Shocked at the S.A. stand on abortion

[Amisk]

A Salvation Army Friend of mine recently gave me a copy of the teaching for membership in our corp. I had been considering becoming a soldier. In fact I have always had a lot of admiration for the Army, and desired to become a soldier when I first began attending.

I was shocked to read in the teaching for membership that the Salvation Army supports abortion in some cases, namely rape, incest and I think there was a couple more instantaneous. Support? I nearly fell off my chair when I read it in the membership book that I had been given. Tonite a lady phoned me and as we talked about things relating to abortion in Canada she bought up the issue of the Salvation Army's stand on abortion.

She went on to say that many of the Salvation Army folks she talked to didn't even realize that the Army was backing abortion. In fact she told me that she had copied the page from the book and was showing it to them. Many like me expressed shock and disbelief.

Prior to reading it for myself I would have thought that she was lying.

While I feel sorry for the girl caught in a rape or incest situration, two wrongs never make a right. Abortion is murder whether it is performed on a girl who wilfully entered into the sex act that got her pregnant or it was forced upon her. In either case you are still killing a human being. There is no scripture that changes that.

Yes, the victim goes through a rough time because of the rape or incest but abortion only adds another emotional drama to her life.

Also the membership book (I call it that for lack of a proper name) warned that the Army takes a strong stand against the use of alcohol. Yet one of the soldiers, who play occasional in the band sometimes wears a brewery companies jacket when you see him on the street. I believe that the powers that be know that he wears the jacket. Recently while in conversation with him, he made it plan that he supports the use of alcohol.

I hear other soldiers talking as if they would really like to have a drink of booze but are scared they might loose their uniform if they do. My thought on it is that, if that is the only reason you don't drink then you might as well and go ahead and have one, because if lusting after sex is wrong then lusting after any other sin is little different.

While I may continue to attend the corp at least for a while, I am debating whether I can support the Army with my tithe. I feel bad because they do so much in other areas of working with the needy.

I guess I was shocked at all this from an organization that came out of the Holiness Movement. An organization which so many people around the world look up to.

This is really my first real involvement with the Salvation Army, and there are so many good things about the Army. Want I need to know, is this common fair in the Salvation Army coast to coast? Does this behaviour come out HQ?

 

[InTheFlame]

Now hang on a moment!

Let's have a look at the positional statement:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It accepts that termination of a pregnancy may be justified on certain limited grounds; that is, where, in the judgement of competent medical and allied staff, the pregnancy poses a serious threat to the life of the mother, or could result in irreversible physical injury to the mother. In cases of proven rape or legally defined incest an abortion may be justified because of the extent to which rape and incest violate the whole person. Termination of a pregnancy may also be justified where reliable diagnostic procedures determine that a foetal abnormality is present which is incompatible with life other than brief post-natal survival or where there is total absence of cognitive function.
Source

That is not SUPPORT of abortion. That is not BACKING. That is acceptance that in some cases, unbiased medical opinion will decide that continuation of a pregnancy will be highly harmful to the mother.

If you've got a different positional statement, please let me know.
[/FONT]

 

[sreno7]

that works for me.

 

[Amisk]

Now hang on a moment!

Let's have a look at the positional statement:
"It accepts that termination of a pregnancy may be justified on certain limited grounds; that is, where, in the judgement of competent medical and allied staff, the pregnancy poses a serious threat to the life of the mother, or could result in irreversible physical injury to the mother. In cases of proven rape or legally defined incest an abortion may be justified because of the extent to which rape and incest violate the whole person. Termination of a pregnancy may also be justified where reliable diagnostic procedures determine that a foetal abnormality is present which is incompatible with life other than brief post-natal survival or where there is total absence of cognitive function."

That is not SUPPORT of abortion. That is not BACKING. That is acceptance that in some cases, unbiased medical opinion will decide that continuation of a pregnancy will be highly harmful to the mother.

