Did These Parents Have A Right To Kidnap Thier 21 Year Old Daughter

[pcabibi]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1137808' date='Dec 7 2006, 10:49 PM']
As I've said before, any law, by its very nature, puts limits on people's personal choice.
The law (if justly carried out) will not respect my choice to murder, maim, commit mayhem, steal, commit fraud, evade taxes, use or deal crack, drive 120 mph on a public highway while drunk, or poach, or practice medicine without a license.
If I choose to do any of these things, I face the consequences of the law.

"Freedom of choice" is a cop-out argument.

The issue with abortion is that all innocent human life should be protected by law.
[/quote]

We've been down this abortion road though. Saying an embryo is human isn't as easily definable as saying me and you are human. Some people, some religions, have differing opinions on this. They have freedom of religion, they should have freedom of choice.

[Socrates]

[quote name='JClives' post='1137837' date='Dec 7 2006, 11:12 PM']
We've been down this abortion road though. Saying an embryo is human isn't as easily definable as saying me and you are human. Some people, some religions, have differing opinions on this. They have freedom of religion, they should have freedom of choice.
[/quote]
If an embryo is human (rather than, say, a chicken embryo), it is human.

And, as I've pointed out in another post, some people, some religions, have differing views on whether it is acceptable to kill other people. Many religions through history have not only tolerated, but [i]demanded[/i] human sacrifice!
Should "freedom" of choice" and "freedom of religion" demand that we allow them the right to practice their beliefs and perform human sacrifice??

People have differing opinions on just about everything under the sun. (Opinions are like er, . . . armpits . . . Everyone's got one and they all stink!)
We should be concerned with what is right.

And I'd like to ask you these questions:
What makes something a human being?

Should the lives of all innocent human beings be protected?
If so, why?

[pcabibi]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1137858' date='Dec 7 2006, 11:21 PM']
If an embryo is human (rather than, say, a chicken embryo), it is human.

And, as I've pointed out in another post, some people, some religions, have differing views on whether it is acceptable to kill other people. Many religions through history have not only tolerated, but [i]demanded[/i] human sacrifice!
Should "freedom" of choice" and "freedom of religion" demand that we allow them the right to practice their beliefs and perform human sacrifice??

People have differing opinions on just about everything under the sun. (Opinions are like er, . . . armpits . . . Everyone's got one and they all stink!)
We should be concerned with what is right.

And I'd like to ask you these questions:
What makes something a human being?

Should the lives of all innocent human beings be protected?
If so, why?
[/quote]

Soc, much respect but I'm not turning this thread into another abortion thread lol. I'm tired.

[Socrates]

[quote name='JClives' post='1137861' date='Dec 7 2006, 11:23 PM']
Soc, much respect but I'm not turning this thread into another abortion thread lol. I'm tired.
[/quote]
Cool.

(But you did start in the first post by saying how this story supported your "pro-choice" views - which related it (indirectly) to the abortion issue.)

I might repeat this in another thread, though.

[got2luvjc]

I don't think the parents had to be so extreme.
They could've told her how they felt way before 24 hours before the wedding, lets day... months before.
The commandment "Honor Thy Father and Mother" doesn't apply in harmful situations. If your parents said "You can't eat! You're too fat!! You can't eat for 3 days!!!", I don't think you would have to obey that cuz it's harmful to you. And lets say the husband did abuse her... the parents could get counceling for them unstead of pulling her hair. And, she is an adult. She can make her own decisions. To further my point of view, the commandment "thou shall not steal" doesn't apply when someone's about to stab you with a knife and you manage to take the knife from them... it wasn't a bad thing that you stole the knife from them.

[quote name='JClives' post='1137861' date='Dec 7 2006, 11:23 PM']
Soc, much respect but I'm not turning this thread into another abortion thread lol. I'm tired.
[/quote]

I know really... there's already about 10 other abortion-related threads in the debate section

[BurkeFan]

Please consider reading Alasdair MacIntyre's [i]After Virtue[/i] and Fr. Servais Pinckaers' [i]Sources of Christian Ethics[/i]. Exalting sheer choice above anything else, or even to the extent of proclaiming oneself to be "pro-choice," is a confusion both of who we are and of what we are. Praise of the power of 'choice' separated from the question of what choices are being made is simply fallacious, though common. We find our freedom in choosing in accordance with the good, not simply by choosing.

[quote]We've been down this abortion road though. Saying an embryo is human isn't as easily definable as saying me and you are human. Some people, some religions, have differing opinions on this. They have freedom of religion, they should have freedom of choice.[/quote]



How can one, in all honesty, claim that an embryo isn't human? It genetically is human! Simply holding the opinion that an embryo isn't human has no bearing whatsoever on its ontological status.

[got2luvjc]

Did the article say that the boyfriend definitely abused her or was it just parental speculation?

[SanctitasDeo]

It was wrong for the parents to kidnap their daughter. Whether the man she intended to marry was abusive or not, her parents had no right under the law to stop her. She was not a minor, so there was no need for parental permission. They were wrong, and what they did is disgusting.

If we ignore the law and pretend that her parents had the legal right to kidnap her, I would still object as I agree that free will is important.

If a parent continues to make the choices for their offspring even when they are adults, it invalidates both the offspring's free will and the offspring's actions. If parents force children to do obey the commandments, and the children are unwilling, then as far as the children are concerned, they may as well have not obeyed the commandments.


