The Abortion Debate.

[Major]

1. It's murder.
2. Science. A one week old embryo already looks human! Even if raped. You punishing the baby for someone elses crime. Would you hold Jesus's hand into the abortion clinic? or trust Him to provide and look after you and the baby?
3. Productive only as the norm is abortion. Any debate enhances public awareness.
4. No. I am normally impatient and merciless on this subject. Better to be clear then blurry.

I used to say it is ok if the abortion is before the baby is a fetus or if there were major abnormalities. But now I see clearer. Its 100% wrong. No grey area's!

KingJ...........Allow me to give you another scenario that no one like to talk about but is nonetheless absolutely true.

Today we are told that Social Security is broke and will be folded by 2025.

Now, when the Rooselvelt administration emplimented the plan, do we believe that they considered and factored into their mathematics the fact that as a nation we would be killing 1.5 million of our citizens every year?????? NO!!!!!!

Beginning in 1970, the USA has been killing 1.5 million citizens every year. Beginning in 1988, there are 1.5 million people missing from the tax roles that should be at work paying taxes to fund the Social Security system. Since 1988 to 2013 that means that there are approx. 25 million people who are not here to pay taxes and 1,5 million more are added to that every year......... 25 million times 15% (SS taxs) equals
$375 million per year not paid in taxes to fund the SS system.

Since 1988 that would come to about 9.3 Billion. Now do you understand why Social Security is going broke?

Chew on that for awhile my friends!

 

[Major]

Are you referring to the "It's a law, therefore it must be just" problem? Certainly one that makes my head spin.

What really makes my head spin is the 50% of church members in all churches that say abortion is a womans choice therefore agreeing with the law of the land. That boggels my mind!!!!

IMO...............the choice that needed to be made 1st was to not have sex that produced the bady to begin with!

 

[LysanderShapiro]

What really makes my head spin is the 50% of church members in all churches that say abortion is a womans choice therefore agreeing with the law of the land. That boggels my mind!!!!

You nailed it, sir. I think those of us who know the truth of God and what he has taught us are at an even worse position to provide support for abortion. Even those who acknowledge the scientific reasoning that a fetus is a legitimate human life don't have the same obligation to protect said life the way we do.

I remember during the Vice Presidential debates between Biden and Ryan, Biden was asked how as a Catholic he can support abortion. His answer was, and I'm paraphrasing, "I personally believe it is wrong, but I don't believe I should interfere with what you want to do." I was disgusted -- this is such a Pontius Pilate approach; acknowledging that the life is innocent and deserves life, but washing your hands of what people will do.

This is one of the things that makes me very sad.

IMO...............the choice that needed to be made 1st was to not have sex that produced the bady to begin with!

Indeed. I think it goes beyond even engaging in consented sex because the question of "What if she's raped" will be asked (but often only to try and trap the pro-life argument). While I think the raped woman should receive help by the many charitable organizations, this doesn't mean penalizing an innocent life because of the crimes of his father. We wouldn't kill a 4-year-old who is living in impoverished conditions to make relieve his mother of her difficulties.

 

[Michael Kaufman]

I would wholeheartedly agree that all of our social ills, including the scourge of abortion will be solved, in the end, only through the rebuilding of the family and winning souls to Christ. As was stated earlier, you cannot expect non-believers to play by God's rules. They don't acknowledge His authority.

That being said, with 1.5 million babies being aborted every year and a relatively hefty percentage of the American public averse to abortion (at the very least, in a personal sense), there's room for "enlightenment" here, even in the absence of salvation.

The fact that there are many non-believers who already are against abortion for themselves, and many who are even against the "pro-choice" movement proves that it is possible to argue the case in a non-religious context and still gain traction. From my perspective, with so many people who clearly indicate they would NEVER choose an abortion for themselves, there is a solid foundation from which to argue the point, with the potential of saving 1.5 million babies every year, and that is significant.

