|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/8/2008 5:27:28 PM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
quote:
I am not sure of the point you are trying to make. What are you saying is not true in the case of a molar pregnancy and how is that relevant to the discussion at hand?
When a sperm fertilizes an egg with a dead nucleus it can implant and grow in the womb. This isn't a living anything. Did I use the wrong term? It is relevant at hand when one says that life begins at conception. When sperm fertilize a dead egg there isn't a living anything.
What I said was this:
"The purpose of the birth control pill is to prevent pregnancy. To do this it has different mechanisms of action, one of them being that of preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. If life begins at fertilization/conception, as I and many other Christian believe, then that means the birth control pill can cause abortions. "
In the situation you described, an abortion would not take place since there would be no life. I could have said, “assuming a successful conception (i.e. a life starts)…” I guess I thought it would be obvious that a “successful conception” is what was being discussed. I could have also said, "Assuming a healthy/normal egg and a healthy/normal sperm and a successful fertilization..."
Your comment has no bearing on the fact that preventing implantation is one of the mechanisms of action, which was the direct subject of what was being discussed at the time.
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/8/2008 7:28:39 PM
|
|
|
rlj
Posts: 1438
Joined: 4/14/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
Your comment has no bearing on the fact that preventing implantation is one of the mechanisms of action, which was the direct subject of what was being discussed at the time.
I will do what I was told to do when I did volunteer work for a crisis pregnancy center as a teen-ager when I was in high school: I will excuse myself from your Jihad. (This was done because we went into schools and churches promoting abstinence. Because of the incredibly volatile nature of the target they did not want us involved in marches or rallies especially breaking the law where we could be on the news and get thrown out of what we were doing. )
quote:
Someone want to explain to me how this is possible??? Dead things don't "grow"!!!!
What happens is a sperm hits an egg that has no nucleus. The woman's body cannot tell the difference and thinks it is pregnant. The result is the fertilized dead egg implants into the wall. This will sometimes slowly discharge itself, sometimes the woman will think she's pregnant until the first ultra sounds. In worst case scenarios she has a full placenta that is growing but has no baby. This can actually at some point explode sending placenta throughout her bloodstream and end up killing her. I got into an argument once on CW from someone who said that this growth shouldn't be aborted.
However, I'll follow the Apostle Paul and bow out of this. It usually ends up making as much sense as trying to explain to a Palestinian why the Jewish race is significant in the Old Testament. Yeah, I did that to in High School.
_____________________________
-Roger
Finally, do not fear to examine both the message and the messenger. Some would disagree with this. They might say that only the message is to be judged not the messenger...but I prefer to drink water from a clean vessel.-Leon Price
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/9/2008 12:53:17 AM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
quote:
Your comment has no bearing on the fact that preventing implantation is one of the mechanisms of action, which was the direct subject of what was being discussed at the time.
I will do what I was told to do when I did volunteer work for a crisis pregnancy center as a teen-ager when I was in high school: I will excuse myself from your Jihad. (This was done because we went into schools and churches promoting abstinence. Because of the incredibly volatile nature of the target they did not want us involved in marches or rallies especially breaking the law where we could be on the news and get thrown out of what we were doing. )
Why do you feel the need to resort to making derogatory comments? By your comment it appeared as if you were trying to detract from what was being discussed. Since the subject at the time was one of the mechanisms of action of birth control pills, I did not and do not see the relevance of your comment about molar pregnancies. My commenting on what you said certainly in no way is breaking any laws.
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/21/2008 4:37:02 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 1914
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
In response to the topic question....
No...
Supporting murder is not the fruit of the Spirit...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/22/2008 12:10:48 AM
|
|
|
katydid278
Posts: 28
Joined: 6/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
Pro-abortion? No. But very few people are actually in favor of abortions.
If you're not pro-life you're pro-abortion...In fact you sanction murder. The word game is a farce...
quote:
Many Christians are pro-abortion-being-legal, however. I see rules regarding abortion like the rules we have regarding war.
Do these Christians having any biblical ground to stand on with their support for abortion, the unlawful taking of life?
quote:
War, like abortion, should never happen, but we realize that in our sinful world, both will occur, regardless of the laws. Both of these are amazingly devastating, and some people have said that niether should be condoned under any circumstance.
