|
Post by KILLER on Jul 26, 2004 13:18:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by test on Jul 26, 2004 17:34:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Jul 26, 2004 17:40:13 GMT -5
Behold the fruits of the so called "choice" movement. Sick, sick, sick.
I do hope that all women who get abortions actually get the T-shirt. That way we will be able to more easily witness to them about the God who wants to give His children eternal life.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by Response on Jul 26, 2004 17:53:07 GMT -5
I do hope that all women who get abortions actually get the T-shirt. Robb ::)Fat chance of any woman wearing that shirt. It's probably a one-of-a-kind shirt owned by it's designer.
|
|
|
Post by stan on Jul 26, 2004 18:41:00 GMT -5
::)Fat chance of any woman wearing that shirt. It's probably a one-of-a-kind shirt owned by it's designer. it is not oneofakind. Please read the link. It is a planned parenthood promoted shirt.
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Jul 27, 2004 17:27:58 GMT -5
In addition to the T-shirt, why not take actual ultrasound pictures of the murder so they can show the world how proud they are of what they have done.
I can picture the conversation around the coffee table now: ... see how she pulls back and tries to resist the killers weapon... see how she bucks in pain as her body is punctured... awww, how precious...
Robb
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Jul 27, 2004 18:24:39 GMT -5
In addition to the T-shirt, why not take actual ultrasound pictures of the murder so they can show the world how proud they are of what they have done. No matter how many times you say it, abortion in the US is not murder. I find your comments to be offensive and out of line. You have focused on the very small percentage of late term abortions. The decision of whether to carry a fetus to term term or not is often a painful decision that most people do not take lightly. Posting comments like those above are not helpful to anyone. Medical science moves forward. Detection of severe problems happens earlier. I do not think the government or any group of lay people have any right to impose their standards and beliefs onto a parent or couple regarding something that will potentially impact them for the rest of their lives. In the case of a growing family, a sibling that consumes the majority of the parents resources, time, care, and affection will often be resented. What is the point of carrying a fetus that has developed anencephaly to term and inflicting that burden on the entire family, as well as society at large, if it can be prevented? The mother (parents) should not be deprived of the ability to make that choice without fearing the ridicule and abuse of those not involved. Very few people think abortions are a good thing. The goal of most is to eliminate the need for anyone to ever have to consider having an abortion.
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Jul 27, 2004 19:24:56 GMT -5
No matter how many times you say that abortion in the US in not murder, it does not change the fact that it is in fact murder. The laws of the US are not my standard for what is murder or not.
I find your comments in defense of such an offensive practice like abortion to be offensive and out of line.
Funny you don't mind imposing your standards and beliefs on the lives of defensless, unborn babies.
Maybe it is the selfishness of parents that causes them to resent those wonderful blessings whom God has trusted to their care. Besides what is wrong with adoption for those "resentful" parents? Despite nearly a hundred letters sent to abortion clinics requesting the opportunity to adopt such potentially resented babies, we have got zero responces back. Hmmm.
To prove the moral lack in your logic, apply it to elderly, and retarded (or any other defenseless, burdonsome group).
To see the flaw in your logic, apply it to slavery.
What is needed is for us all to start calling abortion what it is... murder. Only then will we pass laws against it and call on people to repent and trust in the blood of Jesus to forgive them of this wicked sin.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by fatcat on Jul 27, 2004 19:50:10 GMT -5
abortion is murder
do not fool yourself!
|
|
|
Post by Response on Jul 27, 2004 20:16:06 GMT -5
it is not oneofakind. Please read the link. It is a planned parenthood promoted shirt. Regardless, women who have abortions are not going to wear such a shirt. I was responding to Robb's post. Who would buy and wear the shirt? Anti-abortionists?
|
|
|
Post by Response on Jul 27, 2004 20:18:39 GMT -5
The decision of whether to carry a fetus to term term or not is often a painful decision that most people do not take lightly. Posting comments like those above are not helpful to anyone. Robb has not shown that he has considered those facts.
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Jul 27, 2004 21:45:44 GMT -5
Ah yes, I did fail to comment of this didn't I?