Even if we don't convince everyone that this is a barbaric practice that should be ended, because murder is wrong in all flavors, if we can simply convince enough of the "right" people, we can make abortion illegal in this country once again. It won't stop abortions entirely. There will be a "black market" for abortion, just as there was before. But, there will be FAR fewer abortions than you see today, saving hundreds of thousands and probably millions of innocent lives.

But, at the same time, we need to be focusing on strengthening the family and spreading the Gospel in every way possible, so that, as a nation, we come to a place where life once again becomes precious and this abortion issue (and many others) become entirely clear for our society as a whole.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

Even if we don't convince everyone that this is a barbaric practice that should be ended, because murder is wrong in all flavors, if we can simply convince enough of the "right" people, we can make abortion illegal in this country once again. It won't stop abortions entirely. There will be a "black market" for abortion, just as there was before. But, there will be FAR fewer abortions than you see today, saving hundreds of thousands and probably millions of innocent lives.

But, at the same time, we need to be focusing on strengthening the family and spreading the Gospel in every way possible, so that, as a nation, we come to a place where life once again becomes precious and this abortion issue (and many others) become entirely clear for our society as a whole.

Indeed. I've had this discussion with people. Many people have provided the argument, "If we don't keep it legal, then we'll just be promoting the black market and abortions will become even more dangerous." (this is something Libertarians are divided on).

On a Constitutional level, the federal government has no business being involved in abortion, much less making us fund it. On an economic level, there will be black markets, but the data I found a few months ago showed the abortion rate would most likely drop significantly (I can't remember the national percentage--it would differ by state). But of course on the Christian level, it's important to protect life regardless.

 

[Michael Kaufman]

Although a staunch conservative on virtually all fronts myself, I consider myself, typically, very libertarian in my political and economic views. I don't believe it is productive to try and force individuals to "live a Christian life" when they do not yet have "life in Christ". You can't legislate someone into being a Christian.

The less government intervention in virtually ALL areas, the better. Basically, the only areas where government really has any place is in protecting our person and our property. As long the acts that others are committing are not injuring another or causing damage or loss to someone else's property, it is none of my business what they do (in a legal sense).

Of course, that doesn't mean that on a personal level I would not try and help them see the error in the way they are living and the abundant life that is available through Christ. But, that's as far as it should go.

That being said, since abortion is murder, that would be included under the banner of "protecting our person", but, as you indicate, on a STATE and local level, not a federal one.

Of course, since it is currently being controlled (or NOT controlled, depending upon your perspective) at a federal level, we must work at that level and the state level on this issue, in addition to the obvious, more personal level within our families and communities.

 

[KingJ]

KingJ...........Allow me to give you another scenario that no one like to talk about but is nonetheless absolutely true.

Today we are told that Social Security is broke and will be folded by 2025.

Now, when the Rooselvelt administration emplimented the plan, do we believe that they considered and factored into their mathematics the fact that as a nation we would be killing 1.5 million of our citizens every year?????? NO!!!!!!

Beginning in 1970, the USA has been killing 1.5 million citizens every year. Beginning in 1988, there are 1.5 million people missing from the tax roles that should be at work paying taxes to fund the Social Security system. Since 1988 to 2013 that means that there are approx. 25 million people who are not here to pay taxes and 1,5 million more are added to that every year......... 25 million times 15% (SS taxs) equals
$375 million per year not paid in taxes to fund the SS system.

Since 1988 that would come to about 9.3 Billion. Now do you understand why Social Security is going broke?

Chew on that for awhile my friends!

Wow, that figure is sad. Proof that abortion is another sign of the last days.

 

[LysanderShapiro]

Although a staunch conservative on virtually all fronts myself, I consider myself, typically, very libertarian in my political and economic views. I don't believe it is productive to try and force individuals to "live a Christian life" when they do not yet have "life in Christ". You can't legislate someone into being a Christian.