What is the connection between abortion and war?
quote:
Are those people pro-abortion? Only sick people want abortions to happen (and I know there are a few sick people in this world).
Pro-choice, pro-abortion, both groups sanction murder...
John
First of all, why did you ask "What is the connection between abortion and war?" Why can't people make analogies? I come across this time and time again on message boards and it's really begining to irritate me. I think this poster explained satisfactorily why he brought up war....second of all "If you're not pro-life, you are pro-abortion? With all due respect I feel that is being narrow-minded. You really don't think a person can be pro-life and anti-abortion but "tolerate" safe abortion because it is better than the alternative? Some things are between God and woman/man and I don't think we have the right to decide and push our beliefs on the whole world in going so far as to tell pefect strangers that they cannot have an abortion. If we do that we might as well count ourselves being headed towards an Islamic type Govt. legislating morality even when it comes to personal/ medical decisions. Abortion is heart-breaking. Abortion has been around forever. Abortion will not go away any more than say, lying or adultery will. We can condemn it, personally abstain from it, but we cannot make enforceable laws against it imo.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/22/2008 10:26:27 AM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: katydid278
First of all, why did you ask "What is the connection between abortion and war?" Why can't people make analogies? I come across this time and time again on message boards and it's really begining to irritate me. I think this poster explained satisfactorily why he brought up war....
War and abortion do not compare which is why the question was probably asked. The Bible says there is a time for war. I do not recall the Bible saying the same for murder.
quote:
...second of all "If you're not pro-life, you are pro-abortion? With all due respect I feel that is being narrow-minded. You really don't think a person can be pro-life and anti-abortion but "tolerate" safe abortion because it is better than the alternative?
To what alternative are you referring? I assume by "safe abortion" you mean “safe” for the woman, as abortion is never “safe” for the baby whose life is being extinguished.
quote:
Some things are between God and woman/man and I don't think we have the right to decide and push our beliefs on the whole world in going so far as to tell pefect strangers that they cannot have an abortion.
But it is okay for the ones who want abortions to “push” their beliefs on the defenseless baby?
quote:
If we do that we might as well count ourselves being headed towards an Islamic type Govt. legislating morality even when it comes to personal/ medical decisions.
So you advocate this for all areas, right, and not just abortion? Otherwise you are not being consistent. My belief is that it would be wrong for one to throw a 2 year old off of a bridge to his death. Is it wrong for me to try to “push” that belief on others? If this were legal, would it be wrong for me to try to get a law passed that would make it illegal thus legislating morality? You are the one defining the extinguishing of an unborn baby’s life as a “personal/medical decision”. This all comes down to when life begins. If a life is present at successful fertilization, then abortion is wrong since it destroys that life. If a life is present, then abortion is no different than killing a two year old. To those that believe that “life” does not become present until later, then when would that be? It would be impossible to draw an absolute line that shows this. Since this is a human life at stake, it makes no sense except to err on the side of caution.
quote:
Abortion is heart-breaking. Abortion has been around forever. Abortion will not go away any more than say, lying or adultery will. We can condemn it, personally abstain from it, but we cannot make enforceable laws against it imo.
And just why cannot we make enforceable laws against it? If abortions were to become illegal, then why could not those laws be enforced?
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/25/2008 12:15:55 AM
|
|
|
katydid278
Posts: 28
Joined: 6/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
quote:
ORIGINAL: katydid278
First of all, why did you ask "What is the connection between abortion and war?" Why can't people make analogies? I come across this time and time again on message boards and it's really begining to irritate me. I think this poster explained satisfactorily why he brought up war....
War and abortion do not compare which is why the question was probably asked. The Bible says there is a time for war. I do not recall the Bible saying the same for murder.
quote:
...second of all "If you're not pro-life, you are pro-abortion? With all due respect I feel that is being narrow-minded. You really don't think a person can be pro-life and anti-abortion but "tolerate" safe abortion because it is better than the alternative?
To what alternative are you referring? I assume by "safe abortion" you mean “safe” for the woman, as abortion is never “safe” for the baby whose life is being extinguished.
quote:
Some things are between God and woman/man and I don't think we have the right to decide and push our beliefs on the whole world in going so far as to tell pefect strangers that they cannot have an abortion.
