UK, Ireland / 10,000 Poles in UK for free abortions [58]


It wasn't and, in effect, it doesn't.


No.


It's not a conundrum. One either believes no one has the right "play God," in the words of tornado2007, that is, to decide whether a life should be extinguished or else one thinks people who behaved in such a way as caused their situation have the right to do so based upon anything from their convenience to their station in life to their lack of interest.

UK, Ireland / 10,000 Poles in UK for free abortions [58]


No, it doesn't. The doctrine in question is the prohibition of contraception, but there is also a prohibition of premarital intercourse. In other words, the prohibition of contraception is intended for marital intercourse which, in concurrence with the moral guidance of the Church, has the intent of creating a family. If a person disregards the doctrine regarding premarital intercourse but then observes the doctrine prohibiting contraception and becomes pregnant, it is not a hardship intended by the Church, as you suggested. It's just dumb people practicing one doctrine without the one that actually prevents the pregnancy. That they then choose to murder their own offspring rather than carry him to term is their own failing. That's hardship they brought on themselves with the help of no one else. If someone intends to engage in premarital sex and will have an abortion if pregnancy ensues, they ought to damn well use protection. There is no Church doctrine intended for contraception use during premarital sex since premarital sex is, itself, proscribed.


The answer is still no. If you intended it rhetorically, would you have also answered no? If you would have answered yes, then it wasn't rhetorical to the very large number of people who would disagree.

I don't agree that it applies. Religion might be a great conundrum to you, but it isn't to many people.




Hmm, sort of not really "with it" use of certain language...awkward and a little bit contrived. It's not really the words you use, it's the way you use them that leads me to think "50 bucks says this guy is the same person writing in the other thread as crocker2"

UK, Ireland / 10,000 Poles in UK for free abortions [58]


I haven't assumed anything of the sort. I don't think you read terribly well. Go back and try again.


There always have been.


I know this is "popular knowledge," but it's also not correct. It's based on the false premise that unaffiliated religious people constitute the same confessional group as atheists, which, obviously, they don't. Statistically, diversity of religions practiced, including agnosticism and the unaffiliated religious, is expanding in most Western countries, but the number of believers in all three Abrahamic confessions is also increasing. In some places, certain denominational numbers have dropped of late, particularly among Protestants, but that does not hold true for the breadth of religions present.


Hmm, yes, puzzling that you might write something, and someone who disagrees with it based on the evidence at hand says he disagrees. Very, very puzzling...

It's so puzzling.


Perhaps. However, the evidence may be judged by anyone so inclined, from (a) the particularly awkward use of colloquial language by both you and crocker2 as though it were written by someone not used to speaking using the terms you each were using, (b) the juvenile nature, though crocker2 with a phony and contrived direction, of the messages posted in the same time span but never at the same moment (that is, unprovoked attack messages), (c) the identical session sign-in time of both you and crocker2 when neither had been logged in during the hours before, (d) the same being true with the exception of the sign-in time (no longer available) in the only previous appearance of crocker2 at this forum, and finally, (e) I tend to notice when someone calls me the very dated term "homie," as crocker2 did, and then only a couple minutes later, someone else calls me the similar, equally dated, and awkward term "homesteak," as you did in this thread.




Have you encountered many trolls in this forum that attack forum-goers and then, seemingly without precedent, complement a forum-goer?
And how many conversations happen on forums where both people call each other "brah?"

Well, perhaps you're not the same person, little guy, but anyone participating in this forum may be the judge of that for themselves.


Right, another very mature take on this issue.

Life / Dog's life or what to expect when living in Poland with a dog [22]


I've never even heard of some of these breeds. I looked them up. The akbash dog looks like a polar bear.

Life / DECENCY RATINGS FOR THE INTERNET? Would it work in Poland? [17]


I'm not opposed to decency ratings if they don't interfere with accessibility. That said, the above is at best a gross stretch. At most, there was a telephone conversation or a shared memo between Obama staffers and the Culture Secretary.

News / The new Polish government is going to do... reprivatisation [25]


Of course they can. Contemporary democracies act in the best interest of the whole people. If they fail to do so, they can admit fault. In order to continue to do so, they do not have to contort to grandiose compensation schemes. If you'll humor my opinion, a full disclosure and an apology serve the greater good of the nation.

Genealogy / Do you guys see the Polish in me in this picture? [29]


No, not at all. Maybe if you included a photograph of your Polish parent, one could see resemblances to him or her. The picture of you, however, just looks Persian.

Life / Is it safe for me and my Asian friends to come to Poland? [44]


Not bad at all, I would say. That is, if you could even consider the two events to be attacks.

That there were two occasions when your ethnic origin marginally figured into people making unkind remarks about you does not legitimately constitute an attack. You should have to be a Russian in Poland; then see what you'd get.

Genealogy / Do you guys see the Polish in me in this picture? [29]


And the hair, and the eyes, none of which looks typically Polish even in the slightest way.


Not anyone who knows what most Italians look like. Sicilian, perhaps, but the proportions and the structure are very different from Italians generally.


No, for the same reasons you couldn't pass as an Italian among Italians.


These you do look like.


...Specifically the Lavant, Middle East, and North Africa.


Yes, because the heavy black curls are not something that Poles usually have.


You do definitely have that.


Not necessarily Arab, but certainly Middle Eastern -- Persian, or perhaps Caucasian, Turkish, Levantine....


Pretty much agreed.


Don't take that to heart. You could pass as a recent immigrant to Britain, but certainly not as an Englishman, a Scot, or a Welshman.


That is good, especially if you are glad you are both.




Why so excited about how many replies you receive?