The less government intervention in virtually ALL areas, the better. Basically, the only areas where government really has any place is in protecting our person and our property. As long the acts that others are committing are not injuring another or causing damage or loss to someone else's property, it is none of my business what they do (in a legal sense).

Of course, that doesn't mean that on a personal level I would not try and help them see the error in the way they are living and the abundant life that is available through Christ. But, that's as far as it should go.

That being said, since abortion is murder, that would be included under the banner of "protecting our person", but, as you indicate, on a STATE and local level, not a federal one.

Of course, since it is currently being controlled (or NOT controlled, depending upon your perspective) at a federal level, we must work at that level and the state level on this issue, in addition to the obvious, more personal level within our families and communities.

Absolutely. I think a common misconception about Libertarians is that we're Libertines...not true. It just means we believe in the Non-Aggression Principle. Because science, logic, and more importantly, our Lord expresses that the unborn are human beings, even at its earliest stage of existence, then the youngest of the human family deserve non-aggression, too.

 

[Major]

You nailed it, sir. I think those of us who know the truth of God and what he has taught us are at an even worse position to provide support for abortion. Even those who acknowledge the scientific reasoning that a fetus is a legitimate human life don't have the same obligation to protect said life the way we do.

I remember during the Vice Presidential debates between Biden and Ryan, Biden was asked how as a Catholic he can support abortion. His answer was, and I'm paraphrasing, "I personally believe it is wrong, but I don't believe I should interfere with what you want to do." I was disgusted -- this is such a Pontius Pilate approach; acknowledging that the life is innocent and deserves life, but washing your hands of what people will do.

This is one of the things that makes me very sad.



Indeed. I think it goes beyond even engaging in consented sex because the question of "What if she's raped" will be asked (but often only to try and trap the pro-life argument). While I think the raped woman should receive help by the many charitable organizations, this doesn't mean penalizing an innocent life because of the crimes of his father. We wouldn't kill a 4-year-old who is living in impoverished conditions to make relieve his mother of her difficulties.

We are in total agreement my brother.

The recorded facts are that rape/incest make up 1.0% of all abortions, and that is not even a true figure. The rape question is uselly said to be that from the woman who is pregnant. There is some wiggle room there because of guilt.

 

[MaryseBlossom]

I think its wrong to force what you believe in unto someone who is already in distress. a women who want an aborption is certainly not doing it out of joy. most of the time its because she knows she is not ready to take care of another human being, and thus for life. and I have to say that I prefer a women who get an abortion than one who will not and won't be present for her kids. and I have been witness way too much of the later.

I should say, I would like to see more sex education in school. Where I live, they have removed that program at school and I think it is the worst thing they could have done. It makes more pregnant teenagers, more with STD's and also a lot of confusion about what is sex and with who you should do it.

 

[Michael Kaufman]

We are in agreement that someone who is in distress deserves compassion, but doesn't an unborn baby also deserve compassion?

You suggest that you would prefer that a woman kill her baby rather than bring the baby to term where it has the possibility of adoption and life, because the woman is not "ready" to care for the baby.

When my fourth son turned one year old there was a BREAK in his physical and mental progression. Up till that point he was progressing better than any of our other 3 "normal" children. But, at 1 year old all progress stopped and he regressed considerably. I could go into the details of what we believe happened, but it is irrelevant.

Since that time we have gone through unimaginable difficulty in raising him ... FAR more than we ever thought we could handle. But, I love my son, and I would not give him up for anything. I would die for him in a heartbeat, and I would have on that day and every day since.

How would it have been any different for me to have decided at any point during that period that it was "too much" to raise him, I simply couldn't handle it, so I paid someone to kill him for me? What difference is there between those two scenarios, besides the location of the child (in the womb vs outside the womb)?

Why would I have been considered a murderer for committing that act, but she is simply a woman in distress who didn't know what else to do?

I'm not out to label people who've gotten abortions as murderers. Technically, they HAVE murdered an innocent life, but most of them have been coerced into thinking that it was OK and that the baby wasn't really a human being at all, but just a "fetus", so it didn't matter.