"As I've said before, any law, by its very nature, puts limits on people's personal choice.
The law (if justly carried out) will not respect my choice to murder, maim, commit mayhem, steal, commit fraud, evade taxes, use or deal crack, drive 120 mph on a public highway while drunk, or poach, or practice medicine without a license.
If I choose to do any of these things, I face the consequences of the law.

"Freedom of choice" is a cop-out argument."


The law does not limit personal choice, it merely applies consequences to that choice. Free agency does not mean we can do whatever we want and get away with it. God has not limited our choices by giving us commandments, he has proscribed positive and negative consequences to certain actions. If man had no choice, it would be immoral to consign him to eternal damnation for what he does.

As far as abortion goes, there is no reason the law of the United States (or any other country) should not protect innocent human life. Making abortion illegal does not limit a woman's choice, it merely assigns consequences to it, just as the government assigns consequences to murder.

"Freedom of choice" is a cop-out argument" when one uses it to justify legalization of harm to other people. If the kind of free will that JClives seems to espouse was the founding philosophy of the United States we might not have laws at all. Now, I say that last tentatively, as I do not know the full scope of his view of agency, but it seems to be true from what I have read here.


"Praise of the power of 'choice' separated from the question of what choices are being made is simply fallacious, though common. We find our freedom in choosing in accordance with the good, not simply by choosing."

I think this is true. This quotation is also applicable: "Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself." (2 Nephi 2:27).

[got2luvjc]

yeah I agree. even if the boyfriend was abusive, they still didn't have to kidnap her. it's kind of extreme.

[SanctitasDeo]

Yeah, they should have just told her how they feel. Perhaps asked her to to go to counseling or something if the guy actually is abusive. The whole thing is really weird.

[White Knight]

I'm sure the Parents had some sort of attention to justify what they did, however if their side of the story is true, which theres not enough info to confirm that, then what they did was noble, if their daughter was indeed marrying someone who is a massive creep, jerk, or something I'm not willing to say, then the Parents had the noble attention of doing the right thing.

However, the 21 year old daughter shes an adult now, so she can make her own decesions, to choose rather or not to marry this person, however "that" person is (The Person she was going to Marry.)

The parents have probally a pretty good reason for doing what they did, but still none the less wrong, because its interfering with their daughter's free will and free choice as an adult.

[Anthony]

[quote name='JClives' post='1137673' date='Dec 7 2006, 07:15 PM']
go up to my first post.

go to where it says "Pro choice"

Read what's in the parenthesis.
Now... Pro choice doesn't have to deal with abortion. In cases such as this I also support the woman's right to choose what she wants to do, regardless of whether or not it's the best thing for her.
[/quote]

I don't understand. If you don't support abortion, but you support a women's right to choose to have an abortion, how different is that? It sound like you are taking a moral relativistic view. That's not good. As a Christian, you should stand up for what is right on every moral issue as we are obligated to do what is good according to God.

[SanctitasDeo]

[url="http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650213087,00.html"]Here is an update on this story.[/url]

The relevant passage is this:

[quote]She also testified that her parents said that Perry Myers, her then-fiance, was "wicked" and "evil" because he hadn't proposed with a diamond ring. Julianna Myers said she and Perry decided together to buy a gold band.[/quote]

So, quite frankly, her parents were in every way imaginable in the wrong. I can't imagine how this would justify kidnapping. The whole thing is really weird.

[picchick]

My take on this. I think there is information missing. How long did they (the parents) know about this "abuse" and whatnot and had they ever talked to the daughter before the wedding? No one knows if they read the article.

However, based off of what I read...
The parents should not of kidnapped their daughter. There is a time to let go. They should tell her how they feel and stress how she should listen to them for some reason or another. However, in the end she is going to have to make the decision. As an adult she must make the decision and then face the consequences, good or bad. Furthermore, she should respect her parents and honor their opinion.

[jmjtina]

[quote name='JClives' post='1137659' date='Dec 7 2006, 05:44 PM']
[url="http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/07/kidnapped.bride.ap/index.html"]http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/07/kidnappe...e.ap/index.html[/url]

Situations like this only solidify my pro-choice (not abortion related) standpoint, and how religous people sometimes overlook how important choice really is.
[/quote]


Some in-laws, huh?

This is about crazy people, not "religious" people. You can't generalize that to all "religious" people. It may not be the best way to handle the situation, but that was just bogus.

Nor can I say that "Pro-Choice" people don't know how to use the term and think it's some type of term to use in all situations in life, whether it's about the color of shirt they wear or what kind of T.V. program they watch. This term is usually used for the abortion debate, yet you seem to use it so flippantly in a catholic debate phorum.

By all means, let's discuss the abortion issue. If not, I can read about this in the check-out line at the grocery store and agree with you.

If not, I'm going to be "pro-choice" and stop reading this thread.

[BurkeFan]

[quote name='jmjtina' post='1141954' date='Dec 14 2006, 01:10 AM']
Some in-laws, huh?

This is about crazy people, not "religious" people. You can't generalize that to all "religious" people. It may not be the best way to handle the situation, but that was just bogus.

Nor can I say that "Pro-Choice" people don't know how to use the term and think it's some type of term to use in all situations in life, whether it's about the color of shirt they wear or what kind of T.V. program they watch. This term is usually used for the abortion debate, yet you seem to use it so flippantly in a catholic debate phorum.

By all means, let's discuss the abortion issue. If not, I can read about this in the check-out line at the grocery store and agree with you.

If not, I'm going to be "pro-choice" and stop reading this thread.
[/quote]

I think Mr. Clives has left.