|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 5, 2018 12:50:48 GMT
Fact: the Bible says nothing at all about abortion. Nada. Zilch. There are a few verses about miscarriage - but even these are not in the context of child welfare. In fact, as I understand it under Roman law abortion was legal - given that the Bible tells us to obey the legal authorities, one would have thought if they were to be disobeyed in this case it might have come up. But let us find inspiration in the good book - all of which, it tells us, is suitable for instruction. And lo! The Bible includes plenty of examples of justified killing (i.e. as distinct from illegal killing, such as murder), including that of unborn and young babies.
The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open. (Hosea 13:16)
Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey. (1 Samuel 15:3)
... if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. (Num 5:20-21) etc
So pay closer attention, believers. If you spent more time on more fruitful topics, opposing divorce, say, (about which Jesus does have strong, negative opinions) you might be better respected.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 5, 2018 13:04:00 GMT
Fact: the Bible says nothing at all about abortion. Nada. Zilch. There are a few verses about miscarriage - but even these are not in the context of child welfare. In fact, as I understand it under Roman law abortion was legal - given that the Bible tells us to obey the legal authorities, one would have thought if they were to be disobeyed in this case it might have come up. But let us find inspiration in the good book - all of which, it tells us, is suitable for instruction. And lo! The Bible includes plenty of examples of justified killing, including that of unborn and young babies. The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open. (Hosea 13:16) Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey. (1 Samuel 15:3) ... if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. (Num 5:20-21) etc So pay closer attention, believers. If you spent more time on more fruitful topics, opposing divorce, say, (about which Jesus does have strong, negative opinions) you might be better respected. We already know you're an idiotic bigot no need to give us another thorough demonstration, Christophobe.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 5, 2018 13:05:30 GMT
Fact: the Bible says nothing at all about abortion. Nada. Zilch. There are a few verses about miscarriage - but even these are not in the context of child welfare. In fact, as I understand it under Roman law abortion was legal - given that the Bible tells us to obey the legal authorities, one would have thought if they were to be disobeyed in this case it might have come up. But let us find inspiration in the good book - all of which, it tells us, is suitable for instruction. And lo! The Bible includes plenty of examples of justified killing, including that of unborn and young babies. The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open. (Hosea 13:16) Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey. (1 Samuel 15:3) ... if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. (Num 5:20-21) etc So pay closer attention, believers. If you spent more time on more fruitful topics, opposing divorce, say, (about which Jesus does have strong, negative opinions) you might be better respected. We already know you're an idiotic bigot no need to give us another thorough demonstration, Christophobe. An ad hominem is still not an argument, Cody. It is just instead of one. But I have told you that before. Point to where the Bible discusses and condemns abortion and make your case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2018 13:16:20 GMT
There are no such things as intrinsic rights, only legal rights. If you're right (and let's say you are) it doesn't materially change the conversation. Phludowin, instead of answering as he did, could say, "An infant has a legal right to life, but shouldn't have." Then we'd just proceed as we did. But your point is an interesting topic of its own.
Yeah, I know. I'm just pedantic.
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Feb 5, 2018 16:15:59 GMT
I feel fine with my default position of ‘mother’s choice’. It’s her body first and foremost. If she decides at any time that she wants the child inside her removed and there’s is a medical facility capable. I’m ok with it.
From a legal standpoint at least. I may judge personally and still support the ability to make that decision. I’m not so asinine to think that all of my choices should be law.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 5, 2018 21:54:17 GMT
I feel fine with my default position of ‘mother’s choice’. It’s her body first and foremost. If she decides at any time that she wants the child inside her removed and there’s is a medical facility capable. I’m ok with it. From a legal standpoint at least. I may judge personally and still support the ability to make that decision. I’m not so asinine to think that all of my choices should be law. The babies body is not her body though is it. It's simple, if she doesn't want to fall pregnant she should keep her legs closed or make sure her man wears a rubber. Why should her child suffer because of her irresponsibility?