It's not them that I'm mad at. It's the abortion industry and those that promote abortion and give it nice "sterile" names and descriptions to avoid calling it what it really is ... murder.

Those women who've had abortions (and often their husbands and boyfriends) have to live with the realization of what they've done, and, for many of them, that is traumatic enough and causes significant depression, mental and physical health issues for years afterward. There is no need for me to punish them further. They need love and compassion and mercy. They need to know that Jesus still loves them dearly.

But, that does not mean that I can stand by and watch millions of innocent babies be killed every year out of convenience for the mother (or father or parents or anyone else) and not say anything or do anything about it. That would be like my next door neighbor knowing that I was going to kill my son because it was "too much" and just standing there and doing nothing about it.

 

[Glomung]

There is one inescapable fact in all this, every abortion results in a dead baby.
There is no way to justify the wanton murder of the unborn.
That it is "the law of the land" says much about the state of the land.

They could not have more sex ed in schools if they had to. They start in 5th grade and hammer it in constantly
until the kids graduate.
Sex ed does not stop unwanted pregnancies any more than drivers ed stops car accidents.
STDs are not prevented by anything other than abstinence or a exclusive realtionship.

 

[MaryseBlossom]

I think people against abortion are a bit extreme. yes its a life. Yes after a week the heart beat alone. but out of the uterus, it is not likely to survive on its own. up until at least 8 months of pregnancy.

I am not agreeing with getting abortion as a solution. I agree on it only if this is the only possibility. and think about that: caring a baby in your womb and then have to give it to someone else because you cant take care of him? This is also very traumatizing.

and not only that but having a baby even though you know you can't ''afford'' him, is pretty bad on the moral.

I agree that we don't agree and I don't want to start a fight over this. but thanks for sharing your opinion.

 

[MaryseBlossom]

There is one inescapable fact in all this, every abortion results in a dead baby.
There is no way to justify the wanton murder of the unborn.
That it is "the law of the land" says much about the state of the land.

They could not have more sex ed in schools if they had to. They start in 5th grade and hammer it in constantly
until the kids graduate.
Sex ed does not stop unwanted pregnancies any more than drivers ed stops car accidents.
STDs are not prevented by anything other than abstinence or a exclusive realtionship.

teaching is the key. it doesnt prevent but at least they do know what they are up to. like i said, we dont have sex education anymore in Quebec. which is pretty sad.

also, I would love to see parents getting more serious about teaching theirs kids but also opening the conversation about sexuality with them. Which its seems be a big problem in our society full of taboo.

 

[Brother_Mike_V]

I think I stated earlier that you can't force unbelievers into a moral choice. However, as Christians-we cannot condone any type of abortion-it is murder.

That being said; 'sex education' used to be abstinence until marriage-this is biblical and therefore Christian. This is what we should teach our children and saved people. This culture and society bombards children with sex on a minute by minute basis therefore contradicting Biblical teachings on modesty, appropriateness, intimacy with your spouse, adultery, and having a debased mind.

Kids don't need a lesson in 'insert tab A into slot B'; what they need is some old fashioned teaching on keeping the temple of the Holy Spirit clean (their body) and waiting for their ONE and only husband till death do you part. When a virgin man and woman get together for the first time on their wedding night-THEY WILL figure it out all by themselves.

Just because multiple partners and 'hooking up' are the 'norm' doesn't make it Holy and righteous. We have come so far away from God's standard for sex, most people don't even know what the standard is anymore.

As someone who has been through the selfish process of abortion with a mate; it is a terrible thing to even consider. Both mother and child need compassion-else we sin against God.

 

[Michael Kaufman]

Mary: The difference, though, is that your opinion is an opinion that allows for the death of 1.5 million babies every single year, in the US alone. We are not in a fight, we are in a discussion. I am not any more mad at you than I am at the mother who chooses to kill her baby because she's been convinced, as you have, that it's not yet a "real" baby - it's just a fetus.

