Pro-Life

[Tomas]

Peter, I do not intend to debate, and certainly do not intend to try to dissuade you from your beliefs, but you did, in fact, miss entirely the thrust of what I said above.

At no point did I express a "Pro-Choice" philosophy. What I was discussing was only how you felt you had a right, a mandate, to enforce on others what you believe God, in your interpretation, said was right or wrong.

I disagree with that. You have a right to believe as you will, but you have no right, God granted or otherwise, to control other's behavior.

You may try to convince, exhort, yell, babble, pray, or use whatever means you may have to try to convince others that your way is the only right one and your intrepretation the only true one, but you do not have a God given right to force another to bend to your will.

That is what you were suggesting in your first post - electing representitives to force others to behave as you think they should in this matter. To enforce YOUR beliefs. (Doesn't matter if I agree or not with your belief about abortion, only that I disagree with your assumed right to force others to follow your belief ... )

According to Christianity, God granted each and every one of us the ability to choose between Him and His rules or to choose to turn away. This is his plan. He could certainly have created us to have unswerving devotion and faithful following of all his precepts. He did not. That test is necessary to His purposes.

All I intend to discuss in that one fine point, not the rightness or wrongness of abortion, murder, blasphemy, coveting, worship, or anything else.

We each must make our own choices, must decide for ourselves how we will spend eternity.

Yes, it is proper to try to help others understand what is right and wrong, to guide them, to try to help, but not to force others to follow your beliefs - it must be of their own free will.

(last post on topic)

 

[MicroE]

Peter---I'm going to agree with Tomas' statement that He really doesn't need your help in doing His bidding. We are made in his image. We are not exact copies of Him (with His wisdom and memories).

Unless, of course, you are raising yourself up to the level of Moses or Jesus or the saints.

I believe that the name Saint Peter has already been used.

You are a brave man for posting your (seemingly) inflexible feelings on this topic. If I were in your shoes and was trying to get a tiny fledgling business off the ground I would probably stay away from discussions on abortion in public.

I wouldn't worry about the people that respond to this thread. I would worry about the people that read your opinion and write you off as a "nut".---Marc

 

[Graham]

I agree with many of Jonathans' statements, particularly his closing one.

There can be a number of reasons for justifying abortion, since our current social and economic structure just won't support the alternative.

Is abortion murder? Murder is a word heavy with emotional connotations, and most definitions seem to point to 'unlawful killing'. The trouble is in deciding what is unlawful..

Graham

 

[jmm]

Please join me in protecting the sanctity of all human life by voting for representatives in government that favor life

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Peter - With all due respect, I will continue NOT voting for those who insist that they are the only ones who are correctly interpreting the word of God, the meaning of life and attempt to force their enlightenment on others. You have strengthened my resolve.

John

 

[tiktok 22]

There can be a number of reasons for justifying abortion, since our current social and economic structure just won't support the alternative.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">IMHO I think this solution is part of the problem.

 

[DieselDave]

I won't crawl too far into this can of worms but will stir the pot just a little.

I respect everyone's opinion on the subject and believe they should follow their beliefs. I happen to vote for the party that is pro-life but it is an absolute non-issue for me when voting. I have thought about this subject and believe this is really a non-issue for most voters. I base that on the fact that just about all elected democrats are pro-choice and all but about 11% of African Americans vote democrat but a super high percentage of African Americans are Christians and most Christians are pro-life. So obviously African Americans and I suspect most other people care far more about other issues than abortion and refuse to make a stand. This has been a hot topic for 20+ years and is kept alive by a VERY vocal minority on both sides of the issue. I would hope we could reduce or eliminate abortion but I really won't make much of a fuss either way. I suspect some of you are shocked to hear me say the above but as conservative as I am and being a Christian I just don't think it's a human life until the fetus receives the breath of life. I also think its hypocrisy to say no abortion except in the case of rape or medical emergency. If you feel it's a human life then it would still be murder even if it were rape or a medical emergency. I better stop before the liberals want to give me a hug.

 

[Albany Tom]

On an interesting twist of that, those African Americans are voting for their civil rights, I would like to think anyway. This is along the same lines of my usually voting for a Republican, as the biggest threat I see to my individual rights, especially in NY, are the gun control nuts. That's a vocal minority that worries me more than the religious groups.