But it is okay for the ones who want abortions to “push” their beliefs on the defenseless baby?
quote:
If we do that we might as well count ourselves being headed towards an Islamic type Govt. legislating morality even when it comes to personal/ medical decisions.
So you advocate this for all areas, right, and not just abortion? Otherwise you are not being consistent. My belief is that it would be wrong for one to throw a 2 year old off of a bridge to his death. Is it wrong for me to try to “push” that belief on others? If this were legal, would it be wrong for me to try to get a law passed that would make it illegal thus legislating morality? You are the one defining the extinguishing of an unborn baby’s life as a “personal/medical decision”. This all comes down to when life begins. If a life is present at successful fertilization, then abortion is wrong since it destroys that life. If a life is present, then abortion is no different than killing a two year old. To those that believe that “life” does not become present until later, then when would that be? It would be impossible to draw an absolute line that shows this. Since this is a human life at stake, it makes no sense except to err on the side of caution.
quote:
Abortion is heart-breaking. Abortion has been around forever. Abortion will not go away any more than say, lying or adultery will. We can condemn it, personally abstain from it, but we cannot make enforceable laws against it imo.
And just why cannot we make enforceable laws against it? If abortions were to become illegal, then why could not those laws be enforced?
You know as well as I do that there is a difference between having an abortion and pushing a 2 year old child to their death. You know as well as I do that 1 is not yet born and 1 is. Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body, it is hers, and is not a seperate entity, and we have no right to tell her she has to keep it. I would love to outlaw homosexual sex because it is a sin against God but what am I supposed to do peek into people's bedroom? It is between them and God. I would never make the choice for a woman that she must die and her baby live. Why is baby's life worth more? What if she already has othe rkids who nee dher?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/25/2008 12:01:16 PM
|
|
|
ljmac
Posts: 754
Joined: 11/20/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: katydid278
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
quote:
ORIGINAL: katydid278
First of all, why did you ask "What is the connection between abortion and war?" Why can't people make analogies? I come across this time and time again on message boards and it's really begining to irritate me. I think this poster explained satisfactorily why he brought up war....
War and abortion do not compare which is why the question was probably asked. The Bible says there is a time for war. I do not recall the Bible saying the same for murder.
quote:
...second of all "If you're not pro-life, you are pro-abortion? With all due respect I feel that is being narrow-minded. You really don't think a person can be pro-life and anti-abortion but "tolerate" safe abortion because it is better than the alternative?
To what alternative are you referring? I assume by "safe abortion" you mean “safe” for the woman, as abortion is never “safe” for the baby whose life is being extinguished.
quote:
Some things are between God and woman/man and I don't think we have the right to decide and push our beliefs on the whole world in going so far as to tell pefect strangers that they cannot have an abortion.
But it is okay for the ones who want abortions to “push” their beliefs on the defenseless baby?
quote:
If we do that we might as well count ourselves being headed towards an Islamic type Govt. legislating morality even when it comes to personal/ medical decisions.
So you advocate this for all areas, right, and not just abortion? Otherwise you are not being consistent. My belief is that it would be wrong for one to throw a 2 year old off of a bridge to his death. Is it wrong for me to try to “push” that belief on others? If this were legal, would it be wrong for me to try to get a law passed that would make it illegal thus legislating morality? You are the one defining the extinguishing of an unborn baby’s life as a “personal/medical decision”. This all comes down to when life begins. If a life is present at successful fertilization, then abortion is wrong since it destroys that life. If a life is present, then abortion is no different than killing a two year old. To those that believe that “life” does not become present until later, then when would that be? It would be impossible to draw an absolute line that shows this. Since this is a human life at stake, it makes no sense except to err on the side of caution.
quote:
Abortion is heart-breaking. Abortion has been around forever. Abortion will not go away any more than say, lying or adultery will. We can condemn it, personally abstain from it, but we cannot make enforceable laws against it imo.
And just why cannot we make enforceable laws against it? If abortions were to become illegal, then why could not those laws be enforced?
You know as well as I do that there is a difference between having an abortion and pushing a 2 year old child to their death. You know as well as I do that 1 is not yet born and 1 is. Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body, it is hers, and is not a seperate entity, and we have no right to tell her she has to keep it. I would love to outlaw homosexual sex because it is a sin against God but what am I supposed to do peek into people's bedroom? It is between them and God. I would never make the choice for a woman that she must die and her baby live. Why is baby's life worth more? What if she already has othe rkids who nee dher?