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Feb 5, 2018 22:18:37 GMT
I feel fine with my default position of ‘mother’s choice’. It’s her body first and foremost. If she decides at any time that she wants the child inside her removed and there’s is a medical facility capable. I’m ok with it. From a legal standpoint at least. I may judge personally and still support the ability to make that decision. I’m not so asinine to think that all of my choices should be law. The babies body is not her body though is it. Correct. And once the babies body is disconnected from hers she should have no control over it.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Feb 6, 2018 1:38:09 GMT
All I can do is state my view on what I would do in such a circumstance. By the way, I vote pro-choice; it is the woman's body.
1. If I became pregnant as a result of rape: a. and had access to the 'morning after' pill, I would take the pill. At that point, it is just a few cells. b. but if I didn't have access to that pill and before the fetus could perceive pain, I would abort. c. if the fetus could feel pain, I would carry to term, then give up for adoption.
Only exception: If the fetus was determined to have life-threatening and painful deformities and would suffer every moment of it's life, I would abort at any stage, to end its suffering.
2. If I became pregnant because of failed birth control, and the fetus was normal, I would tough out the 9 months if it's 'occupation', then give it up for adoption.
All pregnancies should be analyzed this way, on a case-by-case basis. I never wanted to have a child and raise it, so adoption it would be. If the fetus was damaged and sentenced to a life of pain, I would stop that pain.
Thankfully, I never had to make such a decision, and now my ovaries are quite dead from chemotherapy, so it is a moot point. But cut-and-dried guidelines are never going to happen. Each woman has the right to make her decision, given all available scientific facts. Her body, her risk, her life, her decision.
And, on the subject of the pro-lifers that protest at abortion clinics; they don't give a damn about the baby after it is born. Can the mother feed, clothe, care for and raise a healthy, balanced member of society? Or will it be starved of food and love and quite possibly be abused? I find it ironic that most pro-lifers are anti-social welfare programs supported by their tax dollars.
Hello, fund birth control programs and the need for abortion will drop. An ounce of prevention...
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 6, 2018 1:49:54 GMT
I feel fine with my default position of ‘mother’s choice’. It’s her body first and foremost. If she decides at any time that she wants the child inside her removed and there’s is a medical facility capable. I’m ok with it. From a legal standpoint at least. I may judge personally and still support the ability to make that decision. I’m not so asinine to think that all of my choices should be law. The babies body is not her body though is it. It's simple, if she doesn't want to fall pregnant she should keep her legs closed or make sure her man wears a rubber. Why should her child suffer because of her irresponsibility? Hey Cody, You forgot about the potential father. This is especially true because he will have financial responsibility for any resulting child and have virtually no choice in whether she continues with the pregnancy, has an abortion, or adopts it out. Guys don't seem to 'get' this!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2018 2:33:35 GMT
I feel fine with my default position of ‘mother’s choice’. It’s her body first and foremost. If she decides at any time that she wants the child inside her removed and there’s is a medical facility capable. I’m ok with it. From a legal standpoint at least. I may judge personally and still support the ability to make that decision. I’m not so asinine to think that all of my choices should be law. The babies body is not her body though is it. It's simple, if she doesn't want to fall pregnant she should keep her legs closed or make sure her man wears a rubber. Why should her child suffer because of her irresponsibility? There is no evidence that the 'child' does suffer. It would be optimal to prevent the pregnancy in the first place, to save all concerned the hassle, though.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Feb 6, 2018 2:42:23 GMT
The babies body is not her body though is it. It's simple, if she doesn't want to fall pregnant she should keep her legs closed or make sure her man wears a rubber. Why should her child suffer because of her irresponsibility? There is no evidence that the 'child' does suffer. It would be optimal to prevent the pregnancy in the first place, to save all concerned the hassle, though. I'd think pain or suffering would all depend on the nervous system development at the stage the abortion was performed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 0:36:43 GMT
There is no evidence that the 'child' does suffer. It would be optimal to prevent the pregnancy in the first place, to save all concerned the hassle, though. I'd think pain or suffering would all depend on the nervous system development at the stage the abortion was performed. Even if the foetus does experience pain when being aborted, it would be as nothing compared to the suffering and pain that it is spared compared to had it been born.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 7, 2018 0:39:16 GMT
I'd think pain or suffering would all depend on the nervous system development at the stage the abortion was performed. Even if the foetus does experience pain when being aborted, it would be as nothing compared to the suffering and pain that it is spared compared to had it been born. At least you are consistent. Retroactive abortions for everyone!
|
|