Whether or not a decision is "painful" to us humans is irrelevant when it comes to what is right or wrong in God's eyes. Speaking of pain, have you seen the pain that the baby endures on the ultrasound videos?
Maybe, but if my comments cause one person to question the lies of the pro-abortionists then some unborn babies might consider them helpful.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by Response on Jul 27, 2004 21:58:01 GMT -5
Very few people think abortions are a good thing. The goal of most is to eliminate the need for anyone to ever have to consider having an abortion. A very worthwhile goal! How very unfortunate that some people choose to use hateful-seeming and/or violent methods to reach that goal. To think that many of them call themselves Christians.
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Jul 28, 2004 0:34:54 GMT -5
No matter how many times you say that abortion in the US in not murder, it does not change the fact that it is in fact murder. The laws of the US are not my standard for what is murder or not. All of that being said, aboortion is still legal and therefore not murder. Perhaps this is one of those times when you have your own meaning of a word. If that is the case perhaps you could share so we can have a discussion. I think the difference would be that I was not ridiculing another's belief. As I have said, I am not imposing my standards on anyone. I do not believe in abortion. I do, however, believe in giving women the right to make their own decision. It was not the parents I was talking about. It is the siblings who are often hurt in the end. Abortion clinics are not adoption agencies. By the time a woman has decided to have an abortion there is little chance of there being a baby for adoption. I am guessing logic is not your strong suite. Whether you decide to carry a fetus with no brain to full term is a decision that should be left to the mother or parents. It is the same decision that is left to children when they decide they can no longer care for their severely disabled parents and make them wards of the state. Well, that is easy. It seems like there are two ways: 1) redefine the meaning of murder. 2) pass laws to make abortions illegal and it will be murder. First the laws have to be passed and then it will actually be murder. You are quick to call it a sin. Is there anything in the bible that would lead you to believe it was ever thought of as murder? Jeremiah wished he had been aborted.
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Jul 28, 2004 0:46:10 GMT -5
Wether or not a decision is "painful" to us humans is irrelevant when it comes to what is right or wrong in God's eyes. It is not irrelevant to those with empathy. Have you seem the pain families endure? Again you are beinging up the late term abortions. Have you seen any pain in an eight week fetus? Do you really think a fetus that has developed anencephaly can feel anything? Ever? Whether aborted or kept alive for years? Ridicule and mean spirited comments would not, IMHO, be the best way to get the word out. Your comments have as much chance of changing someones mind as Reefer Madness did.
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Jul 28, 2004 1:35:41 GMT -5
Abortion is premeditated killing of a human...that is murder by most definitions. Your only real hope is to dehumanise the unborn baby by calling it something else...like a "fetus" for example. I am not disputing that you and the US govt fail to recognise abortion as murder.
I see you would like to have it both ways. Unfortuantly that doesn't work. Try your reasoning on something you (hopefully) actually do oppose like slavery: I do not believe in slavery. I do, however believe in giving plantation owners the right to make their own decision. See, it just doesn't work. You, by supporting the plantation owners would actually be imposing your standards on the slaves. Are you sure it is my logic that is messed up?
Your analogy would have you killing your disabled parents in order to make it work. Do you support the right to kill disabled parents too? And if not, why?
Robb
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Jul 28, 2004 9:14:34 GMT -5
Abortion is premeditated killing of a human...that is murder by most definitions. No, that would be your definition. That would make all soldiers murders, a great disservice to those who are willing to fight to preserve the very freedoms you strive to eliminate. I would also point out that murder does not have to be premediated. It does, however, have to be unlawful. You seemingly have a problem with using words as they are defined and used by most people. Then is it just your lack of knowledge of the definition of murder that is the problem? Do you believe that "Thou shalt not kill" meant any type of killing? No, it is not wanting it both ways. People still have the choice regarding what they may do. Abortion is one of the choices that I would not make but I still respect that others should be afforded the right to make that same choice. Then you should not own slaves. Although the Bible does not seem to think that is a problem. That infringes on the rights of those who are slaves. The unborn do not have rights until they become individuals, something I have asked you to speak on but so far have been unable to get any response. Perhaps this would be a good point for you to explain exactly when a zygote, embryo, fetus, or baby becomes an individual and has the same rights as its parents, espcially its mother. Do you think keeping a brain dead organism alive as a ward of the state is better than allowing it to die? Have you seen the care facilities where there are rooms full of beds containing organisms that resemble humans but do not have functioning brains? I am fully in favor of euthanasia, especially when the person is of sound mind and has requested to die. Living wills are of the utmost importance in today's world. It is possible to keep someone "alive" almost for ever. I am always surprised at the number of people who do not have a living will to guide others should they be required to make decisions regarding quality of life in the event they cannot make their wishes known. We are all going to die. Why should people not have some say in how they wish to die? This raises another question for you to consider - When does a person cease to be an individual?
