Sunday, February 28, 2010

Simpsons Henta Imagens

BIOETHICS -




am a high school student of 15 years, and with regard to the issue of abortion, I wonder, "What right does a woman refuse life another creature?




Federica Cara Federica,

I draw inspiration from your letter, to make any lasting BIOETHICS, starting with the abortion. To "level playing field" signals a web page "on abortion," from which I took pictures (http://www.sandrodiremigio.com/blog/aborto_embrione_ivg_omicidio.htm), and an article of giornale.it (http : / / www.ilgiornale.it/interni/aborto_difendo_ragioni_cuore/21-02-2010/articolo-id=423763-page=0-comments=1).
, especially an article in the Corriere della Sera ON LINE, 20 February 2010, including withholding significant passages (http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2010/febbraio/20/duri_anti_aborto_contro_Fisichella_co_8_100220024.shtml):
"CITY VATICAN - Five members (out of 158) of the Pontifical Academy for Life, call the Pope the head of the President, the 'Archbishop Rino Fisichella, described as "a clergyman who does not understand what does the absolute respect for innocent human life." An attack by against "pro life" more radical - available on the Internet with a gesture considered 'serious' and' incorrect 'by the Holy See - which was a terrible story of' last year: a bimba brasiliana stuprata dal patrigno rimase incinta di due gemelli; era stata violentata e picchiata più volte, aveva nove anni e pesava trenta chili: per salvarla, i medici la fecero abortire. Fu a quel punto che l'allora arcivescovo José Cardoso Sobrinho pensò di annunciare pubblicamente la «scomunica» contro «tutte le persone coinvolte nell' aborto». L' uscita creò sconcerto, anzitutto fra i cattolici, finché Fisichella, il 15 marzo, pubblicò un articolo («Dalla parte della bambina brasiliana») sull' Osservatore Romano: «L' aborto provocato è sempre stato condannato dalla legge morale», scriveva, ma la bimba «doveva essere in primo luogo difesa, abbracciata, accarezzata gently to make them feel that we were all with her, all without any distinction. Before thinking of excommunication was an urgent need to protect innocent life and bring her to a level of humanity of which we men of the Church should be expert preachers and teachers. This has not been and, unfortunately, is affected the credibility of our teaching that is insensitive to the eyes of many, incomprehensible, and without mercy. " At the age of 75 years, the 'Brazilian archbishop was immediately put on board. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, against the "manipulation and exploitation 'of' Fisichella's article made clear that there is' brought the doctrine of the Church, while taking into account the dramatic situation of the child. " But the polemics of the "hard" not been silenced. The thing had no consequences. Nell 'last meeting, a week ago, no one has ever raised the issue of resignation. Furthermore, in addition to the Presidency and the Governing Council, the 'Academy for Life is made up of 158 members between common and related fees: and the "branch" is signed by three ordinary members (out of 56) and two equivalent (out of 87 ). The most famous is Michel Schooyans, Ratzinger wrote that the 'introduction to a book in' 97. But the Vatican c 'is great irritation. The "letter" of the five who ask 'responsible' (that Benedict XVI and Cardinal Bertone from which they were appointed) to dismiss Fisichella was circulated on the Internet. "

Having said this, we come to your specific question: " What right has a woman to deny life to another creature?
A further question that we associate no secondary "What right do others have to force a woman to continue an unwanted pregnancy?"

Let's see, first, what is right. From Wikipedia we read that the meaning more common in reference to our problem is: "The set and the complex (usually systematic) of the rules that govern the lives of community members reference. So, without a community of reference, the right loses meaning.

