Is killing an unborn baby OK??? Inquiring minds want to know!!!

I don’t know if that question is answerable or not… We can say how we feel about it, but that’s about it.

I FEEL that abortion is wrong and that life starts at conception…

Oh, heck, I have very mixed feelings about the matter.

All of those who don’t believe in abortion…don’t have one…

RB, that’s such a cop-out.

I think it’s incredibly important to know whether something is murder or not.

Empty’s quote: “None of this is their fault and having this child would damage their chances of going to the good schools they already got into.”
It’s harsh, but pregnancy was a consequence of their actions that they knew full well was possible. So of course it’s their fault. We don’t let mothers kill their infants because they didn’t know it was going to be that hard to raise them. And you know what, adoption aside, people manage to struggle through single parenthood in poverty with multiple children, and often end up loving those children immensely. No one has a right to convenience or a high level of income, either, certainly not a right that is greater than someone else’s right to live.

I’ll post another, since this topic is probably being dreaded by many and thus is getting off to a slow start.

For Christians, the Bible has a clear and straightforward example of life beginning at conception. Jesus was Jesus at the moment of conception, and so was John the Baptist. In fact, their identities were so well said that the NT could state that John leapt in the womb at the nearness of Jesus (when Jesus was 6 months less developed, probably within the first month of conception). This plus the prohibition against sorcery (pharmakeia was the original term, used to describe drugs commonly associated with contraception and abortion) has kept the belief within the Christian Church from its very start that abortion is a heinous murder of an innocent child. Abortion is not new, and Christians have held steadfastly against it for ages. Only modern equivocation and confusion in this culture of death has brought disunity to Christians on this point, but its an issue so important and so clear that I seriously question whether one can call oneself Christian if one is in favor of abortion.

Arandur, I think it’s off to a slow start because there were a limited amount of people in that last debate and many have said their piece already. As I said in the daily thread, we may have to wait for some new folks to post, and we aren’t seeing very many, either, lately. You said something that puzzled me over there re birth control. It was not the time or place for discussion at that time because everyone was in such a hurry. Since we have time at the moment and I don’t think it’s too far off-topic(?) I believe you said that the church teaches that condoms, the pill, etc. are wrong and you tend to agree with them. I would imagine that you are trying to prevent fornication, that sort of thing. But what about married couples, shouldn’t they be able to have a way to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, many responsible couples know that they have finite resources (especially these days) to care for only so many children or perhaps don’t want a child yet in their lives (college, establishing a career, etc.). (And is the rythym method still taught as a valid method of birth control?) Also, one person in the married couple may have a blood borne disease such as hepatitis or HIV (known to both parties), and doesn’t want to transmit it to the other. Of course, there are other sexual things one can do besides intercourse that are safer. Are those things wrong to do (all by themselves), wrong if you are trying to prevent pregnancy by doing them (I just thought of this now), wrong if you are trying to prevent disease by doing them? Kids sometimes think that if they don’t actually engage in intercourse, they are doing alright by the church’s teachings (this is obviously a misconception on their part, but maybe the church doesn’t make it clear because they are so reluctant to talk about this stuff). Lastly, the morning after pill. I would imagine that most of the time it doesn’t actually cause an abortion because the woman doesn’t actually become pregnant. Is the act of taking it tantamount to having an abortion in that or all cases, and again, what about married couples? You may not know this, a man here in Wisconsin is being prosecuted for murder of a fetus for giving his (unmarried) partner this drug without her knowledge, and not just the morning after. She had two documented miscarriages due to this and became suspicious. I agree on this, he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I may not agree with some of your responses here, but as always, will respect your opinions and beliefs as fully as possible (and you said you are busy for a couple days, so I don’t expect an immediate response). Other people can chime in, too, please. I especially might like to hear from Alexandra, too. She is charming, contrary to my first impression (OK, I admit it!). Thank you for coming to the site, my dear, I hope you like it here.

Actually I have a lot to say but all of this shopping crap is taking all of my time. I intend to weigh in soon.

Glad to hear that, joew! i’ve got plenty of time, it’s not December 23, yet, is it?

an embryo is not a baby.. god is pretend…get with the 21st century

“an embryo is not a baby.. god is pretend…get with the 21st century”

lol word

“an embryo is not a baby.. god is pretend…get with the 21st century”

That may seem true to you, but it may not to someone else. Please be tactful. There’s no need to piss anyone off here. ^^

An embryo is a developing human being, absolutely no way around it. At conception it is completely human by scientific definition (containing 46 chromosomes).

Abortion is Biblically wrong…Since not all people base their moral principle upon the Bible, it cannot be mandated as morally, ethically, or even legally wrong, no matter how hard so many may try. We cannot force restrictions where we ourselves have no authority. To condemn others is to condemn ourself. Therefore, as individuals, with the conviction that abortion is Biblically wrong, must not participate in abortion and turn our focus onto the enrichment of lives through Christ – because that is the only way to reduce the number of abortions.