I should be surprised at such absurd arguments, but dismembering, disembowling or sucking the brains out of a baby require absurd justifications.
The location of the baby argument, protected outside the womb, but not in it, is the parallel to the free-state, slave-state argument used to abuse blacks. The very same person could be free on one side of the state line, but a slave on the other. The very same person can be protected outside the womb, but chopped up inside it. It denies the instrinsic value of each human being.
Rape is outlawed, yet it doesn't require us to "peek into people's bedroom(s)".
A baby, inside the womb or out, is a unique human being. No single individual can have two blood types, yet a mother and her baby often do.
There is nobody trying to force women to die so their babies may live. You simply made it up.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/25/2008 12:26:35 PM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1133
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ljmac
I should be surprised at such absurd arguments, but dismembering, disembowling or sucking the brains out of a baby require absurd justifications.
What does this have anything to do with the common first-trimester abortion? If the fetus doesn't even have brain cells, how can you even compare it to killing a 2 year-old baby? It might be murder, but from a purely logical perspective, the two events aren't comparable.
The scary truth is that the abortion problem is much more nuanced than many make-abortion-illegal folks think.
quote:
The location of the baby argument, protected outside the womb, but not in it, is the parallel to the free-state, slave-state argument used to abuse blacks. The very same person could be free on one side of the state line, but a slave on the other. The very same person can be protected outside the womb, but chopped up inside it. It denies the instrinsic value of each human being.
This is why the abortion debate is much more nuanced than the keep-Abortion-legal folks think.
In any case, the SC allows states to make aborting a fetus that can survive outside the womb illegal.
quote:
There is nobody trying to force women to die so their babies may live. You simply made it up.
Of course there are. I've heard people say that Christians who think abortion is OK if it's to save the mother's life aren't really Christian. I'm not saying that this is your perspective- but apparently, katy isn't the only one who's met people who oppose abortion under all circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/28/2008 11:46:51 AM
|
|
|
ljmac
Posts: 754
Joined: 11/20/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: ljmac
I should be surprised at such absurd arguments, but dismembering, disembowling or sucking the brains out of a baby require absurd justifications.
What does this have anything to do with the common first-trimester abortion? If the fetus doesn't even have brain cells, how can you even compare it to killing a 2 year-old baby? It might be murder, but from a purely logical perspective, the two events aren't comparable.
The scary truth is that the abortion problem is much more nuanced than many make-abortion-illegal folks think.
quote:
The location of the baby argument, protected outside the womb, but not in it, is the parallel to the free-state, slave-state argument used to abuse blacks. The very same person could be free on one side of the state line, but a slave on the other. The very same person can be protected outside the womb, but chopped up inside it. It denies the instrinsic value of each human being.
This is why the abortion debate is much more nuanced than the keep-Abortion-legal folks think.
In any case, the SC allows states to make aborting a fetus that can survive outside the womb illegal.
quote:
There is nobody trying to force women to die so their babies may live. You simply made it up.
Of course there are. I've heard people say that Christians who think abortion is OK if it's to save the mother's life aren't really Christian. I'm not saying that this is your perspective- but apparently, katy isn't the only one who's met people who oppose abortion under all circumstances.
The call for understanding ("nuanced") is almost always a call for excusing brutality. We've seen it frequently over the past few years with judges who let child sexual predators off with little or no punishment. They need to be understood is the excuse. So it is with abortion. All except the morally bankrupt understand the sickness of a mother killing her offspring. Only with distracting arguments and a week moral foundation are people persuaded that it's a good thing.
Nobody worth any importance to the pro-life movement has ever called for abortions to be banned if it's the only way to protect the mother from death. Not the NRLC, not James Dobson, the Pope, GWB, Ronald Regan, Henry Hyde, the Republican Party, Mother Teresa, not God, not anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/28/2008 5:17:35 PM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: katydid278
You know as well as I do that there is a difference between having an abortion and pushing a 2 year old child to their death. You know as well as I do that 1 is not yet born and 1 is.