If you've got a different positional statement, please let me know.
[/FONT]

It sounds like agreeing with abortion to me. I'll give you the old adage of the mother's life verses the child's. Statistics tell us that in our modern age of medicine this decision would be seldom required.

However the S.A. moves into questionable areas with the idea that it is (might be) okay in other areas such as "rape or legally defined incest". Abortion then becomes the murder of a child.

I would allow that any girl who goes through either of these traumas, at any point in her life, has scars that will be hard to live with. Why add another to her already mental torment? It is a record fact that abortion does just that.

Once you move into the shady area that the S.A. has on this issue you are justifying murder of the unborn. After all a child's life begins at conception and anything that disrupts that life before natural is murder. If the girl involved here feels she can not live with the child, then she has a legal right to put him or her up for adoption and give him or her the same right to life that she received.

 

[Andy Broadley]

It sounds like agreeing with abortion to me. I'll give you the old adage of the mother's life verses the child's. Statistics tell us that in our modern age of medicine this decision would be seldom required.

However the S.A. moves into questionable areas with the idea that it is (might be) okay in other areas such as "rape or legally defined incest". Abortion then becomes the murder of a child.

I would allow that any girl who goes through either of these traumas, at any point in her life, has scars that will be hard to live with. Why add another to her already mental torment? It is a record fact that abortion does just that.

Once you move into the shady area that the S.A. has on this issue you are justifying murder of the unborn. After all a child's life begins at conception and anything that disrupts that life before natural is murder. If the girl involved here feels she can not live with the child, then she has a legal right to put him or her up for adoption and give him or her the same right to life that she received.

I agree with ITF on this. The Army does not support abortion, and I would never be part of an Army that did. It recognises that in certain circumstances, it has to be.

As Amisk said though, modern medical science means that the situations where the motheres life would be at risk if the pregnancy continued are very few and far between. So the number of situations where the Army would acknowladge the need for abortion is going to be very small.

As for Amisk's sweeping statements about rape and incest, I would caution him about making statements on circumstances that he (or I) can ever begin to understand.

Neither of us will ever be able to comprehend what is like to be raped or molested by a family member we trusted, so we can never be in a position to make judgements on 'mental scars' caused by the termination of a pregnacy.

EVERY abortion is a tragedy, as is every situation that leads to one. Far too many people these days use abortion as a get-out-of-jail-free card, and the Army is right up there in making a stance about this.

But Amisks posts leave one key word out that is central to Army teaching.

Compassion.

 

[sreno7]

AMEN to that one Andy. that is one word I see missing from many conversations on this topic. Where is compassion in forcing a child to carry a baby for nine months (at the possible risk to her life or health) to constantly remind her of rape or incest. I am glad that I am not the one who has to make those hard decisons and would hope that would all be there to pick up the pieces no matter what decision is made.

 

[Amisk]

I agree with ITF on this. The Army does not support abortion, and I would never be part of an Army that did. It recognizes that in certain circumstances, it has to be.

As Amisk said though, modern medical science means that the situations where the motheres life would be at risk if the pregnancy continued are very few and far between. So the number of situations where the Army would acknowledge the need for abortion is going to be very small.

As for Amisk's sweeping statements about rape and incest, I would caution him about making statements on circumstances that he (or I) can ever begin to understand.

Neither of us will ever be able to comprehend what is like to be raped or molested by a family member we trusted, so we can never be in a position to make judgements on 'mental scars' caused by the termination of a pregnancy.

EVERY abortion is a tragedy, as is every situation that leads to one. Far too many people these days use abortion as a get-out-of-jail-free card, and the Army is right up there in making a stance about this.

But Amisk's posts leave one key word out that is central to Army teaching.

Compassion.

In answer to your statements: "The Army does not support abortion, and I would never be part of an Army that did. It recognizes that in certain circumstances, it has to be."
Where in scripture do we find that God suggested it might be right to take the life of an innocent person?

I hadn't notice that, Ex 20:13 had changed or had qualifications added for those who have been raped or had met with incest.

You are ready to excuse the Army by saying "It recognizes that in certain circumstances, it has to be."