If we think of it in terms of Christianity, the Bible (specifically the Old Testament Law) an unborn child is of importance, but not as important as existing life. An unborn child is an innocent, and in the realm of Faith returns to God if terminated, our concerns should be for those in situation of crisis that leads up to that decision.

If Christians and non-Christians alike put more value on existing human life, i.e, the homeless, the poor, the starving, the abused, the lonely, supporting unnecessary wars, etc., – Valuing ALL LIFE then and only then would abortion not be such an on demand, by the thousands a day occurrence.

If you are not willing to share the weight of the burden they carry, then you have no authority to judge. Abortion is the termination of developing human being, plain and simple…And judging and condemning those who have no hope, help, love, or conscience, – is wrong as well.

Willing to go way out on this one me…If I were a woman…I don’t think I could terminate my developing “passenger”...that’s me…BUT…I certainly would not interfere with the choice of some other woman…

And if it came down to a baby or my future, I would always pick my future. Sorry guys.I don’t have this fantasy of ascending into the sky when I die and living an existence in some sort of “eternal paradise” so I am going to try to enjoy life as much as possible. The world is going to the dogs. Nihilism 2008!

Empty: and you say Christianity is bad for society? With that mentality?

Koo, can I beg off your contraception questions just a little longer? I intend to answer them, but I want to bring something to the fore here first.

Quick reply to Preterist: You summed up a scientific, factual basis that all society can agree on (since science is the god of so many in the Western world) for declaring human life to begin at conception and therefore protecting it just as we do protect all born human life.

Preterist and everyone else who doesn’t think abortion should be legislated against or that we don’t know if an embryo is human life: consider this argument I heard first from Peter Kreeft, a Catholic theologian and philosopher who teaches at Boston College (brilliant man, IMO).
There are four possibilities:

1. The fetus is a person, and we know that; The fetus is a person, but we don’t know that; The fetus isn’t a person, but we don’t know that;
2. The fetus isn’t a person, and we know that. What is abortion in each of these four cases?

In Case 1, where the fetus is a person and you know that, abortion is murder. First-degree murder, in fact. You deliberately kill an innocent human being.

In Case 2, where the fetus is a person and you don’t know that, abortion is manslaughter. It’s like driving over a man-shaped overcoat in the street at night or shooting toxic chemicals into a building that you’re not sure is fully evacuated. You’re not sure there is a person there, but you’re not sure there isn’t either, and it just so happens that there is a person there, and you kill him. You cannot plead ignorance. True, you didn’t know there was a person there, but you didn’t know there wasn’t either, so your act was literally the height of irresponsibility. This is the act Roe allowed.

In Case 3, the fetus isn’t a person, but you don’t know that. So abortion is just as irresponsible as it is in the previous case. You ran over the overcoat or fumigated the building without knowing that there were no persons there. You were lucky; there weren’t. But you didn’t care; you didn’t take care; you were just as irresponsible. You cannot legally be charged with manslaughter, since no man was slaughtered, but you can and should be charged with criminal negligence.

Only in Case 4 is abortion a reasonable, permissible, and responsible choice. But note: What makes Case 4 permissible is not merely the fact that the fetus is not a person but also your knowledge that it is not, your overcoming of skepticism. So skepticism counts not for abortion but against it. Only if you are not a skeptic, only if you are a dogmatist, only if you are certain that there is no person in the fetus, no man in the coat, or no person in the building, may you abort, drive, or fumigate.

http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/personho…

Sorry for the outside link, but it’s a good one for anyone who cares about this topic enough to look.

no problem, Aran, also wanted to know if the church considers birth control abortion, but you might have answered that already, take your time…

Arandur,

You misunderstood my point. You will not and cannot stop abortion by legislation – the ultimate demise of abortion on demand is a respect of existing human life (through the love of Christ).

I believe and stated that life begins at conception, 46 chromosomes – a developing human being.

Legislation will not stop unwanted pregnancies, legislation will not make unwanted pregnancies wanted, legislation cannot mandate morality, legislation cannot force women, who for whatever purpose, find themselves unfit for motherhood…That is essentially what they are saying:

“I was not responsible for my own body, I was not responsible for keeping myself from becoming pregnant, I am not responsible to bring a child into the world, or capable of keeping the child in my body for 9 months let alone bringing a child into the world and caring for them.”

As a child of a mother who did not want a child, I can attest that while I am grateful that I am alive; It would have been less painful of an existence not knowing, hearing and feeling my mother’s burden-filled words, actions and expressions of how I ruined her life, her body and all chances of fulfilling her hopes and dreams. I will always love my mother, and there will always be a part of me that will wish that I could have been a child of a mother who wanted me.

While you or I may not comprehend the mindset of women who are faced with the crisis (to them) of an unwanted pregnancy – we do not have the right to force women to have children that they are unfit to have at that time in their life…And if we try, we are stopping abortions but only legal abortions.

If you truly want to stop abortions – change the world, one person, one family at a time with the love of Christ. Any woman who truly loves herself, is responsible for herself, her body, her actions – will in fact by most all efforts not become pregnant in the first place, or if she does, will not have an abortion performed.

