to have forgotten that it is not simply aspirations that matter, Feuerherd writes, adding that the bishops appear to be "more than willing to accept" antiabortion rhetoric "over results" (Feuerherd, Washington Post, 2/24).

Originally Posted by priestsforlife.org

Opposition to Abortion More Than an Article of Faith

Bishop Paul S. Loverde:

Opposition to abortion does not depend on a foundation of religious faith. Many people, who profess a variety of religious beliefs or even no religion, oppose the direct taking of innocent human life by abortion. There is an error inherent in the assertion that abortion is just an article of faith.

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Regarding "Opposition to abortion does not depend on a foundation of religious faith," more accurately, "Opposition to abortion does not ALWAYS depends on a foundation of religious faith, but in many cases, DOES
depend on a foundation of religious faith." That is obvious since it is well-known that many religious conservatives oppose abortion solely on religious grounds, not to mention homosexuality, same-sex marriage and assisted suicide.

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Regarding "Opposition to abortion does not depend on a foundation of religious faith," more accurately, "Opposition to abortion does not ALWAYS depends on a foundation of religious faith, but in many cases, DOES depend on a foundation of religious faith." That is obvious since it is well-known that many religious conservatives oppose abortion solely on religious grounds, not to mention homosexuality, same-sex marriage and assisted suicide.

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

This statement is true. However, if you are going to quote me, please quote me. If you are going to reply to me, please reply to me. To quote and to reply properly means to engage what I have written.

Originally Posted by Headache

No, it doesn't, it doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of people opposing abortion do so purely on religious background.

Originally Posted by Peter Kirby

I wouldn't think that possible.......

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Since Headache did not explain what he meant by "the vast majority," which means that your reply was not a reply to a specific claim, I posted what I posted because it contained specific statistics that I thought would help you and Headache have more meaningful discussions about how much religion influences what people believe about abortion. What exactly do you believe would not be possible. Since you frequently express yourself in complex ways, not in simply stated ways, I often find your posts to be difficult to understand. Perhaps you should consider trying to state your positions more simply so as to gain a wider audience.

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Disinterest in the NT seems an eminently rational position to me. If it's all nonsense, then why should we be interested.

The people I don't understand are those who, believing that it is all nonsense, believing that they have only one life, nevertheless choose to spend their limited hours on the NT rather than on something positive and constructive.

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The people I don't understand are those, who believing that is all nonsense, choose to spend their time attacking the OT/NT