One of conceptions is called dating. theory of natural law or natural law. This theory postulates the existence of a set of immutable and eternal principles, inscribed in human nature, which gives the name of natural law. The law (the law actually in force) is merely the translation of those principles into rules. The method adopted by the legislature is therefore a deductive method: from universal principles are derived (by inference) the particular rules. The problem is that there is not always complete agreement on what are the universal principles ISPIRATORI DELLE NORME GIURIDICHE. Le Chiese, principali assertrici del diritto naturale, tendono ad identificarlo con i princìpi dettati dai loro testi sacri (la Bibbia, il Corano, etc.); gli studiosi laici con princìpi diversi (di giustizia, equità, il popolo, lo stato, o LA DICHIARAZIONE UNIVERSALE DEI DIRITTI UMANI DELLE NAZIONI UNITE.). Non essendoci accordo sui princìpi-base (a meno che essi non siano imposti da un potere autoritario), viene a cadere il fondamento stesso della teoria del diritto naturale. Ricordiamo, inoltre, che da pochi anni esistono delle TEORIE di etica evoluzionista (vedi il mio post sul BENE e sul MALE) che cercano di individuare dei VALORI ETICI ACQUISITI DALL'UOMO, tramite l'evoluzione, regardless of religions (probably so, it explains why nearly all modern civilized countries, as we shall see, allow abortion on request of the mother at an unconscious level, if not influenced by religion, we give more value to the physical well-being of mother than to the unborn child).

But, for example, in the case of Canon Law Catholic, while the Abortion entails automatic excommunication, no ifs and buts in the case of 9 year old Brazilian girl raped by her father, the doctrine that theoretically should be DIVINE INSPIRATION, so PERFECT, creates major problems of interpretation even within the Catholic community and its most alti livelli.

Decisamente indicativa è la mappa delle legislazioni sull’aborto, che troviamo nel sito web (http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislazioni_sull%27aborto), in cui si evince che la quasi totalità dei paesi civili dell’emisfero NORD della terra e in SUD AFRICA (colorata in azzuro), l’ABORTO E’ LEGALE SU RICHIESTA DELLA MADRE; in INDIA, legale per stupro, protezione della vita della madre, salute fisica, salute mentale, fattori socioeconomici, e/o anomalie del feto; in MESSICO ed AUSTRALIA, legale per stupro, protezione della vita della madre, salute fisica, salute mentale, e/o anomalie del feto; in BRASILE Illegale con l'eccezione di stupro, protezione della vita mother's physical health, and / or mental health, the rest of Africa and the rest of South America, with the exception of Illegal physical health, protection of the life of the mother and / or mental health in Chile and in a few others were minor, illegal without exception.

In conclusion, the answer to your question depends on the will of individual women (from their culture, vision, life, religion, morals, etc..), While the parallel answer to the question ("What right do others have to force a woman to continue an unwanted pregnancy? ") depends only on the existing legislation in their respective States, which can be circumvented, however, going abroad to have abortions, e poi ritornare nello stato di partenza. Personalmente, come donna, difficilmente deciderei di abortire, ma non mi sento di giudicare i singoli casi delle altre donne.

Una cosa, però, ritengo essenziale; ed è che le donne devono essere pienamente informate su tutte le possibili conseguenze civili e psicofisiche che un aborto o un mancato aborto comporta, in modo da decidere liberamente.

Un caro saluto

Alessandra

Monday, February 15, 2010

Cb Z Uk A Odbiór W Polsce

Abortion Law of Job (Rev. 1)



Ritengo che una delle domande più comuni che si fanno i credenti sia più o meno la seguente: "Se Dio esiste, come può permettere tanti cataclismi e disgrazie che coinvolgono tante persone innocenti?"; but not limited to, often it seems that the good captain to others, while bad things happen to us.
Can you give me an acceptable answer? Federico


Dear Federico,

Freud, inspired by the idea of \u200b\u200bDarwin that primitive man had a social organization (although primitive) called "Primal Horde.
Freud drew his idea on the life of primitive man. According to Hunter at the time of man, the leader of the pack, with his entourage males stronger and able, to leave for the hunt that could take even longer periods.

This time let, as a symbol of his power-law:
- a totem clan - which belongs to the whole group and is transmitted hereditarily;
- a totem of sex - as referring to all the males to females as well as prohibition to members of the "clan" to marry each other
- a totem subjective - reported to what is expected from the clan members.