No hugs though, Dave, I don't think I fit the description of a liberal very well anyway. As do you, and many here, I have my own opinions on things. BOTH "sides" seems to take issue with this.

Let's not bring up the topic of "Why do news people insist on polarizing each issue into two opposite viewpoints, when in most cases there are dozens?. Could it be that they, as a group, aren't that bright, or is it the more likely answer that they're looking for a fight, and thus ratings, rather any achievement of distributing accurate and useful information?"

 

[Darell]

I must say that I am VERY impressed with the level of discussion here. Cheers to all.

I made a short comment early on, and will try my best NOT to flesh it out. No thanks are needed.

My senior thesis in High School AP English was on this very subject and it is an issue that has been important to me for my entire adult life. I simply choose to express my feelings in other arenas.

Jonathan wrote so well, that anything I could add to this thread would be an injustice. So, along with Don, I'd like to say "what he said." (BTW, Jon, your email bounces...)

 

[Graham]

Originally posted by tiktok 22:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">There can be a number of reasons for justifying abortion, since our current social and economic structure just won't support the alternative.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">IMHO I think this solution is part of the problem.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'm not sure what solution you are referring to. I was trying to say (not very well I think) that I don't think we currently have an adequate way of dealing with the alternative to abortion.

Graham

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[No message]

 

[SurefireM6]

Wow, this is going to be a huge thread. I just wanted to chime in and say that I am Pro-life.

Pro-choice people always state that it is the Women's Choice. Well, that choice is nullified when she decides to have sex. If you want to have sex, you have to accept the possible outcome! Without the abortion there would be a child, kind of like future murder I guess like a hospital not trying to revive a trauma patient.

It's interesting that a few months make a difference. Ask a woman who has had an abortion, not affected much. After the baby is born and take it away and watch the difference in reaction. Hmm. It's the same damn thing! Just my opinion.

 

[NeonLights]

Most of you would consider me pro-life. I prefer to think of my self as anti-death, and the opposing viewpoint as being pro-death, but I don't tend to get very radical or forceful about my opinions or viewpoints.

There is something I think about everytime I see a news story about a person being charged with murder when a pregnant woman is assaulted resulting in the death of the fetus. If an abortion doctor stops the life of a fetus and removes it from the mother (to be), it is a choice. If a person attacks the pregnant woman and the fetus' life is terminated, it is murder. Does the fact that the mother wanted the baby make it a person? And on the other hand does the fact that another woman doesn't want her baby, make it not a person?

Just something I stop and ponder from time to time.

-Keith

 

[Lux Luthor]

Originally posted by Tomas:
...I am not going to state an opinion in the incessant "Pro-Life / Pro-Choice" arguements, but simply an opinion on forcing others to do what YOU want them to do because you may not approve of what THEY might want to do.

If one believes that an abortion is against God's will and teachings, and that He will settle the accounts of whomever goes against such, then why not allow others the choice to follow or not, as they see fit?...

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Murdering a fetus is the ultimate expression of forcing your own will on someone else!

What you argue in your post is that a society should allow anyone to do whatever they want to, with the idea that God will settle it in the end, so we should not do anything about it. According to your reasoning, we should all sit idly by and witness whatever atrocities anyone cares to commit!

Oh, and Darell, it's the truth (note: singular) that shall make you free (John 8:32, NASB).

 

[B@rt]

Originally posted by Lux Luthor:
Murdering a fetus is the ultimate expression of forcing your own will on someone else!

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Again this boils down to the definition of what a human being is...

Exactly what is the definition of being human?
Are there real (important) differences between living cells from different species?

Can a cluster of cells be considered a human or not? I for one don't consider a fetus a person yet...

There is not only the present to consider, I think the future is equally important, how humane is it to create something without the willingness or means to support it...

Although I know it is (nearly) impossible to exclude religion, Please let's not state that religion is the reason for "humanity"... (I know I'm not making myself popular with this, but, IMHO religon still is being used as a way to avoid responsibility.

Unfortunately, It is my firm belief that, when religion enters, ratio leaves...