Where then is the scriptural grounds to abort the Innocent?

"As for Amisk's sweeping statements about rape and incest, I would caution him about making statements on circumstances that he (or I) can never begin to understand.

Neither of us will ever be able to comprehend what is like to be raped or molested by a family member we trusted, so we can never be in a position to make judgements on 'mental scars' caused by the termination of a pregnancy."

May I suggest that I am not making sweeping statements. I realize that I will never be a lady to find myself in this situration. Neither you nor I will be the baby that was killed either. Nor, I will likely never be the murderer either but that doesn't mean that I should have the right to change the scripture because I feel sorry for the killer.

I am fully aware that the lady in this situation goes through great stress in her life time, however it is also medically proven that a girl who has an abortion goes through guilt for the rest of her life over the abortion. Many girls have testified to the fact that the child's would have been birth date, and the date of his terminated death often troubles them. Many according to medically documented stats. tell of girls who have had mental problems after the abortion, and in some cases are haunted by the child they aborted.

These are not sweeping statements. Check these facts with your local Pro Life group. Check them with Jim Dobson and others who are far more knowledgeable than myself in this matter.

You talk about "Compassion".

It brings us to another point. I agree compassion is need for the lady involved. Still where is your compassion for the child who was mercilessly ripped in piece from his mother"s womb? That too is heart breaking. I remind you again that two wrongs never make a right.

 

[Andy Broadley]

In answer to your statements: "The Army does not support abortion, and I would never be part of an Army that did. It recognizes that in certain circumstances, it has to be."
Where in scripture do we find that God suggested it might be right to take the life of an innocent person?

Go have a read of many of the early OT books and see the genocide and ethinic cleansing that the Isrealites carried out in Canaan. They slaughtered tens of thousands in cold blood. None of these were innocent?

I hadn't notice that, Ex 20:13 had changed or had qualifications added for those who have been raped or had met with incest.

Very easy to quote that verse and ignore the dozens of others that outline the various circumstances for which the death penalty must be applied. Is that any less murder than abortion?

You are ready to excuse the Army by saying "It recognizes that in certain circumstances, it has to be."

Incorrect. I stated that there are some circumstances where compassion for the woman means that an abortion may ben the final and only resort.

Where then is the scriptural grounds to abort the Innocent?

I'm afraid you are getting into the territory here of wanting to have your cake and eat it. While the Bible does not mention abortion (the process had not been developed at that time), it does state that rapists and child molestors should be put to death.

By quoting Exodus 20:13, I assume you are opposed to this.

We could discuss at some length various practices which do not have direct Biblical support yet are accepted and suported by the Army. Ordination of women being one which springs to mind. Many of the best of Gods soldiers are women, yet there is no suport in scripture for it.

"As for Amisk's sweeping statements about rape and incest, I would caution him about making statements on circumstances that he (or I) can never begin to understand.

Neither of us will ever be able to comprehend what is like to be raped or molested by a family member we trusted, so we can never be in a position to make judgements on 'mental scars' caused by the termination of a pregnancy."

May I suggest that I am not making sweeping statements. I realize that I will never be a lady to find myself in this situration. Neither you nor I will be the baby that was killed either. Nor, I will likely never be the murderer either but that doesn't mean that I should have the right to change the scripture because I feel sorry for the killer

By showing compassion for the woman in supporting her in a tragic siuation we do not change scripture, we uphold it.

This is entirely in line with Jesus' teachings on love, compassion and mercy.

I am fully aware that the lady in this situation goes through great stress in her life time, however it is also medically proven that a girl who has an abortion goes through guilt for the rest of her life over the abortion. Many girls have testified to the fact that the child's would have been birth date, and the date of his terminated death often troubles them. Many according to medically documented stats. tell of girls who have had mental problems after the abortion, and in some cases are haunted by the child they aborted.

Sources please. I would be interested to see the research and documented facts of which you speak.

You talk about "Compassion".