The fact is, MANY babies live outside the womb at only 20 - 24 weeks because of improvements in medical science and technology. 20 weeks is a mere 5 months (not 8 months). Now, if the baby can actually survive outside the womb at that age, at what age do you think a baby feels pain when injury is inflicted? It is LEGAL to kill a baby in the womb up to the end of the second trimester, 6 months after conception.

Do you think the baby can feel pain at this point? Let me ask you, how painful would it be if I ripped off your arms and legs, one at a time. Then, before you've yet died from the blood loss or agony, I then tear your torso from your head. Do you think that would be painful?

That is an abortion procedure, in a nutshell. It's not always done in this way, but it is OFTEN done in this manner. Of course, the other methods aren't much less painful (not that this is even really the point, but it's worth paying attention to).

If you were in the room watching that happen to someone's child because they "couldn't afford it" or "couldn't handle the responsibility" or "couldn't bare to give them up to someone else", would you stand there and watch it happen and say it's not your place to get involved? It's their decision and none of your business?

You are suggesting that abortion could EVER be the only possibility, but it NEVER is. There is always the option to bring the baby to term and keep the baby or give the baby up for adoption. And, I would argue that, if the baby could answer the question, I'm pretty sure it would choose a CHANCE at any life vs the alternative of being torn apart at the seams to avoid a possible "bad life".

 

[Michael Kaufman]

Mary: you also indicated earlier that you believe it's wrong to force your opinion onto someone else who is already in distress, and this is an argument for allowing abortion even when we know it is the killing of innocent life.

By that argument, a man who has lost his job and is about to lose his house and can't pay for food would be justified in killing someone who's just made a withdrawal from the bank, because he couldn't think of another way to feed his family. What right do we have to force our opinion on him and tell him that's wrong and that he should be punished for such an act?

Of course, other alternatives would be more difficult and require more effort on his part, and there would be difficult times ahead getting through the situation, but that doesn't make them NON-options. Just because women is uncomfortable with the thought of bringing the baby to term, trying to care for it afterwards or possibly giving it up for adoption later, that doesn't make those options NON-options. They are just more difficult ones.

That is not the same thing, and I, for one, hope to continue to "force" my opinion of murder being wrong on the rest of society because it is only if that opinion remains the majority opinion that ANY of us are safe from wanton death and destruction at the hands of people who more and more believe we are nothing more than "evolved primates" and that moral standards are completely relative.

 

[MaryseBlossom]

I don't know what rules you have down in USA because I am in canada. but abortion is up ot 4 months here.

just a question: can we afford to have babies anymore? with the situation of the planet? all the pollution, money problems, etc? I don't know. those are the reasons why I won't have kids. I don't want to give those problems in their hands.

Oh darling, I do know that it is inflicting pain. I do believe that plants can feel as well so I can only imagine what it is for a fetus to be aborted. I am NOT saying that its cool and I don't care. I can feel the pain from every living being. And even though I don't want babies, if I was to get pregnant I would not allow myself to go into abortion. Never. I would take this as a sign of God that I am now ready to have one and I should have one.

I don't know if the baby would want to live. We have a pretty scary world. but I can see where you are coming from.

 

[Glomung]

I'm sorry Mary, but you've been drinking too much of the mass media koolaid.
"can we afford to have babies anymore?"
If the US government quit spending trillions on the mass murder of brown people around the world,
(i.e. got rid of our overblown military/industrial complex) the money saved could feed, house, and educate every single poor person on the planet with change left over.

There is $16 trillion hidden from the IRS in offshore bank accounts by US corporations.
That works out to about $22 thousand for every person on the planet. The money is there,
the food is there, the room is there. What we don't have is a world political structure that
is willing to let people live in peace. The problem is evil people, not people in general.

 

[MaryseBlossom]

oh good lord Glomung. I know that if wars could stop we would have enough to feed. but the government is way too happy about wars..