(based upon historical studies)
Unfortunately, religion is on of the most successful means to control people.

Since religeon is introduced in the earliest stages of development of the child (it is the most approved form of indoctrination), they learn not to question the statements brought to them.

Although I know "the Cafe" is for all topics, I do feel this is a subject "too heavy" for it...

 

[Wits' End]

I don't have time now to respond well--so I won't, YET

Just want to say Kudos to Peter!!

A quick light note. Does anyone who is "pro-choice" respect my "choice" to be a cannibal? Care to discuss it over dinner?

 

[SurefireM6]

Good point, but at the time of the intervention there will be a human being. Of course you could always argue the point that anything "could" happen like miscarriage etc. But at the time of the abortion, everything is still a go for a human being to develop. If you kill someone, you could argue that tomorrow that person "could" have died anyway. That would never fly right? Because at the time of the murder, that person was still alive. At the time of abortion, everything is still a go for a human being to develop.

Personally, I think that most women that are Pro-Choice do not really beleive in the "right to choose" crap. They just want to protect their option if the need arises however slight that may be.

So, why is it Illegal to kill myself. After all "It's my body" right?

2 things never to bring up: Religion and Politics. This is both.

And what is everyone doing up at this late!

 

[B@rt]

Originally posted by SurefireM6:
And what is everyone doing up at this late!

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Late? it's 11.12 am...

 

[darkgear.com]

I come to raise the bar and bring more controversy.

I come to object to artificial birth control. It may sound like opponents to artificial birth control oppose it because it is artificial. If that were the case then it would be a sin for us to wear polyester. It's not wrong because its artificial. It's wrong because its contraceptive. Contraception is the most accurate word to use when we want to describe what violates the wedding vows when it comes to artificial contraception.

Contraception can be defined as engaging in sexual union but do something else to render that act sterile to defraud it of its procreative potential.

We can do this by using all kinds of artificial devices, hormones, pills, plugs, surgeries, but we can also do this by using nothing artificial. The old fashioned coitus interruptus or withdrawal.

As I go through this ask your self am I crazy or might I be on to something.

Here are some quotes:

Contraception is "the one sin for which the penalty is national death, race death; a sin for which there is no atonement." -Theodore Roosevelt

"The abandonment of the reproductive function is the common feature of all sexual perversions. We actually describe sexual activity perverse if it has given up the aim of reproduction and pursues the attainment of pleasure as am aim independent of it." -Sigmund Freud

Contraceptive methods are "like putting a premium on vice. They make men and women reckless. Nature is relentless and will have full revenge for any such violation of her laws... If [contraceptive] methods become the order of the day, nothing but moral degradation can be the result. As it is, man has sufficiently degraded woman for his lust, and [contraception], no matter how well meaning the advocates may be, will still further degrade her." -Gandhi

By accepting contraception, "the world is trying ...to form a civilized but non-Christian mentality. The experiment will fail; but we must be very patient in waiting its collapse; meanwhile redeeming the time so that the Faith may be preserved alive through the dark ages before us; to renew and rebuild civilization and save the world from suicide." -T.S. Elliot

In 1930 it was predicted that if contraception became widely available we will see and increase in infidelity, divorce, premarital sex, out of wedlock births, abortion, poverty, fatherless children, crime, drugs, homosexual activity, and Std's.

Promoter of contraception scoffed at these predictions and said it will never happen. Has is happened? What the connection with contraception?

Now we all know its way more complex than this but here is the shadow of an outline in an attempt to keep it short.

We all recognize that men and women are tempted to do things we shouldn't do. Because of original sin. Deterrents in society and in nature often prevent us from doing things we shouldn't do.

Let's use crime as an example. What would happen if we remove jail sentences(the deterrent) for all crimes?

Boom. The rate of crime would go up because there is no deterrent.

Apply the same logic to sexual activity. People have been tempted to commit adultery throughout history, its nothing new. The main deterrent of adultery is an unwanted pregnancy. What do think would happen if that fear was taken away by the widespread use of contraception?

Boom. It would go up.

and it has. What's the main cause of divorce? Adultery.

Boom. The divorce rate skyrockets.