It brings us to another point. I agree compassion is need for the lady involved. Still where is your compassion for the child who was mercilessly ripped in piece from his mother"s womb? That too is heart breaking. I remind you again that two wrongs never make a right

And where is your compassion for the young girl forced into this situation through no fault of her own?

 

[sreno7]

wow, I am glad you are here Andy, that is what I would like to say., but would not have had the words.

 

[Andy Broadley]

wow, I am glad you are here Andy, that is what I would like to say., but would not have had the words.

Thank you

 

[InTheFlame]

I am NOT in support of a general 'abortion is OK in the case of rape or incest' ruling. And I think it's important to note that the positional statement does not say that, either. I have seen cases where a woman raped or abused is actually likely to die because of the extra physical and emotional strain of pregnancy - not necessarily for physical reasons, often mental... the woman's mind was at breaking point already. And yes, I'm fully aware of the physical and emotional strains of pregnancy, being pregnant right now (in good circumstances) and having been pregnant before (in bad circumstances - for the record, no, I didn't have an abortion).

I don't see why the SA making allowances for a few extreme situations is so terrible or shocking. Seems sensible to me. I'm sure anyone trying to justify an abortion based on that positional statement would be in for some serious questioning!

 

[Amisk]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Amisk: I hope that I have made this easier to read by re-editing it. Sorry for the inconvenience.




Andy: Go have a read of many of the early OT books and see the genocide and ethnic cleansing that the Israelites carried out in Canaan. They slaughtered tens of thousands in cold blood. None of these were innocent?




Amisk: As for why God ordered the Israelites to carry out the killing that He did will have to be left for God justify.

There are a number of reason that I have heard ministers give in the defense of God’s action here, such as the wickedness of the nations removed, the disease that their sin had introduced into the inhabitants of the Canaan nations that Israel was to slaughter. As so often happens in scripture, God tells us what he expects of us, while on the other hand he does not elaborate on his own actions. All I know is that in this world of shoulder to shoulder people, the innocent suffer many times for the guilt of the nation or the denomination. The rest I have to leave to God, remembering that He expects me to live as He directs in His Word. I believe it was Mark Twain that put it, "It’s not the parts of the Bible that I don’t understand that troubles me, it is the parts that I do understand."


Andy: Very easy to quote that verse and ignore the dozens of others that outline the various circumstances for which the death penalty must be applied. Is that any less murder than abortion?


Amisk: I also note that the Army are instructed that the death penalty is wrong when it applies to obeying God’s instruction to put those guilty of murder, rape, and so on to death. If the death penalty is wrong then why does it now become correct to put to death the little child who has not yet sinned. Or as Ben Delmorez put it, "In Canada it is okay to kill a child by abortion who has neither sinned, nor broken the law, while it is illegal to hang a man or woman who has committed the grossest of crimes against society."

The truth of the matter is the death penalty for crime is a God given command while the abortion and death of the innocent child places the killer in condemnation by the verse you want to ridicule in order to back what the Salvation Army is teaching.

You are ready to excuse the Army by saying "It recognizes that in certain circumstances, it has to be."

Andy: Incorrect. I stated that there are some circumstances where compassion for the woman means that an abortion may be the final and only resort.


Amisk: When might that be?


Andy: I'm afraid you are getting into the territory here of wanting to have your cake and eat it. While the Bible does not mention abortion (the process had not been developed at that time), it does state that rapists and child molesters should be put to death.

Amisk: True the Bible does not use the word abortion. Our Friend, Mr. Webster defines abortion as "inducing of premature delivery in order to destroy offspring" The World book Dictionary.

Is not murder in a sense the same thing? Doesn’t it destroy life and opportunity?

One of the things that the Nazis became very good at was substituting words for that which they wanted to do but knew the public would rebel at, if their crime was given its proper name. Terms like undesirables were cooked up to replace Jews, Gypsies and Poles. Thus the Nazis got away with murdering over 6 million Jews plus Gypsies and Poles.