No, I do not know this. There is no difference. Both are living human beings. The location of the baby (in the uterus / out of the uterus) makes no difference in that. You even seem to acknowledge that the unborn baby is alive (You said, “Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body…”)
quote:
Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body, it is hers, and is not a seperate entity, and we have no right to tell her she has to keep it.
I am not sure what your exact argument is here. You seem to be kind of making the “my body, my choice” argument. However, with that argument the position put forth is usually that the unborn baby is part of the woman’s body and thus subject to her choices. Yet you said, “Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body, it is hers, and is not a seperate entity, and we have no right to tell her she has to keep it.” On the one hand you seem to be saying that since the “life” is inside the woman’s body, the “life” (the life of the child) is the woman’s to do with as she chooses. Yet on the other hand you seem to be saying that the baby is part of the woman’s body (or part of the woman’s “life”…whatever that would mean) as you said that the baby is “not a separate entity”.
The argument that the baby is somehow part of the woman’s body is easily refuted. One example has already been stated…that the unborn baby can have a different blood type from the mother which would not be possible if the baby were a part of the woman’s body. This article - How the unborn child defends itself against its mother, confirming that it is a separate human being from the start – shows without question why the unborn baby is not a part of the mother’s body.
If you are making a different argument - one of that the baby is a living human being but since the baby is living inside of the woman, she has the right to kill the baby if she so desires – would be one I do not think I have yet seen. I would hope that you are really not advocating such a position. The baby’s location has no bearing at all on if the mother has the right to kill him. If it is wrong to murder a baby, then it is wrong regardless of where the baby lives at the time.
quote:
I would never make the choice for a woman that she must die and her baby live.
If all abortions were outlawed except for in situations where the life of the mother were in jeopardy, there would be far, far fewer abortions (that is as long as abortions only happened if the life of the mother were truly in danger.) From your last statement about the life of the mother should I assume that your entire argument has just been for abortion to be okay if the life of the mother is in danger? Otherwise, why did you even make the statement?
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/28/2008 5:19:23 PM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: ljmac
I should be surprised at such absurd arguments, but dismembering, disembowling or sucking the brains out of a baby require absurd justifications.
What does this have anything to do with the common first-trimester abortion? If the fetus doesn't even have brain cells, how can you even compare it to killing a 2 year-old baby? It might be murder, but from a purely logical perspective, the two events aren't comparable.
It is logically comparable as long as life begins at conception (and there are many good reasons to believe that to be the case). If life does not begin at that time, then when exactly would that time be? It would not be possible to pinpoint an exact cut-off time of when that time would be. Since this is a human life at hand, erring on the side of caution should be the position.
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/28/2008 5:28:14 PM
|
|
|
rhippie
Posts: 628
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: Rich The Hippie
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: ljmac
I should be surprised at such absurd arguments, but dismembering, disembowling or sucking the brains out of a baby require absurd justifications.
What does this have anything to do with the common first-trimester abortion? If the fetus doesn't even have brain cells, how can you even compare it to killing a 2 year-old baby? It might be murder, but from a purely logical perspective, the two events aren't comparable.
But the fetus does have brain cells. As a matter of fact the baby has a heart beat as indicated here at the fine young age of 22 days. For most women this is before they even realize they are pregnant.
_____________________________
Stand up for what's right....even if you're standing alone
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/28/2008 11:08:27 PM
|
|
|
katydid278
Posts: 28
Joined: 6/14/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
quote:
ORIGINAL: katydid278
You know as well as I do that there is a difference between having an abortion and pushing a 2 year old child to their death. You know as well as I do that 1 is not yet born and 1 is.
No, I do not know this. There is no difference. Both are living human beings. The location of the baby (in the uterus / out of the uterus) makes no difference in that. You even seem to acknowledge that the unborn baby is alive (You said, “Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body…”)
quote:
Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body, it is hers, and is not a seperate entity, and we have no right to tell her she has to keep it.
I am not sure what your exact argument is here. You seem to be kind of making the “my body, my choice” argument. However, with that argument the position put forth is usually that the unborn baby is part of the woman’s body and thus subject to her choices. Yet you said, “Fact of the matter is that the life is still in the woman's body, it is hers, and is not a seperate entity, and we have no right to tell her she has to keep it.” On the one hand you seem to be saying that since the “life” is inside the woman’s body, the “life” (the life of the child) is the woman’s to do with as she chooses. Yet on the other hand you seem to be saying that the baby is part of the woman’s body (or part of the woman’s “life”…whatever that would mean) as you said that the baby is “not a separate entity”.