People have been tempted to have premarital sex but one of the main deterrent is the fear of an unwanted pregnancy. Take that fear away. Rates of premarital sex skyrockets.
Premarital sex is also a key predictor of marital difficulties. Why?

Well in engagement consulting 92% of engaged couples are engaging in premarital sex. I like to tell them "One thing you know about your fiancee is that he or she is willing to have sex outside of marriage". Premarital sex is adultery in advance.

But it gets much worse because we know that no form of contraception is 100% effective so in a culture that has huge increases in adultery and premarital sex. What's going to happen when so many women get pregnant and didn't want to be? What's the next step? Get rid of the baby.

Too many people think the way to solve the abortion problem is to get more contraception out there. FOLKS THAT'S LIKE THROWING GAS ON A FIRE TO PUT IT OUT!

There is one reason and one reason alone that abortion exists. Because men and women are having sex that do not love each other freely, totally, faithfully, and open to children.

Am I crazy here? Or am I on to something?

But it get much worse. Not every woman will abort her baby, Thank God. Some will give them up for adoption. A beautiful, wonderful choice. Some will raise the child on her own. Not inherently wrong but can be problematic.

A culture of fatherless children which is already compounded by the rate of divorce is a culture of violence, pornography, sexual dysfunction, homosexuality, and the list goes on and on and on.

Do you know what the number one indicator of poverty is? Single mothers with children.

For all you Christians, every Christian Church was unanimous in its condemnation of contraception as harmful to marriage and society until 1930. At that time the Anglican church broke with its teaching and accepted contraception within marriage. That opened the flood gates... Now we see churches accepting contraception and even abortion upon demand. What changed? Surely not the Gospel.

Am I crazy here? Or am I on to something?

Now back to abortion. Most people do not know that most contraception is actually abortifacient. That is, most contraception is not designed to prevent sperm and egg from meeting but designed to kill a fertilized egg. All contraception methods besides barrier methods, which are highly ineffective, makes the womb unfit for the fertilized egg to implant so the pregnancy is aborted.

So not only do we kill 4000 unborn in abortion clinics EVERY DAY in America. There are countless unborn that are aborted every day through use of contraception. This is our Holocaust. This is what we will have to answer for.

Sincerely,
Randy

PS WOW Congrats to anyone that actually reads this. Kinda long

 

[Graham]

Randy mentions some interesting things. Lots there though, so I'm just going to respond to a few bites..

Originally posted by darkgear.com:
Contraception is the most accurate word to use when we want to describe what violates the wedding vows when it comes to artificial contraception.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. In what way are you relating contraception to violation of wedding vows (wedding vows, by the way, are themselves a personal thing and vary considerably - do you mean a particular vow? Because not everyone takes the same vows..)? Do you mean contraception used for extra-marital sex? Contraception can be and is also used in marital sex...

There is one reason and one reason alone that abortion exists. Because men and women are having sex that do not love each other freely, totally, faithfully, and open to children.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I disagree. I believe that abortion exists because accidents happen. The concept of the abortion has come about out of a wish to solve a problem (I know, not a really nice way to put it..)
Is it the best solution? No, I don't think so.
Are there better solutions? Most likely, but nearly all involve many other issues which our society still has trouble with.

Men and women may love each other freely, faithfully, and be open to children, but still decide to get an abortion. Even married couples get abortions.

But here's another idea - men and women may love each other, and want to have intimacy(have sex, even), but not want children. They may not even want to get married (in the legal sense).

Graham

 

[darkgear.com]

Heh, you linked the two and didn't even know it. Most wedding vows come from this idea of freely, totally, faithfully, and open to children.

This has been the basic ideas that involve, I guess I should say, Christian marriage for millenniums. Only in the last century has marriage become so ambiguous.

A pregnancy is never an accident nor a problem if the couple loves each other freely, totally, faithfully, and open to children.

As to Intimacy without children. Read Freuds quote above. This is also the way in which homosexuality becomes pervasive. As soon as you divorce sexual pleasure from its inherent link with procreation, why does sex have to be between a man and a woman? You cannot oppose homosexualily and endorse contraception in the same breath they are linked.

Randy