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Jul 28, 2004 11:08:20 GMT -5
You make a good point about soldiers. The same applies to capital punishment. Both of these types of killings are permissible in God's law as we see in the Bible. Killing of babies for the convienience of the mother does not seem to be justified anywhere I read. Of course your point that killing in order to be murder must be unlawful, is correct. It is just that you and I have different stadards of law. Just because men call something lawful, does not necesarily make it so in the sight of God.
Right again! I do have a problem with the word fetus as used to dehumanise babies in order to then kill (murder) them. The word and concept of a fetus (as subhuman) seems to be missing in the Bible. In fact, God say that he knows us while still in the womb.
Although it is a different discussion, it is not fair to compare the Hebrew slavery with what we saw in this country untill the 1860's. American slavery was not biblical, imo.
But wait, slaves didn't have rights back then, just like unborn babies don't have them now. The reality is that both slaves and the unborn have rights, we just choose to not recognise them in some cases.
Conception.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by hot on Jul 28, 2004 14:28:37 GMT -5
A very worthwhile goal! to use hateful-seeming and/or violent methods You're talking about abortions, right? I mean what is more hateful to a unborn child then killing it? I mean what is more violent then killing a unborn child?
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Jul 28, 2004 17:22:03 GMT -5
You make a good point about soldiers. The same applies to capital punishment. Both of these types of killings are permissible in God's law as we see in the Bible. The killing of non-virgin women was also permissible in the Bible. And the killing of male children. There are other reasons for abortion. Perhaps we live in different countries. This is why discussions first need to establish the foundation. It also points out why religion and government should be kept apart. In a country all people may not be listening to the same God. This is very true but by the same token something that you think is wrong in the sight of your God is not illegal. This is how you view the word fetus. Others view it as the definition of a stage of development without judgmental qualities. Why subhuman? It is a human in development. Just because it is not mentioned in the Bible does not mean a lot. The idea of fertilization was not mentioned in the Bible either. In fact some believe the Bible implies that the fetus begins to live at the time of the 'quickening'. Does it really say that or does it just say God knew Jeremiah before He formed him in the womb? How was it different? What would not be 'fair'? Captured people were sold as slaves or kept as spoils of war. There is nothing in the NT regarding the practice of slavery. Many verses mention the practice and Jesus used slavery in one of his parables. Paul tells slaves to obey their masters and tells masters to be fair to their slaves. Not one word condemning it Slaves were individuals and an 8 week fetus is a part of the mother. The mother, and the developng child, have rights. You might say the mother is the proxy for the fetus. The slaves had the same unalienable rights that all individuals have. Various groups have always sought to abridge the rights of other groups. The reality is that slaves that can live on their own and are not solely dependent on another are very different from a developing baby (to use your words) that cannot live without the mother. This opens up a whole other area of discussion. If the zygote becomes an individual at the moment of conception, what happens with identical (monozygotic) twins? Is there only a single individual? There is only one moment of conception but ultimately 2 or more children might be born. This would require that the formation of an individual is not at the moment of conception but at a later stage. Any thoughts? This leads to the question of conjoined twins. A single individual or two individuals? Suppose they share a heart but have two heads? Suppose they share a head but have two hearts? Fetuses have been delivered conjoined in every imaginable way. In your mind what determines if they are a single individual or two individuals? If survival is impossible conjoined how is the decision made to eliminate one and save one? Is that a decision that should be made? It is your belief that the individual is created in the fallopian tube. It would be interesting to learn how you chose that moment. While it is true that the fertilized egg (zygote) has the potential to develop into a human being the same could be said of the sperm and ova. What then can be said for the 75% of the zygotes that do not implant and are naturally aborted? Should they not be treated with more dignity and concern? According to your definition they should have all the rights and privledges of a full term child. I would have to guess that you are also opposed to in vitro fertilization since the procedure almost always leaves unused embryos. What should be done with these? Stem cell research? I assume you have the same feelings regarding fertility drugs since when a multitude of zygotes implant some must be selectivly aborted. Ectopic pregnancies also have to be considered. Who do you think has the right to decide to have the abortion? The mother, who will almost surely die if left untreated? The fetus who will most certainly die if allowed to develop? The government? The church?
