• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured Buttigieg Draws On Bible, Suggests Unborn Babies Can Be Aborted Up Until Their First Breath

Discussion in 'Debates on Abortion' started by redleghunter, Sep 9, 2019.

  1. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +28,625
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Buttigieg Draws On Bible, Suggests Unborn Babies Can Be Aborted Up Until Their First Breath

    Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg suggested Friday that unborn babies can be aborted up until they draw their first breath, saying parts of the Bible mention “how life begins with breath.”

    The South Bend, Indiana, mayor spoke with “The Breakfast Club” on Friday morning about his comprehensive Douglass Plan, his thoughts on whether America is ready for a gay president, and whether black voters should vote for him.


    Buttigieg discussed how the Bible talks about life beginning with breath, and suggested this would be one way to determine when life began in relation to abortion debates.

    He said Republicans hold everyone in line with doctrine about abortion.

    ” … which is obviously a tough issue for a lot of people to think through morally,” Buttigieg said. “Then again, there’s a lot of parts of the Bible that talk about how life begins with breath, and so even that is something that we can interpret differently.”


    He added that he’s pro-choice.

    “I think, no matter what you think about the kind of cosmic question of how life begins, most Americans can get on board with the idea of, alright, I might draw the line here, you might draw the line there, but the most important thing is the person who should be drawing the line is the woman making the decision,” the South Bend mayor continued.

    This is not the first time Buttigieg has spoken out about his views on abortion. He criticized pro-life Republicans on Aug. 21 at a town hall, asking what Republicans do for “unplanned parenthood.”

    “They are so busy attacking Planned Parenthood,” Buttigieg said. “I’d like to know what they think of unplanned parenthood.”


    Buttigieg also defended a woman’s right to late-term abortions at a Fox News town hall in May.

    “I think the dialogue has gotten so caught up on where you draw the line, that we’ve gotten away from the fundamental question of who gets to draw the line, and I trust women to draw the line when it’s their life,” Buttigieg told Fox News’ Chris Wallace.

    Wallace then asked if he would be “okay with a woman, well into the third trimester, deciding to abort her pregnancy.”

    “The bottom line is, as horrible as that choice is, that woman, that family, may seek spiritual guidance, they may seek medical guidance, but that decision isn’t going to be made any better, medically or morally, because the government is dictating how that decision should be made,” said Buttigieg, after asking Wallace to put himself in the shoes of the woman in that situation.

    Buttigieg’s campaign did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

    More at link: Buttigieg Draws On Bible, Suggests Unborn Babies Can Be Aborted Up Until Their First Breath
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • List
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +28,625
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    So any defenders of Mayor Pete?
     
  3. Brightmoon

    Brightmoon Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.

    +2,874
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Single
    US-Others
    Well women can’t “decide “to abort in their third trimester for one thing, that’s illegal. Third trimester abortions only happen if the mother’s life is at risk or the baby is dead. Aside from that I feel it’s not my place to tell another woman what they should do with their body. That’s up to the woman and her doctor
     
  4. ~Zao~

    ~Zao~ Great is Thy Faithfulness Supporter

    +831
    Canada
    Christian
    Private
    Is such the fast that I choose,
    a day to humble oneself?
    Is it to bow down the head like a bulrush,
    and to lie in sackcloth and ashes?
    Will you call this a fast,
    a day acceptable to the Lord?

    6 Is not this the fast that I choose:
    to loose the bonds of injustice,
    to undo the thongs of the yoke,
    to let the oppressed go free,
    and to break every yoke?
    7 Is it not to share your bread with the hungry,
    and bring the homeless poor into your house;
    when you see the naked, to cover them,
    and not to hide yourself from your own kin?
    8 Then your light shall break forth like the dawn,
    and your healing shall spring up quickly;
    your vindicator shall go before you,
    the glory of the Lord shall be your rear guard.
    9 Then you shall call, and the Lord will answer;
    you shall cry for help, and he will say, Here I am.

    If you remove the yoke from among you,
    the pointing of the finger, the speaking of evil,
    10 if you offer your food to the hungry
    and satisfy the needs of the afflicted,
    then your light shall rise in the darkness
    and your gloom be like the noonday.
    11 The Lord will guide you continually,
    and satisfy your needs in parched places,
    and make your bones strong;
    and you shall be like a watered garden,
    like a spring of water,
    whose waters never fail.
    12 Your ancient ruins shall be rebuilt;
    you shall raise up the foundations of many generations;
    you shall be called the repairer of the breach,
    the restorer of streets to live in.