The argument that the baby is somehow part of the woman’s body is easily refuted. One example has already been stated…that the unborn baby can have a different blood type from the mother which would not be possible if the baby were a part of the woman’s body. This article - How the unborn child defends itself against its mother, confirming that it is a separate human being from the start – shows without question why the unborn baby is not a part of the mother’s body.
If you are making a different argument - one of that the baby is a living human being but since the baby is living inside of the woman, she has the right to kill the baby if she so desires – would be one I do not think I have yet seen. I would hope that you are really not advocating such a position. The baby’s location has no bearing at all on if the mother has the right to kill him. If it is wrong to murder a baby, then it is wrong regardless of where the baby lives at the time.
quote:
I would never make the choice for a woman that she must die and her baby live.
If all abortions were outlawed except for in situations where the life of the mother were in jeopardy, there would be far, far fewer abortions (that is as long as abortions only happened if the life of the mother were truly in danger.) From your last statement about the life of the mother should I assume that your entire argument has just been for abortion to be okay if the life of the mother is in danger? Otherwise, why did you even make the statement?
Do us human beings have the authority to take a life? Nope. But we do. We used to kill men with electric chairs, now it's by injection. Are you also against the death penalty? The "Life" that is inside the woman does not yet belong to society. It cannot sustain itself. It is a part of the womans body. If she wants to smoke, drink, eat bad food, forget her prenatal vitamins, even kill herself...sadly there is nothing anyone can do about it. If we legislate against it, if it were possible, we have lost the freedom over our own bodies. She is responsible for her own body...and that happens to be where the fetus is growing, so the fetus is part of her own body. And we imvho have no right to intrude on peoples personal lives and decisions. If I am intimate with a man in the privacy of my own rooms, and we produce life inside my womb, who is responsible for the whole affair? Myself, the man, and the Lord. Who does one have to answer to? Myself, the man, and the Lord. Not you or anyone else. There will never be any shortage of women who want abortions....what there should be is a shortage of doctors willing to perform them.
It is against the law to do many things...yet people break the law everyday. Since the beginning of time, until the end. Ultimately God will judge the individual for their sins.
< Message edited by katydid278 -- 1/28/2008 11:15:31 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/29/2008 8:22:09 AM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1133
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
It is logically comparable as long as life begins at conception (and there are many good reasons to believe that to be the case). If life does not begin at that time, then when exactly would that time be? It would not be possible to pinpoint an exact cut-off time of when that time would be. Since this is a human life at hand, erring on the side of caution should be the position.
How about when brain cells form? This happens at roughly the same time that the stoumach forms and when the spinal cord forms.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/29/2008 2:25:55 PM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: katydid278
Do us human beings have the authority to take a life? Nope. But we do.
This is not entirely true. The Bible allows this in certain situations, for example, in war.
quote:
We used to kill men with electric chairs, now it's by injection. Are you also against the death penalty?
Actually a good argument can be made that the Bible allows for the death penalty (which would be another example regarding your first question).
quote:
The "Life" that is inside the woman does not yet belong to society.
My “life” does not belong to society. My children’s lives do not belong to society. My life, my children’s lives, my wife’s life, etc. belong to God. My children belong to my wife and me which is not the same as their lives belonging to my wife and me. They are my children, and it is my responsibility as a parent to raise them, nourish them, protect them, etc. However, their lives do not belong to me in the sense that I have the right to take their lives. A baby still in the uterus is a living human being whose life belongs to God. Can you show me in God’s Word where it says a woman has the right to decide to take her child’s life as long as her child is in her womb? A woman’s ability to end her child’s life is not the same as a woman’s right to end her child’s life.
quote:
It cannot sustain itself.
First of all, the child is not an “it”. Secondly, your statement is irrelevant. An infant cannot sustain himself either. Left alone, the infant would be unable to survive as the infant could not feed himself, protect himself from the elements, etc. There are some adults who, due to physical and/or mental disabilities, are also unable to sustain themselves. Would you say that they are not entitled to protection from death because they cannot sustain themselves?
quote:
It is a part of the womans body.
