Dr. Willy Parker on reproductive rights

Status
Not open for further replies.

StillGods

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
1,506
2,640
North Island
✟290,958.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
It's the woman who is already a living, breathing human being, it is her body which will be undergoing massive changes for a nine-month period, whereas the fetus is not alive yet and feeds off the mother, so that is why the well-being and rights of the mother takes precedence over the fetus. It's not that hard to understand.


Roman's 20:3
Thou shalt not murder, unless it is in the time up to eight weeks after conception, for then it is not murder.

or

Exodus 20:13
Thou shalt not murder.

I wonder which one is reality.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
It's the woman who is already a living, breathing human being, it is her body which will be undergoing massive changes for a nine-month period, whereas the fetus is not alive yet and feeds off the mother, so that is why the well-being and rights of the mother takes precedence over the fetus. It's not that hard to understand.
What’s hard to understand is your inability to grasp that a fetus is a living, growing, human being created in the image of God and possessing inherent moral worth and value.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: JacksBratt
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
I find it ironic that the Pericope adulterae was used as an analogy, when it was unarguably a story about Christ saving a person's life. Christ made no argument in favor of killing the woman to satisfy the emotional demands of her husband, which would be more comparable to killing a baby to satisfy the emotional demands of the mother. In this case, the abortion doctor is the man with the stone in his hands.

It's just an analogy, even I could understand that. The point is that Jesus was not merely a bystander but became involved in peoples lives at his own risk. And of course, ultimately that sort of risk cost him dearly when he was condemned to the Cross: the religious authorities of the day deemed him heretical and unacceptable- because he loved and helped the wrong sort of people.

An easier slam dunk was never had.

Only if you assume fetal rights outweigh a woman's rights. I don't.

What’s hard to understand is your inability to grasp that a fetus is a living, growing, human being created in the image of God and possessing inherent moral worth and value.

This is the rhetoric of Rome on the issue. For hundreds of years, Evangelicals never thought like this. They disapproved of abortion, but they considered it more or less a private matter. It was not until the 1820's there were even laws against abortion in the US, prohibiting abortion after the 4th month of pregnancy, a stance that is consistent with English common law dating back to the middle ages.

In the early 1970's, even the Southern Baptist Convention agreed that abortion should be made legal in more states, and that the rights of women and their bodies were the most important concern. Evangelicals initially were indifferent to abortion as a political cause. It took a Catholic Republican operative, Paul Weyrich, to mobilize evangelicals against abortion. And it looks like he's been successful in corrupting many peoples understanding of Protestant ethics in the process.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I believe men should stay out of debating abortion ethics in the abstract. That's what I believe.

:scratch: :scratch: :scratch:

"in the abstract"? - There's nothing "abstract" about abortion.

My son is developmentally disabled and one day when he was 5 or 6; I was rollerblading with him and he was in a special needs stroller that was obviously made for larger children. He was asleep. (He also has epilepsy.)

As we "rolled" up to the car. There was a lady in the parking lot with girl who was probably about 4? She watched me take my rollerblades off and transfer my son from the stroller into the car seat. He never woke up.

I was packing his stroller into the back when she started asking me questions about him. How hard was it to take care of him? - was basically the question. I told her his care had challenges, but I get help from agencies and support from doctors and school.

Then she told me that she was asking because she'd just aborted a baby because she was told it was going to be disabled; yet she insisted she did the right thing because she knew she couldn't take care of a disabled kid.

I said: "Well, you never know what you can do until you actually try!" Then I said to her: "Despite all the challenges this kid has, he is the greatest earthly blessing I have ever received. Your healthy daughter could get cancer and die. You could get into a car accident and she is in a wheelchair for the rest of her life. What then? We get no guarantees in this life!" And I turned around and walked away. I was mad!

I have a sister who had an abortion about 30 years ago now. She couldn't have kids afterwards and she NEVER got over it!

There's nothing "abstract" about abortion; and if you think there is, you're only deceiving yourself!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: StillGods
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
What’s hard to understand is your inability to grasp that a fetus is a living, growing, human being created in the image of God and possessing inherent moral worth and value.
:scratch: :scratch: :scratch:

"in the abstract"? - There's nothing "abstract" about abortion.

