Abortion: Can You Be Both?

[rambot]

What? Objectively speaking, some are worse than others.

PErhaps but CERTAINLY that is not up to us to decide.

 

[RamiC]

Yes they did.
I only really ever spoke to one of those parents (she was a teen when she was pregnant). Her parents didn't allow access.
Almost all of them (except the above noted one)
Absolutely. Edmonton Alberta Canada. We have clinics; it is medically paid for.

In that case your argument seems to fail, because the people that you are working with chose not to use an available service and still tell their children that they did not want them. Unless you are suggesting that people should be forced to have terminations, your objections about harm to children because they are unwanted are not solved by abortion...your city/region has it, and yet still these unhappy family situations exist.

You know how Christians talk about the "broken and sinful"? Well, spend some time doing social work and you'll understand that "broken" doesn't necessarily (by a LONG shot) refer to sin.

I work for an addiction recovery charity. I am the art and craft facilitator there, not a social worker. I have no idea if you think that counts. We are regarded as providing an essential service by the local authorities....that means lives are deemed to depend on what I do (in a non-medical context) , and the official services of NHS and Family Services reckon they could not manage without us.

These parents had FAS; they had addictions issues; several of them were raped (often on substances). They were not good decision makers....and surprise surprise, they didn't make great parents.

Yes, I believe I understand, see above, but poor decision making cannot be resolved by abortion can it? The problems you are depicting are drug related, drug use in a community is not cured by abortion...if it was you would not have these troubles in your community, because as you have said, the legal option is already there, and it is free.

 

[Delvianna]

We've carved out a place for solidiers in war to "murder"...

I wouldn't take guidelines by worldly standards or the worldly definition of murder. The word for "you shall not murder" in Exodus 20:13 is Ratsach which means unlawful, intentional or premeditated homicide.

Whoa. Back up. You just provide your logic and then confidently said it's "God's stance".

Yes, it is and its actually backed up by science since we can see exactly what happens when the egg and sperm join. Some bible verses as examples: Jeremiah 1:5, Psalm 139:13-16, Luke 1:41, Luke 1:44, Exodus 21:22-23, Proverbs 6:16 and my personal favorites, Ecclesiastes 11:5, Genesis 9:6, Job 31:15. God considers it a life and not just a "clump of cells" but actually a "reward" Psalm 127:3.

 

[concretecamper]

PErhaps but CERTAINLY that is not up to us to decide.

No one did

 

[rambot]

I wouldn't take guidelines by worldly standards or the worldly definition of murder. The word for "you shall not murder" in Exodus 20:13 is Ratsach which means unlawful, intentional or premeditated homicide.

"unlawful".
Ok.
Regardless, I also don't consider it homicide with a fetus.

Yes, it is and its actually backed up by science since we can see exactly what happens when the egg and sperm join. Some bible verses as examples: Jeremiah 1:5, Psalm 139:13-16, Luke 1:41, Luke 1:44, Exodus 21:22-23, Proverbs 6:16 and my personal favorites, Ecclesiastes 11:5, Genesis 9:6, Job 31:15. God considers it a life and not just a "clump of cells" but actually a "reward" Psalm 127:3.

In that case your argument seems to fail, because the people that you are working with chose not to use an available service and still tell their children that they did not want them.

I don't see how my argument fails. I mentioned those people were broken. They don't make good choices.

Unless you are suggesting that people should be forced to have terminations, your objections about harm to children because they are unwanted are not solved by abortion...your city/region has it, and yet still these unhappy family situations exist.

I would never ever EVER suggestion force for that (I've already said I don't "like" abortions). They absolutely exist. But for those babies who were aborted, they do have to suffer through that life.

I work for an addiction recovery charity. I am the art and craft facilitator there, not a social worker. I have no idea if you think that counts. We are regarded as providing an essential service by the local authorities....that means lives are deemed to depend on what I do (in a non-medical context) , and the official services of NHS and Family Services reckon they could not manage without us.