This statement is simply not true (as has already been shown). I can only assume here that you either did not bother to read the evidence given which completely refutes this statement or you are deliberately ignoring it.
quote:
If she wants to smoke, drink, eat bad food, forget her prenatal vitamins, even kill herself...sadly there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Now you are detracting from the topic at hand. This issue is abortion and it being legal. This issue is not a woman choosing to hurt her baby by other means, nor is the issue suicide and its consequences on others.
quote:
If we legislate against it, if it were possible, we have lost the freedom over our own bodies.
This statement is meaningless since, as has already been shown, the baby is not a part of the woman’s body. If you have evidence which refutes the evidence presented thus far (and there is more evidence by the way) then please present it; otherwise, all you are doing is making unsupported statements.
This article presents even more evidence which shows that the baby is not a part of the woman’s body –
Part of the Mother’s Body?
quote:
She is responsible for her own body...
True.
quote:
…and that happens to be where the fetus is growing, so the fetus is part of her own body.
So your argument is that since the baby is growing inside the woman, then the baby must be a part of her body? Some people have parasites growing inside of them. Are the parasites then a part of their body? Of course not. Your reasoning is flawed. If you would take the time to read the evidence which shows otherwise, you would see why the baby is a separate human being and is not a part of the mother’s body.
quote:
And we imvho have no right to intrude on peoples personal lives and decisions. If I am intimate with a man in the privacy of my own rooms, and we produce life inside my womb, who is responsible for the whole affair? Myself, the man, and the Lord. Who does one have to answer to? Myself, the man, and the Lord. Not you or anyone else. There will never be any shortage of women who want abortions....what there should be is a shortage of doctors willing to perform them.
It is against the law to do many things...yet people break the law everyday. Since the beginning of time, until the end. Ultimately God will judge the individual for their sins.
The government intrudes many times on people’s personal lives and decisions. If a man makes a personal choice to rape a woman, do we or the government have the right to intrude on the man’s personal decision or would you say that his decision is just between him and God? If an adult makes a personal decision to molest a child, do we have the right to intrude on the adult’s personal decision? In the two examples I have given, others will suffer due to the personal decisions made by the person committing rape and the person committing molestation. We have laws in place against such acts. Do you advocate that those laws should be changed since those laws intrude on people’s personal lives and decisions? After all, the people committing those acts will one day have to face God in judgment. This is, in fact, the argument you seem to be putting forth for the justification of abortion being legal. Just as others suffer when people engage in those acts, so do others suffer when women have abortions… the babies. Unborn babies are individual human beings that deserve the same protection as a 3 month old baby. Saying over and over again that the baby is part of the woman’s body does not make it true. As I have shown, there is plenty of evidence which shows otherwise. Apparently, you are either ignoring it or not reading it.
< Message edited by CCCdnt -- 1/29/2008 5:35:15 PM >
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/29/2008 2:29:42 PM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
It is logically comparable as long as life begins at conception (and there are many good reasons to believe that to be the case). If life does not begin at that time, then when exactly would that time be? It would not be possible to pinpoint an exact cut-off time of when that time would be. Since this is a human life at hand, erring on the side of caution should be the position.
How about when brain cells form? This happens at roughly the same time that the stoumach forms and when the spinal cord forms.
And you can guarantee that a soul is not present before this time?
The following are some of the “good reason” to which I referred in my earlier post as to why to believe that life begins at conception:
From fairly recent and older medical textbooks:
The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed.
Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18.
"[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm ... unites with a female gamete or oocyte ... to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual."
Essentials of Human Embryology
William J. Larsen, (New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1998), 1-17.
"In this text, we begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual. ... Fertilization takes place in the oviduct ... resulting in the formation of a zygote containing a single diploid nucleus. Embryonic development is considered to begin at this point... This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."
Human Embryology & Teratology
Ronan R. O'Rahilly, Fabiola Muller, (New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996), 5-55.
"Fertilization is an important landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed... Fertilization is the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments... The zygote ... is a unicellular embryo... "The ill-defined and inaccurate term pre-embryo, which includes the embryonic disc, is said either to end with the appearance of the primitive streak or ... to include neurulation. The term is not used in this book."