My son is developmentally disabled and one day when he was 5 or 6; I was rollerblading with him and he was in a special needs stroller that was obviously made for larger children. He was asleep. (He also has epilepsy.)

As we "rolled" up to the car. There was a lady in the parking lot with girl who was probably about 4? She watched me take my rollerblades off and transfer my son from the stroller into the car seat. He never woke up.

I was packing his stroller into the back when she started asking me questions about him. How hard was it to take care of him? - was basically the question. I told her his care had challenges, but I get help from agencies and support from doctors and school.

Then she told me that she was asking because she'd just aborted a baby because she was told it was going to be disabled; yet she insisted she did the right thing because she knew she couldn't take care of a disabled kid.

I said: "Well, you never know what you can do until you actually try!" Then I said to her: "Despite all the challenges this kid has, he is the greatest earthly blessing I have ever received. Your healthy daughter could get cancer and die. You could get into a car accident and she is in a wheelchair for the rest of her life. What then? We get no guarantees in this life!" And I turned around and walked away. I was mad!

I have a sister who had an abortion about 30 years ago now. She couldn't have kids afterwards and she NEVER got over it!

There's nothing "abstract" about abortion; and if you think there is, you're only deceiving yourself!

This is confusing the personal and the political. "I chose to have a disabled son, therefore all people should be forced by the state to do the same".

Me and my partner are both disabled ourselves, so please don't lecture me about disability. Ableism is the problem here, not the freedom of women to access abortion. And anti-choice Evangelicals are just as capable of being ableist and dehumanizing the disabled as anyone who is pro-choice or pro-abortion.

You really do not know other peoples struggles. Live your life as an example persuasively, but don't try to manipulate other people into seeing your point of view by using their faith against them.
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
This is confusing the personal and the political. "I chose to have a disabled son, therefore all people should be forced by the state to do the same".

Me and my partner are both disabled ourselves, so please don't lecture me about disability. Ableism is the problem here, not the freedom of women to access abortion. And anti-choice Evangelicals are just as capable of being ableist and dehumanizing the disabled as anyone who is pro-choice or pro-abortion.

You really do not know other peoples struggles. Live your life as an example persuasively, but don't try to manipulate other people into seeing your point of view by using their faith against them.

You prove my point - should we euthanize you because your disabled? Are morals relative? What if the "majority rule" decided that you are too much of a drain on the system, so we should euthanize you and your partner?

Where do you draw the line in the sand? If there's no absolute moral authority that determines what's right and wrong - no one is safe!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: StillGods
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
You prove my point - should we euthanize you because your disabled? Are morals relative? What if the "majority rule" decided that you are too much of a drain on the system, so we should euthanize you and your partner?

I'm not still living in my mother's womb. And again, I don't approve of ableism, I detest it. But many Christians don't. So perhaps he who is without sin should throw the first stone?

Morality is not relative, no. My church teaches our kids the Ten Commandments and the two great commandments of Jesus. But ethics is more complicated than legalism.

Where do you draw the line in the sand? If there's no absolute moral authority that determines what's right and wrong - no one is safe!

Morality and ethics are two different things. None of us are justified by morality, God's Law condemns us in our sins. You and I are just as sinful and unworthy of salvation as Dr. Willie Parker. Moral living justifies no one.
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I'm not still living in my mother's womb.

Morality is not relative, no. My church teaches our kids the Ten Commandments and the two great commandments of Jesus. But ethics is more complicated than legalism.

Morality and ethics are two different things. None of us are justified by morality, God's Law condemns us. You and I are just as sinful and unworthy of salvation as Dr. Willie Parker. Moral living justifies no one.

Doesn't matter where you're living! It's a question of human rights! An ethical question you are dodging with ..... the argument that everyone are sinners anyways? What does that have to do with ethics?

We all either stand on the foundation of truth, or it's a quick slide down a real steep hill.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: StillGods
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
Doesn't matter where you're living! It's a question of human rights! An ethical question you are dodging with ..... the argument that everyone are sinners anyways? What does that have to do with ethics?