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Jul 28, 2004 17:29:12 GMT -5
I mean what is more hateful to a unborn child then killing it? If it has severe congential defects it might be more hateful to bring it to term. Was it painful before you were born? Abusing an unwanted child after it is delivered. Of course this is not usually the case. But it is not a black and white situation.
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Aug 4, 2004 13:58:38 GMT -5
Robb, Your one word answer in response to when you thought life begins raised a lot of questions that have gone unanswered. I was wondering if you were formulating a response or if you are not interested in discussing the topic in more detail. +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Some of my questions: If the zygote becomes an individual at the moment of conception, what happens with identical (monozygotic) twins? Is there only a single individual? There is only one moment of conception but ultimately 2 or more children might be born. This would require that the formation of an individual is not at the moment of conception but at a later stage. Any thoughts? This leads to the question of conjoined twins. A single individual or two individuals? Suppose they share a heart but have two heads? Suppose they share a head but have two hearts? Fetuses have been delivered conjoined in every imaginable way. In your mind what determines if they are a single individual or two individuals? If survival is impossible conjoined how is the decision made to eliminate one and save one? Is that a decision that should be made? It is your belief that the individual is created in the fallopian tube. It would be interesting to learn how you chose that moment. While it is true that the fertilized egg (zygote) has the potential to develop into a human being the same could be said of the sperm and ova. What then can be said for the 75% of the zygotes that do not implant and are naturally aborted? Should they not be treated with more dignity and concern? According to your definition they should have all the rights and privledges of a full term child. I would have to guess that you are also opposed to in vitro fertilization since the procedure almost always leaves unused embryos. What should be done with these? Stem cell research? I assume you have the same feelings regarding fertility drugs since when a multitude of zygotes implant some must be selectivly aborted. Ectopic pregnancies also have to be considered. Who do you think has the right to decide to have the abortion? The mother, who will almost surely die if left untreated? The fetus who will most certainly die if allowed to develop? The government? The church?
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Aug 5, 2004 9:08:01 GMT -5
Present,
I have little interest in continuing the discussion with you. It seems to be an exercise in futility at this point. Even if I were to take the time to formulate an answer to your "questions", I am convinced it would do little good based upon your past responses. Likewise, your endless barrage of questions, requests for precise definitions, ethical dilemmas and what if scenarios will do little to convince me that abortion is anything but an evil act of murder.
I encourage you to prayerfully consider your position. I cannot change your heart, only God can.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Aug 5, 2004 11:14:58 GMT -5
I have little interest in continuing the discussion with you. Thank you for your time up to this point. I was just questioning how you could logically support your position when there are cases (1 in 250 according to some studies) that demonstrate some other conclusion. I have no desire to change your mind about anything. I am interested in how and why you arrived at the conclusion you did. Vague definitions are great if you do not really care about the issue. Saying that an individual is formed at conception is a safe reply but upon close examination it seems to have some flaws. Assigning the same rights to a non-implanted zygote that you assign to all individuals is a dangerous path to take. People face ethical dilemmas frequently. Some people consider them as a means of examining their own beliefs and values. Should the fetus be saved if the mother will die? Which of the conjoined twins should be sacrificed? I can understand if you do not want to take the time to respond. You are probably right in assuming that I would have more questions. I do consider my position and think about the position I have taken often and in depth. I would encourage you to do the same and hope that you are never faced with an unexplored ethical dilemma.