As the poster that preceded you, they see it as a choice between a future and having a child…Do you think legislation is going to make that thought process change?

God is a God of forgiveness – He gave His only begotten Son so that we might all have forgiveness. These women are only accountable to God and themselves, not to us. And if we have the conviction in our heart not to terminate the life of an unborn child, then we do not do so – because it is OUR MORAL COMPASS, but OUR MORAL COMPASS DOES NOT guide the entire world.

I agree with you except for the fact that the government has an obligation by our own Constitution to protect human life.

Also, while legislation will not end abortions or make children wanted, can you really deny that Roe v. Wade’s condonement of abortion, making it legal, led the culture directly to accepting abortion as just a form of birth control, something acceptible and, for many people, not even really much of a problem?

Legality has made abortion rampant, because it has fostered the belief that there is nothing wrong with it, and that it can be done as merely a matter of convenience. Like it or not, Preterist and others, but, for a culture that has lost its way from God, legality DETERMINES morality. If something is legal, most people won’t or don’t question its morality, and think it’s okay. If something is illegal (even drugs, for instance), many people at least give pause and think about what they are doing.

For these reasons, if abortion is truly a matter of taking human life, or if it is even POSSIBLY a matter of taking human life it must be outlawed.

Aran, Dr. Kreeft seems to be splitting hairs to me, I don’t see the logic in what he is saying, especially his examples, they seem contrived. Haven’t followed the link yet, though.

Arandur,

Since you like analogies:

Speeding is against the law – Have you not ever sped?

Legality does not determine morality. Is it illegal to have sex with multiple partners? No…And yet there are people that find it morally repugnant.

Do laws draw us closer to God? No, LOVE does.

Do you think laws will keep women from having abortions? NO, but I believe real LOVE would.

Do you think laws make men responsible for any women they impregnate, will make them responsible?

NO, they don’t.

Is it illegal to drink? Aside from underage drinking, NO, and yet many people CHOOSE not to drink.

During Prohibition, did it keep people from manufacturing alcohol, and drinking? NO.

AGAIN, you do not keep people from doing something by making it illegal – You only fill an empty void by filling it with something REAL.

Does morality make you a better person? Does it make you right with God?

NO, even the Bible states that obeying the Law isn’t what leads you to salvation, but LOVE. LOVE leads us to repentance, NOT LAWS, AND PENALTIES.

Preterist, I’m not arguing with any of that. Do you dispute that making something legal in this society leads, if not a majority, then a huge minority, to accept it with little question as perfectly okay to do?

The point I’m making is that this culture views legality as morality/acceptibility.

Koo, the basic summary is this:
1. If the fetus is a person and you know it, and kill it anyway, that’s obviously murder.
2. If a fetus is a person and you don’t know it, and kill it, that’s manslaughter (you didn’t know it was murder and didn’t intend it, but you still killed someone)
3. If the fetus is NOT a person, but you think it is, and kill it, you obviously have the intent to murder, and that is wrong.
4. If the fetus is NOT a person, and you KNOW that it is not a person, then you’re okay.

However, point 4 doesn’t work for anyone in this society, because even science gives very strong grounds for showing that human life begins at conception. The question is highly in dispute, and thus you cannot be sure that it is not a person, and so taking chances with killing it is incredibly irresponsible, akin to demolishing an unwanted building without knowing that everyone is safely out.

Preterist, I’m not arguing with any of that. Do you dispute that making something legal in this society leads, if not a majority, then a huge minority, to accept it with little question as perfectly okay to do?

The point I’m making is that this culture views legality as morality/acceptibility.

-

Is our society willingly and acceptingly Christian or even willingly and acceptingly moral?

Our cultural views really have very little to do with legality, but what is mainstream.

Fashion & Television dictate cultural morality more so than our government’s legislation. The reason being, there is a disconnection between LOVE and DISCIPLINE and a connection between PUNISHMENT and HYPOCRISY in the family home, as well as our government.

When I went high school, and junior high school, for that matter – virginity was in, and was fashionable AND THERE WERE NO LAWS GOVERNING THAT. Now, promiscuity is in…Sex sells, and they’re buying.

Divorce was legal for a number of years, but it wasn’t until popular Christian icons started becoming divorced that the divorce rate increased among Christians.

If obeying the law was the key to morality, then Christ’s purpose and sacrifice would be considered in vain.

We don’t have morals because we obey the laws, we have morality because we love virtue ( and GOD).

Again, I’m not disagreeing, for the most part.

“Our cultural views really have very little to do with legality, but what is mainstream.” Was abortion mainstream before Roe v. Wade? No. Would it have ever become mainstream if it had not been made legal? I highly doubt it. Do you?

“If obeying the law was the key to morality, then Christ’s purpose and sacrifice would be considered in vain.” Let me just state clearly that, as when you made this point in a previous post, I have never said that obeying the law is key to morality in actuality. I don’t make that connection at all.

I still don’t know whether you’re disputing my point that : “making something legal in this society leads, if not a majority, then a huge minority, to accept it with little question as perfectly okay to do?”