    13 If you refrain from trampling the sabbath,
    from pursuing your own interests on my holy day;
    if you call the sabbath a delight
    and the holy day of the Lord honorable;
    if you honor it, not going your own ways,
    serving your own interests, or pursuing your own affairs;
    14 then you shall take delight in the Lord,
    and I will make you ride upon the heights of the earth;
    I will feed you with the heritage of your ancestor Jacob,
    for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.
     
  5. SPF

    SPF Well-Known Member

    +1,411
    United States
    Protestant
    Married
    Not surprising.
     
  6. paul1149

    paul1149 that your faith might rest in the power of God Supporter

    +3,322
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Republican
    So for the mayor, the fetus isn't alive until its lungs are used for breathing? If that's his argument, it's utterly ridiculous.

    Or if the health of the mother is at risk, including emotional health. Do a little doctor shopping, and you've got your abortion.
     
  7. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +28,625
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    That’s actually allowed in NY right now. Notice Mayor Pete did not make mention of the circumstances you mention. He indicated first breath is life.

    Which I think he got that wrong as those who adhere to the subjective first breath claim that is when we get a soul. They can’t prove that, but Pete equated that with life.

    So he was arguing from an incorrect point as biology confirms we are living human beings at conception.
     
  8. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +28,625
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    ?
     
  9. Justified Sinner

    Justified Sinner New Member

    32
    +33
    United States
    Reformed
    Married
    Huh, I didn't realize Mayor Pete was God, determining who is human and who isn't. Problem is, I don't think God is going to give up His place for a man.
     
  10. Hazelelponi

    Hazelelponi Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,676
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    If we are using the Bible, the life is in the blood..
     
  11. Brightmoon

    Brightmoon Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.

    +2,874
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Single
    US-Others
    . Actually life beginning at conception is a religious point of view it’s not a biological one . Miscarriages happen because the fetus isn’t viable or it affects the mother so badly that she can’t support the pregnancy. Biologists actually don’t have a view about this. My understanding is that Medical doctors use viability outside of the mother as the criteria they use for abortions . That’s the reason that doctor who deliberately killed aborted near term babies went to jail. He deliberately killed babies who could have lived with medical intervention.
     
  12. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +28,625
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    No it's scientific fact. Human life begins at conception:

    WHEN DO HUMAN BEINGS BEGIN?

    "SCIENTIFIC" MYTHS AND SCIENTIFIC FACTS

    Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.


    The question as to when the physical material dimension of a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and fundamentally should be answered by human embryologists�not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists. The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question. Current discussions on abortion, human embryo research (including cloning, stem cell research, and the formation of mixed-species chimeras), and the use of abortifacients involve specific claims as to when the life of every human being begins. If the "science" used to ground these various discussions is incorrect, then any conclusions will be rendered groundless and invalid. The purpose of this article is to focus primarily on a sampling of the "scientific" myths, and on the objective scientific facts that ought to ground these discussions. At least it will clarify what the actual international consensus of human embryologists is with regard to this relatively simple scientific question. In the final section, I will also address some "scientific" myths that have caused much confusion within the philosophical discussions on "personhood."

    II. When does a human being begin?

    Getting a handle on just a few basic human embryological terms accurately can considerably clarify the drastic difference between the "scientific" myths that are currently circulating, and the actual objective scientific facts. This would include such basic terms as: "gametogenesis," "oogenesis," "spermatogenesis," "fertilization," "zygote," "embryo," and "blastocyst." Only brief scientific descriptions will be given here for these terms. Further, more complicated, details can be obtained by investigating any well-established human embryology textbook in the library, such as some of those referenced below. Please note that the scientific facts presented here are not simply a matter of my own opinion. They are direct quotes and references from some of the most highly respected human embryology textbooks, and represent a consensus of human embryologists internationally.



    A. Basic human embryological facts


    To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization�the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte�usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.

    When Do Human Beings Begin?


    A zygote [fertilized egg] is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.

    Keith L. Moore’s The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (7th edition, Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003)

    http://www.textbookrush.com/browse/...calinventory&gclid=CJGkm7nNncoCFQqpaQodVZINSA


    The French geneticist Jerome L. LeJeune has stated:

    To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. The human nature of the human being from conception to old age is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” [The Human Life Bill: Hearings on S. 158 Before the Subcommittee on Separation of Powers of the Senate Judiciary Committee, 97th Congress, 1st Session (1981). See Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics: Options and Issues (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1989), p. 149 also Francis J. Beckwith,Politically Correct Death: Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993), p. 42.] (Emphases mine – VJT.)