Good for you. Thank you for doing that work. I also worked with a LOT of fentyl and crystal meth addicted youth. They can be pretty tough. I'm sure adults are tough too.

Yes, I believe I understand, see above, but poor decision making cannot be resolved by abortion can it?

It would really depend on how you define the word "resolve". Nothing can resolve poor decision making but abortion would change the outcomes of poor decision making.

The problems you are depicting are drug related, drug use in a community is not cured by abortion...if it was you would not have these troubles in your community, because as you have said, the legal option is already there, and it is free.

They are not always drug dependent but OFTEN they have been. I woluld NEVER argue drug use is cured by abortion.

Youre presumption is that every person who says "I don't want this child" would get an abortion. Many people say "I don't want this child" and have it anyways...often due to social,cultural,societal pressures. Or....they are lazy and passively living their life (I saw that too...crazy town). That was actually a super sad family to work with. Mom didn't want the kid (And frankly, had no business being a parent to anyone), but was so lazy she was unwilling to do anything about it. The childhood of that kid was ug..... depressing.

 

[rambot]

No one did

Fair enough.,

 

[Oompa Loompa]

I voted yes. Christians find themselves supporting biblically immoral, wicked, and vile things all the time.

 

[rambot]

I wouldn't take guidelines by worldly standards or the worldly definition of murder. The word for "you shall not murder" in Exodus 20:13 is Ratsach which means unlawful, intentional or premeditated homicide.

How do you think so many Jews came to the opposite conclusion as the Prolife crowd when they use some of the same texts?

Yes, it is and its actually backed up by science since we can see exactly what happens when the egg and sperm join.

"Backed up by Science"?

Some bible verses as examples: Jeremiah 1:5, Psalm 139:13-16, Luke 1:41, Luke 1:44, Exodus 21:22-23, Proverbs 6:16 and my personal favorites, Ecclesiastes 11:5, Genesis 9:6, Job 31:15. God considers it a life and not just a "clump of cells" but actually a "reward" Psalm 127:3.

"Children ARE a reward". (....CHILDREN. I agree)
Most people that I know wouldn't call a lost or ecoptic pregnancy a reward at all though. Are those people wrong?


If you're willing, we can discuss Exodus 21 in greater detail....as this AS CLOSE as the Bible comes to directly discussing the value of life inside a mother.

 

[Pepperdoodle]

I voted yes. Christians find themselves supporting biblically immoral, wicked, and vile things all the time.

I voted no. Christians shouldn't find themselves supporting biblically immoral, wicked, and vile things all the time.
If they are, they are putting a question on their claim, if they knowingly, purposely support those things.

 

[Brother Del]

For the better part of my 60 years on this earth, I have believed that there is no such thing as a stupid question.

I stand corrected.


Have we truly fallen this far?

Father have mercy.
Christ have mercy.
Holy Spirit lift the veil.

 

[Delvianna]

How do you think so many Jews came to the opposite conclusion as the Prolife crowd when they use some of the same texts?

Same reason so many Christians come to wrong conclusions about the bible in general, they aren't being led by God.

"Backed up by Science"?

Yes, you should see what they found. They have video of the very moment of conception and there is a "light".

If you're willing, we can discuss Exodus 21 in greater detail....as this AS CLOSE as the Bible comes to directly discussing the value of life inside a mother.

Sure.

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

So, the verse is calling the unborn child a life. So if there was harm done to the unborn child, then the judgement is life for a life. If an unborn baby isn't considered "alive", it wouldn't require the giving of a life if the unborn baby dies.

 

[rambot]

Same reason so many Christians come to wrong conclusions about the bible in general, they aren't being led by God.

Which comes first being wrong or not being led by God? One is your opinion...

Yes, you should see what they found. They have video of the very moment of conception and there is a "light".

The release of zinc I believe.

So, the verse is calling the unborn child a life. So if there was harm done to the unborn child, then the judgement is life for a life. If an unborn baby isn't considered "alive", it wouldn't require the giving of a life if the unborn baby dies.

