ItIsFinished!
Jesus Christ is our only hope.
- Sep 1, 2018
- 1,678
- 1,134
- 51
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Upvote
0
I understand. Just thought you may of had scripture, since this is a religion site. Im fine with opinions, and scientific views as well.
Correct. Although the Bible is not exhaustive in every detail, what it says about God and us is absolutely true.Not everything is found in scripture.
Does scripture tell you how to boil an egg? How to treat a headache? Etc etc etc
If you are using that argument, why not murder every baby as it is born. Guaranteed way of getting to heaven. All it needs is one person to self sacrifice their chance of heaven in order to guarantee every child they murder a place in heaven.I know this is going to open a can of worms, but I just had a thought. Christians who are against abortions, I'm curious as to why you would rather a child suffer in this life, rather than being sent to heaven before enduring any suffering? As far as I can remember children are granted automatic entry into heaven until they can be held accountable. So why deny a child a chance to have a loving home with your heavenly father instead of being raised in foster care, or worse? I don't get it.
Highlight each paragraph or sentence you want to quote and the “reply” and “quote” option show. Then hit the quote portion and it adds to multiquote. Then when you are finished go to the bottom reply dialogue box and hit “insert quotes”
Exodus 20:13What does God say about abortion?
although I was reluctant to read anything from you after the emotional extremes you peppered in, I did finish your post.
The equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears if someone raises their voice. Let me be straight here - the notion that because people get emotional about a topic they should be not heard and / or considered flat out wrong or to have faulty judgement is dangerous nonsense.
If you desire your words to be heard and respect by all, you should try eliminating extremes, and emotional statements and respect the opinions of others just like your own. After this, i believe you will no longer need to use "they are non-believers" as a reason why people dont listen to you. Im sure their are many believers who also disagree with many of your interpretations of the bible as well.
Yes they do... people who are brain dead also live with breath in their lungs. Yet there are some people who do not liken, "pulling the plug," to murdering the homeless, or killing children at the park. Even if you cannot make the differienciation...the opinion of those that can, should still be respected.
Are you able to use examples that arent extreme? Can you think of everyday examples or is the only case "If you agree with abortion, you might as well murder infants and the homeless?"
Yes this is a reasonable judgement and a respected one. However, you did say that I made a determination about the life of a child when I did not. Perhaps you could use different wording so that your motives arent questions verbally or mentally.
Here is where your exclamations fall apart. I believe if you feel so strongly about something.....strong enough to call one a sinner and murderer who commits this act....there should be no exceptions. Truth very seldom has exceptions or loopholes....
IT is never ok to murder....so why turn a blind eye in this case? how can I Esteem your opinion now, knowing that there are cases that you can turn your back on and say "let it be as they decide" How can you turn your back on this innocent child? the child who is still breathing in the womb, as you proclaimed, yet cannot speak for itself?
Killing would suffice.....the added adjectives is a attempt to sway the readers emotions. unless you are saying that you would be ok with it if it wasnt brutal.
So which is it? is it the brutality of it that bothers you, or is it the fact that a life is being snuffed out? If the latter, why add talks about whether or not it is brutal?
Because it would make sense to discuss the most broad cases of abortion, not the most narrow......if we are trying to change the minds of the many. we arent trying to give the impression that abortion should be avoided only during late terms.... so why not speak of it in general instead of referencing select cases, which just so happens to conjure the most emotion?
Thanks for the conversation. I find no fault in anything that you have said and believe.The term 'emotional statements' is used to reject the weight that the remark carries, which in this case is seriously heavy weight.
It also is a casually used snub which dis-respects someone's strong opinion on a matter as being 'emotional'.
I'm not making emotional statements, I'm expressing a strong opinion which seems to unsettle you.
yes they do what ? Inhale and exhale air ? I hope you're not suggesting such a basic biological falsehood.
The parallels aren't extreme - they highlight the inconsistency in the 'choice' stance. As Shapiro mentions in his video posted earlier - if your reason for termination is purely financial as an example - then it must be applied across the board if it's genuinely the pure reason. What the extremities reveal is that those 'reasons' never stand up to scrutiny, and are never the real reason.
'different wording so that your motives arent questions verbally or mentally' - sorry, that makes no sense at all.
I'll be honest - I'm still on the fence on this one. A very hard call to make. One thing is certain though - that Doctors efforts and choices are to save and preserve life to the maximum - entirely different to the elective choice to end life based on inconvenience - which we all know is the overwhelming, absolute majority of cases (certainly in the west).
Ok we will go with that - take the word brutal out in order to focus on the concept of babies loss of life being the key issue. I'll rephrase - "killing unborn babies". There - makes it all the better ! Positively delightful now.
That's not what the OP is about though, is it ? We are answering the OP. If you want to discuss all eventualities - start your own thread ;-)
Also, they're not the most narrow, they're the absolute majority (elective I mean).
Thanks for the conversation. I find no fault in anything that you have said and believe.
my apologies for replying to your post....
I know this is going to open a can of worms, but I just had a thought. Christians who are against abortions, I'm curious as to why you would rather a child suffer in this life, rather than being sent to heaven before enduring any suffering? As far as I can remember children are granted automatic entry into heaven until they can be held accountable. So why deny a child a chance to have a loving home with your heavenly father instead of being raised in foster care, or worse? I don't get it.
Christians who are against abortions, I'm curious as to why you would rather a child suffer in this life, rather than being sent to heaven before enduring any suffering?
More than half of all Christians are a part of a church that believes all contraception to be a sin. Is it just to advocate one sin to prevent the need to commit another?Those little children don't just happen. Children are conceived when a man and a woman copulate. I would rather that people took responsibilty of their sexual health and used proper contraception and protection before engaging in sexual intercourse not just against unwanted pregnancies but STDs that can lead to lifelong infections. Condoms, condoms, condoms! It's pure nonsense to try to make the debate about the poor little suffering children (as though that was the only possible outcome!) vs. happy little heaven-bound angels.
It's not. It's about personal responsibility. No contraception = no sex. You refrain from having sex then and there until you have taken care of the prevention and/or explore other ways to give and receive sexual pleasure that does not involve the method of how babies are made.
Abusing abortion as one's primary birth control method is not cool, has never been cool and will never be cool, happy little heaven-bound angels or not.
And yet, only a small % of abortions are due to nonconsensual sex, medical reasons or honest accidents, i.e. properly used contraception failures. The vast majority of women seeking abortion got "accidentally" pregnant because they did not use contraception at all or used it inconsistently, most typically popping pills if and when they happened to remember. Girl, if you are an irregular pill-popper = you are not covered and need to use a condom. The most typical reason given to the unuse of contraception? "Did not think was going to get pregnant just by having unprotected sex." I mean, come on. The year is 2018, not 1820. There is nothing "accidental" in getting pregnant following unprotected sex. That's the ages old way of making babies.
More than half of all Christians are a part of a church that believes all contraception to be a sin. Is it just to advocate one sin to prevent the need to commit another?