    Dr. Hymie Gordon, professor of medical genetics and Mayo Clinic physician stated:

    “I think we can now also say that the question of the beginning of life – when life begins – is no longer a question for theological or philosophical dispute. It is an established scientific fact. Theologians and philosophers may go on to debate the meaning of life or purpose of life, but it is an established fact that all life, including human life, begins at the moment of conception.” [The Human Life Bill – S. 158, Report 9, see Francis J. Beckwith, Politically Correct Death: Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993), p. 42.] (Emphases mine – VJT.)

    To cite just a few examples, the American Heritage Science Dictionary defines “conception” as “the formation of a zygote resulting from the union of a sperm and egg cell; fertilization.” (For reference, a zygote is the first stage of a human embryo.)

    Likewise, the entry for “life” in the American Heritage Dictionary of Science states that life is “the form of existence that organisms like animals and plants have and that inorganic objects or organic dead bodies lack; animate existence, characterized by growth, reproduction, metabolism, and response to stimuli.”

    [The] statement that “human life begins at conception” is consistent with both of these definitions, because human zygotes display all four empirical attributes of life:


    1. Growth – As explained in the textbook Essentials of Human Development: A Life-Span View, “the zygote grows rapidly through cell division.”
    1. Reproduction – Per Human Sexuality: An Encyclopedia, zygotes sometimes form identical twins, which is an act of “asexual reproduction.” (Also, in this context, the word “reproduction” is more accurately understood as “reproductive potential” instead of “active reproduction.” For example, three-year-old humans are manifestly alive, but they can’t actively reproduce.)
    1. Metabolism – As detailed in the medical text Human Gametes and Preimplantation Embryos: Assessment and Diagnosis, “At the zygote stage,” the human embryo metabolizes “carboxylic acids pyruvate and lactate as its preferred energy substrates.”
    1. Response to stimuli – Collins English Dictionary defines a “stimulus” as “any drug, agent, electrical impulse, or other factor able to cause a response in an organism.” Experiments have shown that zygotes are responsive to such factors. For example, a 2005 paper in the journal Human Reproduction Update notes that a compound called platelet-activating factor “acts upon the zygote” by stimulating “metabolism,” “cell-cycle progression,” and “viability.”
    Furthermore, the science of embryology has proven that the genetic composition of humans is formed during fertilization, and as the textbook Molecular Biology explains, this genetic material is “the very basis of life itself.”

    In accord with the facts above, the textbook Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects directly states: “The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.” This may be controversial from a political perspective, but the sciences of embryology and genetics leave no doubt as to when human life begins.

    The science of abortion: When does life begin? - Just Facts


    Peer reviewed studies:

    A new human organism begins to exist when the process of fertilization is successfully completed.

    1. Life Begins at Fertilization – Peer Reviewed Scientific Sources
     
  13. SPF

    SPF Well-Known Member

    +1,411
    United States
    Protestant
    Married
    You've briefly popped in at other abortion discussions, made these mis-statements and then left, so I don't expect much more here. But for everyone else reading, Brightmoon is completely wrong on this.

    Science has actually done us a great favor in that it is now essentially settled science that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization.

    “Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

    “Fertilization – the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism – is the culmination of a multitude of intricately regulated cellular processes.” Marcello et al., Fertilization, ADV. EXP. BIOL. 757:321 (2013)

    “Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).” Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

    “In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.” Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974

    “It should always be remembered that many organs are still not completely developed by full-term and birth should be regarded only as an incident in the whole developmental process.” F Beck Human Embryology, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1985 page vi

    “It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.” Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

    The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.” Keith L. Moore & T.V.N. Persaud Before We Are Born – Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects (W.B. Saunders Company, 1998. Fifth edition.) Page 500

    “Thus a new cell is formed from the union of a male and a female gamete. [sperm and egg cells] The cell, referred to as the zygote, contains a new combination of genetic material, resulting in an individual different from either parent and from anyone else in the world.” Sally B Olds, et al., Obstetric Nursing (Menlo Park, California: Addison – Wesley publishing, 1980) P 136

    “[All] organisms, however large and complex they might be as full grown, begin life as a single cell. This is true for the human being, for instance, who begins life as a fertilized ovum.”Dr. Morris Krieger “The Human Reproductive System” p 88 (1969) Sterling Pub. Co
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  14. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +20,891
    Anglican
    Married
    I can't help but wonder if Mayor Pete thinks that his too-obvious references to his Christianity are going to impress most voters when he starts in with his defense of infanticide and a few other jaw-dropping notions. Democrats who are not religious wouldn't seem to care or would be put off by it, while Christians who share his religious views are very few.
     