IT calls it "Alive". It says that if two men fight and hit the woman causing her to miscarry and the child dies, there is a fine.
If any other harm (presumably to the mother since the baby has miscarried) follows THEN it is to be "eye for eye, tooth for tooth".

 

[Pepperdoodle]

For the better part of my 60 years on this earth, I have believed that there is no such thing as a stupid question.
I stand corrected.
Have we truly fallen this far?
Father have mercy.
Christ have mercy.
Holy Spirit lift the veil.

Well, either your 60+ yrs on earth have failed you to some degree or you don't see all those online who claim to be Christian and support abortion, some proudly so. And some saying abortion is blessed by God.
I've seen it and it's disgusting.

So which part of this "Can you support the killing of growing babies in the womb via abortion and be a Christian?" is "stupid" to you?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Add your vote to the Poll

Can you support abortion, the killing of growing babies in the womb...and also be a Christian?

Considering that close to 90% of the women having abortions are unmarried, they are first and foremost not Christian by way of continued unrepentant fornication.
So having an abortion just continues their state of spiritual darkness. Rape however, is another story.
Blessings

 

[Delvianna]

The release of zinc I believe.

Technically you're essentially just cells made up of water, oxygen, carbon, hydrogen.. etc. Does that make you less of a person to be downgraded by the specific compounds that you're made up of? Even if it's the releasing of zinc, that doesn't negate that life began with light and what was the FIRST thing God created in Genesis? Light...

Which comes first being wrong or not being led by God? One is your opinion...

Being wrong because, not being led. It's an effect of. Jews disregard Christ, so that would mean they aren't being led by God because they have rejected their creator. So if a bunch of Jews came to a wrong conclusion about anything scripture related, that is the reason. Same with Christians. I'm making a general statement based off your initial question.

IT calls it "Alive". It says that if two men fight and hit the woman causing her to miscarry and the child dies, there is a fine.
If any other harm (presumably to the mother since the baby has miscarried) follows THEN it is to be "eye for eye, tooth for tooth".

Sure, but the outcome is the same. If the baby dies, the requirement is life for a life.

22 “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

The reason why the wording here in verse 23 is generic, is because if any harm follows EITHER the mother or child. The phrasing is open to both. So if she gives birth prematurely and the mother AND child are okay, then they get the lesser punishment according to the womans husband, but if harm DOES follow in either mother or child, then it's life for life and there's no distinction as the child is considered a life. The word used is "'ason" which is a serious injury or fatality which is why next it says "life for life".

 

[Pepperdoodle]

Considering that close to 90% of the women having abortions are unmarried, they are first and foremost not Christian by way of continued unrepentant fornication.
So having an abortion just continues their state of spiritual darkness. Rape however, is another story.
Blessings

Rape is sad, but not another story.
See my reply to another in this post for a bit more about that.

 

[RamiC]

I would never ever EVER suggestion force for that (I've already said I don't "like" abortions). They absolutely exist. But for those babies who were aborted, they do have to suffer through that life.

My point is merely that abortion does not solve the problems you are talking about. Let us imagine we can solve the problems that are causing the neglect and abuse. Let us imagine we can let teenagers know they matter, let us imagine they do not have to stay in touch with family that do not want them.

Good for you. Thank you for doing that work. I also worked with a LOT of fentyl and crystal meth addicted youth. They can be pretty tough. I'm sure adults are tough too.

I am thinking that if you are emplyed by the state, and working with teenagers, it maybe tougher for you because it is less clearly their own choice to be in your care. Plus you are probably working longer hours.

However difficult my work gets, everyone who comes to us has basically chosen to do so. Although even among adults, we really do not see anybody who says that they are from a happy untroubled home, and references to parental drug use are the norm. I still do not see terminating people as the way to solve anything.

It would really depend on how you define the word "resolve". Nothing can resolve poor decision making but abortion would change the outcomes of poor decision making.