On returning from hunting, the chief exercised its right to possess all the females and to punish those who had tried to take his place: to mate with any female.
This action had nothing "loving" just because the chief was dragged from his "libidinal thrust" of pleasure cha has a predominantly biological justification (genital libido). The
situation of "oppression" that could also reach the "castration" of the young too active, leading to a "rebellion" that, by challenging the power of the old, often ended with the murder, the killing of the head of the pack and that is even the "ritual meal" to take ownership of its quality, capacity, potential.
Freud saw in this paradigm the birth of "guilt", thus related to the "patricide and rebellion to the laws of the aggressive and castrating father.
This social situation, then change, about 35,000 years ago with the birth and evolution of agriculture man sapiens in homo sapiens sapiens, through the birth of emotions and feelings of family members specifically, in which the mother becomes the reference point.

The concept of the archetypal father-master, then the man who identifies with God, that rewards or punishes you depending on your behavior, it remains for tens of thousands of years up to 5500 years ago in the religion of the Sumerians, who invented writing.
If you read my post: http://apiuvoci2.blogspot.com/2009/10/1.html
already seen that the Sumerians believed that the gods sent the earthquake to punish the men or the same concept that primordial the gods (or, more recently, God) will reward or punish you according to your behavior.

Ancor in modo più esplicito, la formulazione di questo concetto è stata tracciata già su un papiro, 2200 anni prima di Cristo, in occasione della caduta dell’Impero Egizio.
(vedi: http://www.psicoanalisi.it/psicoanalisi/osservatorio/articoli/osserva16.htm)

“Questo testo, che senza ombra di dubbio costituisce uno dei primi scritti della Storia, racconta l’angoscia di una persona colta e socialmente importante, forse uno scriba, che viene assalita da “un attacco di panico” di fronte al disgregarsi della forza vitale che aveva finora caratterizzato il proprio impero e, di riflesso, la propria esistenza. Da questa presa di coscienza, scaturisce una profound depressive reaction, which tries to escape questioning his soul, trying to find in it the reason to continue living. The soul is working hard in providing good and plentiful responses that may lead to the suffering I do not give up life, but he is convinced, and most devastating in the throes of despair, kills himself jumping into the flames. "They will
1600 years before long, to ensure that the human mind gradually draw up new synapses. We find, in fact, a similar incident in 600 BC with the Book of Job, set in Mesopotamia. This famous biblical text is the foundation of the excess demand primordial. In

original version, this time, Job eventually able to confront God, who reveals himself directly in your true nature. And "this unmediated perception of reality that gives rise to the emergence of new concepts and new synapses.

"During the vision of Prime Creator, Job suspending all judgments, as it includes the Laws of Creation that exist independently of any human desire: even if for reasons absolutely understandable to man, the vital principle gives rise to the sun, the stars , the oceans, along with the monsters Behemoth and Leviathan. which are emanations of the same law are inseparable. The same container covers policy areas and opposed, without any contradiction. Job is realizes that it is no longer possible to separate the Creation in its good and bad aspects, that there is a God in turn will direct the protection of Man and His Laws can not be proportionate to the human will. G. Ravasi
writes "... In this remarkable speech celebrating a Copernican revolution in the culture of the ancient East: the man is no longer the center of creation, as taught by the traditional wisdom, but it was only a microscopic component that fails to account for the whole of the cosmos.
's universe is incomprehensible and unknown in' infinitely large (planetary structures) and in 'infinitely small (the birth of chamois). Yet, Being has a plan that holds together harmoniously aspects as diverse ... (omitted). "


Unfortunately awareness THAT THERE IS A WILL IN GOD 'LIVE TO PROTECTION OF MAN OR HIS PUNISHMENT, as it existed in 600 BC, is something that is often forgotten and that religions pervert.

And even thought you say, it seems that the good captain to others and not us, is descended from these patterns, in which not explain the fact that we not punished for crimes we did not do, while others are rewarded.

Best wishes

Alessandra