Human Embryology, 3rd ed.
Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.
"It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitues the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."
Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics
J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Friedman, (Philadelphia: W.B. Sanders, 1974), 17.
"The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life."
Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3d ed.
E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, (Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975), vii.
"Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."
The following is testimony from a collection of medical experts received by a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee in 1981:
Professor Micheline Matthews-RothHarvard University Medical School
"It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive...It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception."
Dr. Alfred M. BongioanniProfessor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."
Dr. Jerome LeJeune
Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes
"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion...it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception."
Professor Hymie GordonMayo Clinic
"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."
Dr. Watson A. Bowes
University of Colorado Medical School
"The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception."
From this testimony, the following conclusion was reached by the official Senate report:
“Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being - a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”
Of course, the point at which “the soul becomes present” cannot be scientifically tested and is something that will always be impossible to know with certainty. Since there are reasons to believe that a soul is present at conception, erring on the side of caution should be the position taken.
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/29/2008 11:47:29 PM
|
|
|
EaZiE
Posts: 49
Joined: 7/2/2007
Status: offline
|
I found this online:
How many abortions have there been in 2007?
I don't know that information has been compiled for this year yet. There are about 3,700, every DAY in the US. That equates to 1.37 MILLION per YEAR. Worldwide, there are approximately 46 MILLION per YEAR.
Only 1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest. 6% occurs because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child. 93% of all abortions, performed in the US, are for social reasons.
Stats taken from abortionno.org, the most extensive compelation of abortion information I have found.
social reasons=corrupt society
"I'm living in fornication and further sex is safe regardless of contraception--abortion is my final safeguard"
_____________________________
In a word, the future is, of all things, the thing least like eternity. It is the most completely temporal part of time--for the past is frozen and no longer flows, and the Present is all lit up with eternal rays. -Screwtape Letters
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/30/2008 3:04:32 PM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1133
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
And you can guarantee that a soul is not present before this time?
100%. An embryo has no brain cells, does not have a heartbeat, cannot reason, cannot even feel pain. The embryo can even be frozen and stored for years- something that human beings wouldn't be able to do. If we are worried about killing embryos, we should be worried about farming corn, because that could contain a soul too, for all we know.
Embryos are frozen for reproductive purposes all the time, and if we were to regulate all forms of abortion, we would also have to make fertility clinics illegal- otherwise, families who wanted an abortion would just have their embryos "frozen" indefinitely.
And even if we're not 100% certain, is it the government's job to regulate everything? The feds don't regulate herbal supplements that can do everything from making you fall asleep to causing kidney failure.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/31/2008 12:19:38 AM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 307
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
And you can guarantee that a soul is not present before this time?
100%. An embryo has no brain cells, does not have a heartbeat, cannot reason, cannot even feel pain.
Since when does physical development inside the womb dictate when God chooses for a soul to become present? What you have said is not a 100% guarantee, it is just your opinion.
quote:
The embryo can even be frozen and stored for years- something that human beings wouldn't be able to do.
All this means is that it is possible to freeze a human at that stage of his development without killing him. That again is not 100% proof that the baby is not alive (with a soul/spirit) at that stage of development.
quote:
If we are worried about killing embryos, we should be worried about farming corn, because that could contain a soul too, for all we know.
I hope you are not being serious here. You really think it is possible that corn could have a soul? Just where in the Bible does it say that plants have souls/spirits?
quote:
Embryos are frozen for reproductive purposes all the time, and if we were to regulate all forms of abortion, we would also have to make fertility clinics illegal- otherwise, families who wanted an abortion would just have their embryos "frozen" indefinitely.
I never said that I thought the practice of freezing fertilized eggs and later discarding/destroying them was okay. The practice of invitro fertilization where some of the fertilized eggs are discarded either immediately or later is also wrong since that also destroys lives.
quote:
And even if we're not 100% certain, is it the government's job to regulate everything? The feds don't regulate herbal supplements that can do everything from making you fall asleep to causing kidney failure.
So do you advocate for the government to do away with laws which are there to protect us from harm (such as from murder, rape, etc.?) You do not think the it is the government's job to protect a child from being killed?
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: is it possible for Christians to be pro-abortion? - 1/31/2008 9:27:53 AM
|
|
|
|
| | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