It means that basically people who do not end up living at all are spared suffering hardship in life. Yes they are, but I do not believe Jesus sees stop life as a suitable solution to the matter of life being tough.

Youre presumption is that every person who says "I don't want this child" would get an abortion.

I thought you were saying that, but then you described people having children and then not wanting them. The solution to the misery you describe is to ensure those neglected human beings discover loving and being loved, and know that God/Canada/all civil members of the human race can see that they are worthwhile because they are people. I do not see how that message is conveyed to anyone by thinking that their parents, who concieved them, should not have had them.

I do understand that my idea of the solution looks absurdly unrealistic.

 

[RamiC]

For the better part of my 60 years on this earth, I have believed that there is no such thing as a stupid question.

I stand corrected.

I assumed the OP was meant to simply open a discussion, rather than an attempt to find out the answer.

 

[rambot]

My point is merely that abortion does not solve the problems you are talking about.

I would posit that it prevents them from taking place against a child (because the child doesn't exist).
HAve you heard of heard of Survivor Bias?

Let us imagine we can solve the problems that are causing the neglect and abuse.

The world is broken; we can only imagine solving those as concepts. WE can help individuals only.

Let us imagine we can let teenagers know they matter, let us imagine they do not have to stay in touch with family that do not want them.

That's what I do in my class every day and that's what I did in the counselling position as well. Often times they didn't and we would respect it (worked a couple kids through the immancipation process)

I am thinking that if you are emplyed by the state, and working with teenagers, it maybe tougher for you because it is less clearly their own choice to be in your care. Plus you are probably working longer hours.

To an extent....as a teacher (obviously) no. As a frontline social worker? The kids were happy to have me but yeah, they didn't have a choice.
As a counsellor...kind of? IF kids didn't like it, they'd just go AWOL til their bed closed. Many stayed, some did not. Work hours were reasonable (except as a teacher; it's freaking insano)

However difficult my work gets, everyone who comes to us has basically chosen to do so. Although even among adults, we really do not see anybody who says that they are from a happy untroubled home, and references to parental drug use are the norm.

Have you read "In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts" by Gabor Mate. To have ANY sense of addition, I think this is required reading. I would just encourage you to read it. He was the doctor that worked in the world famous drug consumption site in EAst Vancouver back in the 1990s before ANYONE EVER really thought it was a "really good idea".

I still do not see terminating people as the way to solve anything.

But you are not terminating people (that implies adults to me...though I doubt you meant that). You are keeping the child from being born. The solution is that they don't have to go through that painful life i've seen so many other kids go through.

It means that basically people who do not end up living at all are spared suffering hardship in life.

Yes. THat's correct.

Yes they are, but I do not believe Jesus sees stop life as a suitable solution to the matter of life being tough.

I understand why folks think that because it seems like such a distasteful solution.
As I see it, that little fetus that God knew will go back and be with Him.

I thought you were saying that, but then you described people having children and then not wanting them. The solution to the misery you describe is to ensure those neglected human beings discover loving and being loved, and know that God/Canada/all civil members of the human race can see that they are worthwhile because they are people. I do not see how that message is conveyed to anyone by thinking that their parents, who concieved them, should not have had them.

OF the kids that I have worked with who fit the description I gave above, ALMOST half of them, when they were crying in their bad at night, confused why their FAS brain got them in trouble and not understanding anyhting would wail "I wish my mom just aborted me" (perhaps a bit dramatic but I mean half of them DID say those words to me).

I'm not advocating for abortion as a solution to anything; again, I grieve abortions. But I have seen what 15 years of pain actually does to children...and I grieve that far, far, far FAAAAAAAR more.

I do understand that my idea of the solution looks absurdly unrealistic.

I understand that.
Lol. Try being a christian holding my position...sometimes it still even feels unrealistic. But here I am.

 

[jonojim1337]

Absolutely not. Christians also have to avoid sin so nothing worse happens to them.