|
|
|
Post by Curious on Aug 5, 2004 15:08:17 GMT -5
....will do little to convince me that abortion is anything but an evil act of murder. In your mind then all women who have had an abortion (and those who assisted them) are murderers? If a female member of your family had one, you believe that she would have commited "an evil act of murder"? What sort of a consequence do you believe they deserve? The choice to have an abortion is not lightly made by women. It is very likely that most men are unable to understand how women feel before and after having done so.
|
|
From Planned Parenthood
Guest
|
Post by From Planned Parenthood on Aug 5, 2004 15:10:15 GMT -5
"A Message from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. Among many items offered in the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) online store is this T-shirt with the message, “I had an abortion.” This shirt was not created by PPFA, but we do offer it in our store. The T-shirt delivers a message that is intended to confront and subvert the sense of shame surrounding abortion that has been so deliberately created by the anti-choice movement. "I had an abortion" is a statement that breaks a silence, and not a cavalier declaration. One in three women will have an abortion by the time they are 45, yet abortion remains an unspoken reality in our society. For some women the choice to terminate a pregnancy is a decision they wish to keep private, while others want to share their experiences in order to let other women know that there is nothing shameful about exercising the right to choose abortion. The T-shirt is thus a way for women to take ownership of their personal experiences and to communicate their stories. We believe it is particularly important to help women do so now in the current political climate, when reproductive rights are under unprecedented attack and honest, open discourse is so desperately needed. The anti-choice movement never yields in publicly discussing abortion. As part of their rhetoric, many anti-choice activists declare that they had abortions. Their motive is to place a scarlet letter in our minds and then to re-criminalize abortion; ours is to spark discussion and cast off shame. Women who have abortions are the same women who have children, and they make both of those decisions with thought and heart and moral deliberation. As an organization, Planned Parenthood does more to prevent unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion than any other group. Our belief that every pregnancy should be a wanted pregnancy and every child a wanted child is the very core of our mission. Reproductive rights and the ability to control one's own fertility are fundamental human rights. Our goal in selling this T-shirt is to remind people that abortion policy affects real people and that guaranteeing safe and legal abortion is critical to our rights and our health. Anti-choice forces have never worked harder to shame women into silence about the realities of their lives. It is our duty to empower women who wish to share their experience with the venues to do so — free from the stigma, prejudice, and censorship others wish to impose."
|
|
|
Post by bryan2 on Aug 5, 2004 15:35:11 GMT -5
In your mind then all women who have had an abortion (and those who assisted them) are murderers? If a female member of your family had one, you believe that she would have commited "an evil act of murder"? What sort of a consequence do you believe they deserve? The choice to have an abortion is not lightly made by women. It is very likely that most men are unable to understand how women feel before and after having done so. Yes.
Yes.
From God's standpoint or Man's standpoint?
Don't give me that crap about a man not being able to understand.... My mother was the poster child for someone who needed an abortion in 1977. Instead her Christian convictions lead her to have the baby (me) as a single unmarried woman and I am the result of her courage… I have no doubt you and others would have counseled her into killing me for the sake of her career, happiness, selfishness, or whatever. So when you talk about abortions as a choice, just think of me as the example of what that choice can lead to…
Would I still be alive today if you had been my mother?
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on Aug 5, 2004 16:31:44 GMT -5
From God's standpoint or Man's standpoint? Do you speak for God? Your mother was the 'poster child'. She made the decision. When was the last time you were with child or was concerned that you might be? Men can be very suipportive of a woman. They give another viewpoint. But they are not the individual who is pregnant. I don't think any group is out there trying to increase the number of abortions preformed. The goal is to eliminate the need for anyone to have an abortion. Your mother had the freedom to make the choice she did. Every woman deserves the same freedom of choice. You have surprising little insight into how people are counseled. The point of counseling is to make people aware of all of the choices that they have and then allow them to make their own decision. Suppose we talked about a Hitler. Or a Saddam. Children who are unwanted and suffer through childhood. Your mother(so it seems) wanted you and supported you and cared for you. Think how different your life would have been if she hated you and resented your very existance? I do not know enough about the circumstances to know the answer. But this does raise an interesting question. If the moment of conception is when an individual is created what happens to an aborted fertilized egg (zygote)? If there a soul involved? Original sin? I have to be careful - I have been chastised for asking too many questions!
|
|