Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Ok, lets say abortion is murder, what would you rather do?
1. Prosecute anyone involved in unnecessary abortions, which is likely millions of people.
2. Bring back to life the aborted as if they were never aborted(over 60million) and flood the foster/adoption system, which is already busting at the seems with over 400,000 kids.
To me, both options are not ideal, which is a reason why I'd rather have an option 3. where we let things continue as they have been, where early abortion is legal(not considered murder), but a last resort when all else fails.
If you had to pick 1, 2 or 3, what would it be? Or another option I'm not thinking of?
And I would agree. Further, properly understood, the theological truths contained in the bible are eternal.I would point out that there fulfilled prophesies in the bible that can be verified by history and used as evidence.
If you do not believe the bible is authoritative then is it not hypocritical to refer to it as being authoritative?Do you not hold the Bible to be authoritative in this case, even if I do not?
Please read the cited article. Living human tissue is not a human being. Do you murder another when you cut off your finger nails?So why can't we say a sperm is Human life? After all, it is alive, isn't it? It is Human, isn't it?
How's this for an option you are not thinking of:
Not 1: You can’t prosecute anyone who had abortions while they were legal
Not 2: You can’t bring back to life those aborted because it’s impossible
Not 3: Don’t continue doing as have been, that’s what they are complaining about!
But 4: Immediately make it illegal, and prosecute anyone who has abortions from now on
1. Prosecute anyone involved in a murder, which is likely millions of people. Yes.At what lesser number of murders would you decide to call murder illegal?
The question is why do you think it is not murder? Science tells us that a human being's life begins at fertilization. If abortion advocates argue that one may murder underdeveloped human beings then at what age is a human being sufficiently developed to avoid being murdered, 8 years, 12 years, 35 years?Ok, but take a look at reality, why isn’t anyone being prosecuted for what you seem to think is clearly murder?
No. It's clearly the willful killing of an innocent human being, i.e., murder.Could it be that the issue is far more nuanced and complex and not so black and white?
Probably not. But prosecuting and punishing those who participate will certainly help.One things for certain, simply accusing people of murder isn’t enough to solve the problem.
The question is why do you think it is not murder? Science tells us that a human being's life begins at fertilization. If abortion advocates argue that one may murder underdeveloped human beings then at what age is a human being sufficiently developed to avoid being murdered, 8 years, 12 years, 35 years?
If you do not believe the bible is authoritative then is it not hypocritical to refer to it as being authoritative?
So you say need abortions in order to prevent the foster/adoption system from getting too full? Is that the best case you can make for abortion? You can't do any better than that?That is a possible solution, but it still comes with the problem of an influx of possibly millions of kids(over time) who’s parents don’t want them(assuming less abortions take place), further burdening the foster/adoption system.
Please read the cited article. Living human tissue is not a human being. Do you murder another when you cut off your finger nails?
So you say need abortions in order to prevent the foster/adoption system from getting too full? Is that the best case you can make for abortion? You can't do any better than that?
If the post did not respond to me then I most likely skipped it. IVF -- the unnatural manipulation of sperm and ovum so as to be make human beings in a laboratory test tube -- is anathema. New thread needed.Did you see my post about IVF fertilizing over 70% of eggs, meaning mass murder?
The use of extraordinary means to sustain life are not morally required. There is a difference between killing and letting die. New thread needed.Which is another question I wanted to ask, when’s it ok to take someone who’s in a persistent vegetative state off life support to let them die?
Nope.By this logic, a Christian debating an atheist should be confined to using nothing but the Bible. See the problem there?
Why would anyone, let alone a Christian, do such hypocritical thing? Do you know someone who cites as authoritative that which they do not believe is true?If a Christian can use science they disagree with ...
Well, three possible conclusions: 1) didn't really read the article, 2) didn't understand the science, or 3) a science-denier.I read it. It's little more than an opinion piece. It describes no research. It's the authors writing a paper about their opinions and citing others as well
I do find it a puzzler. From your perspective they are merely in another place, happier than they ever could be alive. You should be joyous.It does not make sense that I would feel pain at the loss of a loved one?
If the post did not respond to me then I most likely skipped it. IVF -- the unnatural manipulation of sperm and ovum so as to be make human beings in a laboratory test tube -- is anathema. New thread needed.
The use of extraordinary means to sustain life are not morally required. There is a difference between killing and letting die. New thread needed.
Do you mean "murder"? No. The direct killing of an innocent human being is always and everywhere evil.But there may be cases where it’s better to kill ...
Palliative care for the terminally ill can manages much of the suffering. New thread?... and end the suffering rather than let them die naturally and suffer a long agonizing death.
Innocent is a term that varies from time to time, place to place. Remember; during NAZI Germany, all of those people who died in the Concentration camps? The monsters who killed them were innocent under the law of the land.Do you mean "murder"? No. The direct killing of an innocent human being is always and everywhere evil.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?