Abortion Pill & Morning After Pill Contraception

[SPF]

No, it is not a baby or toddler.

A baby and a toddler are just labels denoting the different stages of human development. Human development takes about 25 years, beginning at fertilization. Yet at no point during our 25 year development are we anything other than a human being.

 

[SPF]

Don’t tell me that is somehow moral on you part to force a rape victim to carry a fetus to term against her will

I think killing an unborn human being for any reason outside a life-threatening medical emergency is immoral, yes. Absolutely.

There are two victims when a woman is raped and becomes pregnant - The woman, and the unwanted baby. But the morally appropriate answer to the situation is never going to be to kill one of the victims.

As to your attack on my education, I will match my two masters and one doctorate against anything that you have earned.

Well, I have an undergrad and two masters, though I never made it to the doctorate as I had a vocation change. Now I just have a bunch of silly letters after my name like CFP®, CLU, CLTC, and CKA®. However, I would trade all those in for a doctorate, so yea, you got me on that.

Unfortunately though your education didn't help much in terms of recognizing the fallacy you keep committing by asserting that a person's gender determines whether or not they can discuss morality.

 

[SPF]

Is it wrong for a woman to try to resist and prevent a rape?

No.

If it becomes clear to the woman it is impossible to resist, would it be immoral, a wrong, to try to convince the rapist to wear a condom?

No.

A condom is contraception of course.

Yes.

To me, the clear moral answer is that it is perfectly moral for a woman to try to prevent a pregnancy from rape

I agree.

Do you agree our bodies are God's design?

Yes, although subject to the fall and sin entering the world.

Pregnancy seems to only begin after a still living fertilized egg implants successfully in the uterus.

Yes, but prior to the successful implantation there is an already existing living and growing human being.

Many fertilized eggs do not implant -- naturally fail -- by the nature of our bodies, which is God's design.

Many fertilized eggs do not implant, but I wouldn't say that was God's design. I would say it's probably one of the results of the fall and sin entering the world.

 

[GodLovesCats]

There are no obvious parallels, and the argument is a strained fallacy of false equivalency.

Slaves were humans and the unborn were fetuses.

Fetuses are humans too. There is no reason to go crazy over that term unless you want to say infants are not huamns either. Fetus one minute, infant the next, same baby.

 

[Halbhh]

No.

No.

Yes.

I agree.

Yes, although subject to the fall and sin entering the world.

Yes, but prior to the successful implantation there is an already existing living and growing human being.

Many fertilized eggs do not implant, but I wouldn't say that was God's design. I would say it's probably one of the results of the fall and sin entering the world.

Ok, I see the consistency in your view.

It's then to when the God-given spirit is put in the developing human body -- since it has to be at some moment in time, as an individual's spirit seems by scripture to already exist before it is given by God into that developing human body:

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart and appointed you a prophet to the nations."
and
Ecclesiastes 12:7 before the dust returns to the ground from which it came, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.


So, the individual spirit already existing, already known by God before the physical body is formed in the womb, then placed in the developing human body at some moment.

When though?

Here are 4 moments that come to mind as possibilities:

Fertilization (I think unlikely due to the reasons above previously, about the many nonviable fertilized eggs God knows will die shortly -- that it seems He would not choose to put a spirit in a nonviable (soon to die) fertilized egg)

Implantation of a viable embryo (7-14 days later)

Or, when the woman suddenly feels in a subtle, deep way something (not the same as the testing or thinking or merely noticing the period is late) that she is pregnant

Or, finally the moment of first true consciousness, which would require we can think both neurons and possibly spirit together (possibly as early as 11 or 12 weeks, but possibly later such as when able to respond to music).

After all, if the body hosts the spirit, and the spirit leaves as consciousness dies....then....logically, the spirit is associated to consciousness. Then it would be plausibly associated to the body through consciousness, thus through neurons, so not associated before neurons.

 

[JacobKStarkey]

A baby and a toddler are just labels denoting the different stages of human development. Human development takes about 25 years, beginning at fertilization. Yet at no point during our 25 year development are we anything other than a human being.

At every point of development, it is always divided between fetus and child. Yes, they are different, and God knows that.

 

[His student]

But only men voted for the abortion law in the Senate. The women involved were just trying to prevent men from voting for it. The article I posted claims there are only 6 women total - not just 6 women who voted for it - so there was very little female lawmaker involvement.

OK - But who's fault is that? Women can run for office also and women outnumber men in most states in the U.S.

 

[~Zao~]

[QUOTE="Halbhh, post: 73969972, member: 375234”]...
When does God put a spirit into the body? For those guessing it's at fertilizing of the egg, [/QUOTE]


Scripture please. Where does God tell us that? Scripturally contraceptive from the sperm not reaching the egg was punishable by death so I really don’t get the fuss of gender related discrimination.

8 Then Judah said to Onan, Go in to thy brother's wife, and fulfil to her the brother-in-law's duty, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 But when Onan knew that the seed should not be his own, it came to pass when he went in to his brother's wife, that he spilled [it] on the ground, in order to give no seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and he slew him also.

 

[JacobKStarkey]

Fetuses are humans too. There is no reason to go crazy over that term unless you want to say infants are not huamns either. Fetus one minute, infant the next, same baby.

No, they are unborn fetuses not yet birthed breathing humans.

 

[SPF]

At every point of development, it is always divided between fetus and child. Yes, they are different, and God knows that.

They are different in terms of their development. Zygote --> Embryo --> Fetus --> Newborn --> Infant --> Toddler --> Child --> Adolescent --> Teenager --> Young Adult --> Adult

Different stages, yet at all times still a human being created in the image of God and possessing inherent moral worth and value.

 

[His student]

No, they are unborn fetuses not yet birthed breathing humans.