Those who support abortion have learned to do the same thing. They use the word "abortion" because the public are willing to accept the term, rather than killing. The public are willing to accept the term "fetus" defining it as a "blob of tissue". The crime then has no human face. Still when you look at the facts, it breaks down to the crime of killing babies. Is a human fetus any less of a baby just because we change the term? Is it any less of a baby because it hasn’t received a name yet?

Others Comments worth thinking about in relation to abortion:

Nobel Laureate Pearl S. Buck put it this way: "I fear the power of choice over life or death at human hands. I see no human being who I could ever trust with such a power—not myself or any other."

"Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I have a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." Abe Lincoln FOUR WENT TO THE CIVIL WAR. Would this philosopher say the same thing about abortion today? I believe so.

Andy: By showing compassion for the woman in supporting her in a tragic situation we do not change scripture, we uphold it.

This is entirely in line with Jesus' teachings on love, compassion and mercy.


Amisk:you really show compassion by helping her commit the sin of murder? Where in scripture is there a verse where Jesus excused sin by looking at the circumstance that lead up to the sin?

We are judged not on what has happened to us, but rather on how we handle the situation before us.

Compassion is based on helping the victim in trouble to live through the situation, not aiding and a betting them in increasing their dilemma nor taking revenge on some other innocent party, in this case the baby.

Amisk from pervious posting: I am fully aware that the lady in this situation goes through great stress in her life time, however it is also medically proven that a girl who has an abortion goes through guilt for the rest of her life over the abortion. Many girls have testified to the fact that the child's would have been birth date, and the date of his terminated death often troubles them. Many according to medically documented stats. Tell of girls who have had mental problems after the abortion, and in some cases are haunted by the child they aborted.

Andy from his last posting: Sources please. I would be interested to see the research and documented facts of which you speak.

Amisk:You ask for Sources: here are a couple that I have collected through the years.

Dr. Anne Catherine Speckhard a Ph. D. at the University of Minnesota recently (1986) published a study of long-term (5 to 10 years) manifestations of stress from abortion. Although the women she studied came from diverse backgrounds, their reactions where amazingly similar.

81 % reported preoccupation with the aborted child;
73 % reported flashbacks of the abortion experience
69% reported feelings of "craziness"
54% recalled nite-mares related to the abortion
35 % had perceived visitations from the aborted child; and
23 % hallucinations related to the abortion
Although 72% said they held no religious beliefs at the time or their abortion, 96% in retrospect regarded abortion as the taking of a life – murder."
The Evangelist May\86

"Studies of women 8 to 10 years after having an abortion have revealed serious psychiatric problems stemming from the abortion" Dr. David Hurst M.D. (President of Physicians for Life) reported in the Peterboro Examiner.

Italian lawyer, Raffaello Balestrini argued that wherever abortion becomes a social custom, "it is the external manifestation of a people’s decadence." The Plain Truth May 1985.

"It is well known that the current abortion rate is a major factor in determining the incidence of gynecological diseases and childless marriages, infant mortality, miscarriages, and child morbidity. Lowering the abortion rate would have a colossal effect on public health." A. A. Popov---A Moscow Specialist in Medical demography. Herald of Holiness March 15th, 1986


Andy And where is your compassion for the young girl forced into this situation through no fault of her own?


Amisk: My compassion? Well I can do nothing to save her from what she has gone through because of the abuse railed on her by some senseless jerk. In turn I long to keep the young lady from future injury by a a State politian who is willing to inflict upon :her injury in exchange for votes, a Church (S.A. included) to weak to stand up to a sinful world around it, and a Medical System willing to do anything for their own monetary gains and who therefore suggest to her an abortion rather than aiding her to recover from her hurts of the past.

I might also ask, where is your compassion for the little unborn baby that you would instruct this young lady to kill for short time gain (if there is any gain)? What would you advise her to say on Judgment Day?

 

[InTheFlame]

Argh - Amisk, would you mind editing that last post to make it clear who said what? I'm having trouble reading and comprehending it I realise it's a big task though.