I simply don't see a fetus as necessarily having equal rights with a woman. That would be Kafkaesque and risks turning the US into a country like El Salvador, a country that jails women for merely having a miscarriage. It's deeply misogynistic.

We all either stand on the foundation of truth, or it's a quick slide down a real steep hill.

Be careful about trying to justify yourself through your moral living.
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I simply don't see a fetus as having equal rights with a woman. That would be Kafkaesque and risks turning the US into a country like El Salvador, a country that jails women for merely having a miscarriage. It's deeply misogynistic.

Be careful about trying to justify yourself through your moral living.

I stand on the foundation of Scripture - not my "moral living".

Society has two choices:

1. There is a higher moral authority that declares to all of us what is ethical and what is not.

2. Society determines ethics.

Those are your only two choices. What does the Scripture say about the value of human life?

If an unborn child doesn't have the same rights as the woman who bears it; than you don't have the same rights as a non-disabled person.

If your opinion isn't of any more value than mine; it will always boil down to the guy who has the most power is always right! And like I said before; that's an awful slippery slope to go down.

So, where does the foundation of your morals and ethics stand?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

StillGods

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
1,506
2,640
North Island
✟290,958.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I stand on the foundation of Scripture - not my "moral living".

Society has two choices:

1. There is a higher moral authority that declares to all of us what is ethical and what is not.

2. Society determines ethics.

Those are your only two choices. What does the Scripture say about the value of human life?

If an unborn child doesn't have the same rights as the woman who bears it; than you don't have the same rights as a non-disabled person.

If your opinion isn't of any more value than mine; it will always boil down to the guy who has the most power is always right! And like I said before; that's an awful slippery slope to go down.

So, where does the foundation of your morals and ethics stand?

I think his morals and ethics are the society determined one, the Bible doesn't really come into it for him. until one of his kids aborts his grandchild he wont get it.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
It's the woman who is already a living, breathing human being, it is her body which will be undergoing massive changes for a nine-month period, whereas the fetus is not alive yet and feeds off the mother, so that is why the well-being and rights of the mother takes precedence over the fetus. It's not that hard to understand.
Thank you Doctor "JerseyChristianSuperstar".

"Not alive yet" :doh:

By the way... your children are going to "Feed off the Mother" and father... for at least 18 years....

This post, from a Christian... is nothing short of a blaring sign of naivety.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
This is the rhetoric of Rome on the issue. For hundreds of years, Evangelicals never thought like this. They disapproved of abortion, but they considered it more or less a private matter. It was not until the 1820's there were even laws against abortion in the US, prohibiting abortion after the 4th month of pregnancy, a stance that is consistent with English common law dating back to the middle ages.

In the early 1970's, even the Southern Baptist Convention agreed that abortion should be made legal in more states, and that the rights of women and their bodies were the most important concern. Evangelicals initially were indifferent to abortion as a political cause. It took a Catholic Republican operative, Paul Weyrich, to mobilize evangelicals against abortion. And it looks like he's been successful in corrupting many peoples understanding of Protestant ethics in the process.
And all of this of course has absolutely 100% nothing to do with the morality of abortion.

The morality of abortion is really simple at the end of the day - If the human being inside the womb is created in the image of God, then he or she possesses inherent moral worth and value. If they do, the only conclusion we can come to is that non-medical emergency driven abortions are immoral.

I don’t get how Christians of all people can think that the intentional killing of an innocent and vulnerable human being, for the sake of our convenience could ever be acceptable.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
It's just an analogy, even I could understand that. The point is that Jesus was not merely a bystander but became involved in peoples lives at his own risk. And of course, ultimately that sort of risk cost him dearly when he was condemned to the Cross: the religious authorities of the day deemed him heretical and unacceptable- because he loved and helped the wrong sort of people.

So, Christ, the son of God, "helped the wrong sort of people"...... Seriously?



Only if you assume fetal rights outweigh a woman's rights. I don't.