Since you list yourself as a Methodist Christian - I'd like to ask you - In which trimester do you believe that Jesus became fully human?

Was it late term? Was it when it was determined that He would not be born with birth defects? Was it at birth? Or was it perhaps when some Bethlehem Planned Parenthood worker took pity on Him lying on a cold table breathing His last after a botched abortion, wrapped Him in swaddling clothes and handed Him to Mary?

Anyone who can't figure out when human life starts from what the scriptures say might as well turn in his or her Bible. They obviously aren't hearing from the Holy Spirit, it's author, who is given to all born again Christians to lead them into truth.

 

[SPF]

So, the individual spirit already existing, already known by God before the physical body is formed in the womb, then placed in the developing human body at some moment.

I think this is the heart of where we disagree. I believe Jeremiah 1:5 is an acknowledgment of God's foreknowledge. It doesn't necessarily mean that I existed before I had a body. The Ecclesiastes reference is simply saying that when I die my spirit lives on. There's nothing in that passage about my spirit existing prior to my physical form.

My position has essentially been that as humans we are both physical and spiritual in nature. It's how God created us, and it's how we will exist after Christ returns and sets all things right.

Thanks to modern biology, we know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization. For me, the default position then is that at fertilization we are a full human being, created in the image of God and possessing inherent moral worth and value.

David said in the Psalms that he was sinful from conception. He already had his sinful nature at conception. That's more than just physical.

 

[JacobKStarkey]

We, of course, all believe as we do, based on our relationship with God and our understanding of His guidance to each of us.

 

[Halbhh]

Scripture please. Where does God tell us that? Scripturally contraceptive from the sperm not reaching the egg was punishable by death so I really don’t get the fuss of gender related discrimination.

For the post you quoted from -- the post asking when the spirit is placed in the body -- the scriptures it used about the spirit being from God, and returning to God, are in that very same post there you replied to.

Please let me know the scriptures you are using though to say contraception is sin. The quote shows a refusal to treat his brother's widow as a wife and fulfill basic duty to provide her a heir to his deceased brother. That's not strictly about contraception.

Suppose he had instead given her a heir, and even several, and then stopped, so at that later time doing a form of contraception.... See? It's not about the contraception it seems.

 

[~Zao~]

For the post you quoted from -- the post asking when the spirit is placed in the body -- the scriptures it used about the spirit being from God, and returning to God, are in that very same post there you replied to.

Please let me know the scriptures you are using though to say contraception is sin. The quote shows a refusal to treat his brother's widow as a true wife. That's not strictly about contraception.

Suppose he had instead given her a heir, and even several, and then stopped.... See? It's not about the contraception it seems.

The verse shows not wanting to share the inheritance. God’s stipulations are always more about not using what is lawful for anything but the intended purpose. Brass tacks and all that. But I’ll check that post again for the quote you are using. Can you give me the post number again

 

[Halbhh]

There's nothing in that passage about my spirit existing prior to my physical form.

Ok, but if you believe in total foreknowledge...don't you then believe we were individually chosen in Christ before the world.... (Ephesians 1:4)? I'm not saying you have to believe that a very certain specific way (or that you do), but just wondering. To me, it's a different sense of meaning, that all the Body of Christ was chosen, all who would believe in Him. It is interesting this comes down to precisely the quality of what omniscience and free will are (and 'predestined', the question of foreknowledge, all the different sides of this same question).

 

[SPF]

Ok, but if you believe in total foreknowledge...don't you then believe we were individually chosen in Christ before the world.... (Ephesians 1:4)? I'm not saying you have to believe that a very certain specific way (or that you do), but just wondering. To me, it's a different sense of meaning, that all the Body of Christ was chosen, all who would believe in Him. It is interesting this comes down to precisely the quality of what omniscience and free will are (and 'predestined', the question of foreknowledge, all the different sides of this same question).

Well I certainly don't think we want to derail this all the way into a discussion over predestination, do we?

I would say that God is by definition a Maximally Great Being. I think one of the attributes associated with that would necessarily be omniscience. On a side note (this entire conversation has become a side note), I agree with Jonathan Edwards who said that at any given time we always act according to our greatest inclination.

Tying this back to abortion, I don't see anything in Scripture that would lead me to believe there ever exists a human being without a soul. And since biologically we know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization, I just think the logical landing place for when a human "gets" his soul is at fertilization, simultaneous with his physical being coming into existence.

 

[Halbhh]

Well I certainly don't think we want to derail this all the way into a discussion over predestination, do we?

I would say that God is by definition a Maximally Great Being. I think one of the attributes associated with that would necessarily be omniscience. On a side note (this entire conversation has become a side note), I agree with Jonathan Edwards who said that at any given time we always act according to our greatest inclination.

Tying this back to abortion, I don't see anything in Scripture that would lead me to believe there ever exists a human being without a soul. And since biologically we know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization, I just think the logical landing place for when a human "gets" his soul is at fertilization, simultaneous with his physical being coming into existence.

Ok, well, it's a lot to think about, but basically I believe God already knows our spirits before He places them in our developing bodies in the womb. And that view arose out of the 2 verses above and some other things in the Bible, quite a long while back, but only very recently did I realize it also has an implication about such things as contraception or a morning after pill that prevents pregnancy. If God puts our spirits in viable developing bodies as I think fits the scriptures, then contraception has no effect on that action. He will put that individual spirit in a body, as He chooses, and our actions will not prevent it at all then, see.

 

[JacobKStarkey]

@Halbhh, I think that explains Mormon theology on this subject very well.

If the fetus fails to be birthed, then the soul will be placed in another fetus.

 

[GodLovesCats]

No, they are unborn fetuses not yet birthed breathing humans.

They are human, just not born breathing humans. SPF is right on this one.