  15. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +28,625
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    As I posited in another thread, Mayor Pete is using the Bible to get across the usual social justice message. He quotes all the Kingdom of God quotes and applies it to liberal socialism. So nothing new there, but he is truly, out of all the Democrat candidates, taking up that mantle.

    I'm wondering when he's done with "Pete's sermon on the value signaling" if he flips his Bible to Mark 7 and how he address the following:

    Mark 7: NASB

    20And He was saying, “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. 21“For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23“All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”
     
  16. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +20,891
    Anglican
    Married
    Sure, but it seems to me that he is preaching to a very small choir of liberal Christians, certainly not enough to win him the nomination.
     
  17. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +28,625
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    He's trying to corner the market of liberal Christians IMHO.
     
  18. Yekcidmij

    Yekcidmij Polymath

    +931
    United States
    Calvinist
    Married
    US-Others
    It's actually a philosophical and ontological question too, not just a religious one.

    Even though trying to determine "when life begins" is important and very relevant, it's probably not even required for a pro-life, moral argument to succeed.

    (1) The first problems that both sides have to avoid when figuring out determination of life is the charge of arbitrariness. The charge is a two way street. The pro-choicer must answer to why human life begins at the moment of birth or [fill in the moment of beginning of life here], and will have to answer the question, why not life at this other point or that point? Why not 6 months and one day? Why not birth plus or minus 5 seconds?

    But the pro-lifer doesn't get to avoid the question since the "moment of conception" is itself a biological process consisting of many different moments. At which moment in the conception process is there a division between human life and non-human life? And why this point and not this other point or that point? Is it ok to end this process prior to the human-life-moment?

    There is a possibility to claim that life begins in the process itself and not at any particular moment in the process, but I will put this possibility aside for the moment.

    Neither of these answers are easy and any will likely be victim to a charge of arbitrariness. But it seems that the pro-lifer has an advantage here as the pro-lifer's default position is one of risk avoidance. The pro-lifer's simple premises are to preserve and flourish human life and that all humans have a right to life. In the case where you can't be precisely certain when human life begins, then default to the the less risky position of not-conducting the abortion. After all, why even risk the chance the chance that you could be killing another human and so unjustly deny their right to life through murder?

    It seems the pro-choicer accepts this risk, which I think may entail that some people have different degrees of a right to life than other people. The newly formed human, whenever exactly that may be, is exposed to a degree of risk of death by the pro-choicer that they would not expose for some older, age-appropriate humans.

    So the pro-lifer seems to have an advantageous moral position of risk avoidance while the pro-choicer seems to differentiate to what degree they would intentionally expose another human to death.

    (2) Trying to determine the moment where life begins (if indeed it is a moment rather than a process in itself) also simply shifts the moral question. In the event that the biological life in question isn't human, but would be one day in the future ceteris peribus, then how does it, as if by magic, become more morally acceptable to deny this biological life the right to human life that it will have in the near future? What ethical standard allows this determination?

    Again though, the pro-lifer has an advantage of risk avoidance. The pro-lifer doesn't need to assume that they have a moral right to deny the right to life to anyone to whom it will be granted in due course. In fact, the pro-lifer may admit that they don't have such a moral right.

    So this isn't an issue you can say "is a religious question" in an effort to avoid the philosophical problems you have to address as well. Nor will you be able to declare it a "religious issue" by which you really infer that it's just a private opinion. Killing other [potential] humans is never a private opinion as it involves the life of someone else.

    ...so not human caused, intentional abortions? Right?
     
  19. Brightmoon

    Brightmoon Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.

    +2,874
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Single
    US-Others
    70137950-586F-4453-A46A-C0661C5D038E.jpeg I decided to get my information from a real ob/gyn who actually does deal with this issue and has for over a decade . I’ll let her explain the criteria used . This is a photo I can’t link to her blog because of issues with my phone
     
  20. SPF

    SPF Well-Known Member

    +1,411
    United States
    Protestant
    Married
    And as expected, Brightmoon is not engaging with any of the material presented to her. Also, the website you are directing people to does not have any obvious links to a discussion regarding when human life begins, so I'm not sure why you are directing people to her site.

    How do you deal with the plethora of credible citations from medical and biological textbooks that make it clear that biologically we know at this point that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization?
     
Loading...