Tell me.... what long term danger is there to a woman when she carries a baby to term? Especially in this day and age?





This is the rhetoric of Rome on the issue. For hundreds of years, Evangelicals never thought like this. They disapproved of abortion, but they considered it more or less a private matter. It was not until the 1820's there were even laws against abortion in the US, prohibiting abortion after the 4th month of pregnancy, a stance that is consistent with English common law dating back to the middle ages.

Is that not because, before 1820's, people had enough common sense and human decency to understand that abortion was murder?

Only when society, on it's decline of moral integrity, became so decrepit that it needed a court of law to tell them that it was wrong.

In the early 1970's, even the Southern Baptist Convention agreed that abortion should be made legal in more states, and that the rights of women and their bodies were the most important concern. Evangelicals initially were indifferent to abortion as a political cause. It took a Catholic Republican operative, Paul Weyrich, to mobilize evangelicals against abortion. And it looks like he's been successful in corrupting many peoples understanding of Protestant ethics in the process.

Yes, heaven forbid that someone tell the populous that it is biblically wrong to kill a human...

How arrogant, ignorant and selfish of us, as a human race, to convince ourselves that killing a defenseless unborn child... is OK.

How far have we slid away from moral common sense.

You do realize that the next step is "Partial birth" abortions then what? Your kid has colic... keeps you up nights.... you can't sleep... lose time from work, equals that you lose money.... kid is causing you loss of time, money and health.. so... kill it?
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
I stand on the foundation of Scripture - not my "moral living".

I trust in God's grace alone, not my ability to correctly interpret the Scriptures. People are turning this into a religious-political feud when it's really much more simple than that.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
And all of this of course has absolutely 100% nothing to do with the morality of abortion.

The morality of abortion is really simple at the end of the day - If the human being inside the womb is created in the image of God, then he or she possesses inherent moral worth and value. If they do, the only conclusion we can come to is that non-medical emergency driven abortions are immoral.

I don’t get how Christians of all people can think that the intentional killing of an innocent and vulnerable human being, for the sake of our convenience could ever be acceptable.
If I could give this post a triple win... I would.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,474
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,090.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
So, Christ, the son of God, "helped the wrong sort of people"...... Seriously?

In the eyes of the elders and pharisees, yes.

Tell me.... what long term danger is there to a woman when she carries a baby to term? Especially in this day and age?

Her risk of dying from complications due to pregnancy is over 10 times the risk of an abortion. To say nothing of the actual inconvenience and distress pregnancy can cause psychologically.

Is that not because, before 1820's, people had enough common sense and human decency to understand that abortion was murder?

Protestants traditionally had a more nuanced understanding of abortion than that, recognizing degrees of gravity depending on the development of the fetus. Abortion was legal under common law in England during early stages of pregnancy.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I simply don't see a fetus as necessarily having equal rights with a woman. That would be Kafkaesque and risks turning the US into a country like El Salvador, a country that jails women for merely having a miscarriage. It's deeply misogynistic.



Be careful about trying to justify yourself through your moral living.
I just noticed.... You support the Demon-crat party... all is clear. I'm done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StillGods
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I trust in God's grace alone, not my ability to correctly interpret the Scriptures. People are turning this into a religious-political feud when it's really much more simple than that.
Well, I sure hope you interpreted Scripture correctly to understand that you can trust in God's grace! Because well... that's what you did. You apparently read in Scripture something about God's grace, and you interpreted it to mean that you could trust in it.

Her risk of dying from complications due to pregnancy is over 10 times the risk of an abortion. To say nothing of the actual inconvenience and distress pregnancy can cause psychologically.
All this does is demonstrate how good we are at killing unborn babies. We can do it quickly and safely. But again, that of course has absolutely nothing at all to do with whether or not it's moral to actually do it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Kenny'sID
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

StillGods

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2017
1,506
2,640
North Island
✟290,958.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I trust in God's grace alone, not my ability to correctly interpret the Scriptures. People are turning this into a religious-political feud when it's really much more simple than that.

Considering your interpretation of scripture is really weird and twisted its good not to trust your ability there.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.