• 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 The Question Abortion Advocates Won’t Answer

Discussion in 'Debates on Abortion' started by redleghunter, Jul 22, 2019.

  1. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Please read the excerpt below and link for the full article provided.

    The Question Abortion Advocates Won’t Answer


    Abortion discussions can get ugly real fast.

    In a June 11 interview with the Des Moines Register, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) likened judges who oppose abortion to bigots who promote racism. She was just getting started.

    A moment later, she put the entire pro-life movement in her crosshairs. “I think there are some issues that have such moral clarity that we have, as a society, decided that the other side is not acceptable,” the presidential hopeful said. Lest anyone miss the point, the ultra liberal Huffington Post summarized the interview in its headline: “Kirsten Gillibrand Compares Anti-Abortion Views to Racism.”

    For Gillibrand, pro-lifers are not only bigots; they are religious bigots who wrongly force their sectarian views on others. “All these efforts by . . . ultra-radical conservative judges and justices to impose their faith on Americans is contrary to our constitution,” she told the paper. “Church and state are separated by law,” but the conservative right is legislating the religious views of pro-life advocates. Put simply, opposing abortion is an unacceptable form of religious bigotry.

    Is Abortion About Privacy?
    I think Senator Gillibrand is correct. Abortion is a private matter, and laws restricting it are unjust. She’s right that pro-lifers should not impose their views on others. She’s right that only women should decide the issue. She’s right that the government should stay out. Yes, she is right about all of that if . . . If what?

    If the unborn are not human beings. And yet that is precisely the question she refused to engage. She simply changed the subject to a personal attack on pro-lifers.

    Contra the senator, the issue that divides us is not that she is pro-choice and I am anti-choice, or that she is tolerant and I’m a bigot. Truth is, I am vigorously “pro-choice” when it comes to women choosing a number of moral goods. I support a woman’s right to choose her own healthcare provider, to choose her own education, to choose her own husband, to choose her own car, and to choose her own career path — to name a few. These are among the many choices I fully support for the women of our country. But some choices are wrong, like intentionally killing innocent human beings simply because they’re unwanted. No, we shouldn’t be allowed to choose that.

    In short, the abortion issue is not about forcing religious views; it’s not about privacy; it’s not about who hates women and who loves them. It’s about one question: What is the unborn?

    Remainder of the article here:

    The Question Abortion Advocates Won’t Answer: Five Ways They Avoid the Unborn
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
    • List
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Carl Emerson

    Carl Emerson Well-Known Member

    +1,075
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Married
    Mmmm... In New Zealand we are allowed to kill our unborn children but not smack them for discipline when they are alive...

    We save them at one end of the hospital and kill them at the other - at the same age.

    Bizarre really...

    As society crumbles wickedness abounds.

    God have mercy....
     
  3. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Indeed, Lord have Mercy!
     
  4. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    From the linked OP article:

    Premise #1: It is wrong to intentionally kill innocent human beings.
    Premise #2: Abortion intentionally kills innocent human beings.
    Conclusion: Therefore, abortion is morally wrong.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  5. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Kristen Gillibrand is correct to say the religious people should not force others to agree with them. It can't be done. Nobody can force me to believe all abortions are immoral; they can only state their reasons. But calling abortion opponents bigots is ridiculous. I am sure they are not totally anti-women just because the abortoin laws hurt pregnant mothers.
     
  6. Bumble Bee

    Bumble Bee Disciplemaker Staff Member Supervisor Supporter

    +3,354
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    MOD HAT ON
    This thread has been cleaned to remove some off topic replies.
    MOD HAT OFF
     
  7. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    On the flip side . . .

    Premise #1: Church and state are separated by the Constitution.
    Premise #2: Patient confidentiality is a legal and human right.
    Conclusion: Therefore, the it is not the government's job to decide who gets an abortion.
     
  8. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Premise 2 may be a legal right but not a right when compared to human life.

    Privacy never trumps the right to life.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  9. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    In some cases privacy is the right to tlife. A woman could morally choose tp abort her pregnancy because she is literally in a "do or die" situation. Premise #2 prevents states from making the decision for her who (mother or baby) should be allowed to live.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  10. civilwarbuff

    civilwarbuff Well-Known Member Supporter

    +4,740
    Christian
    Single
    US-Constitution
    That is an incorrect premise but should be discussed on a separate thread......
     
  11. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +5,264
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    The unborn is a unique fertilized egg that will mature to adulthood given the best possible environment and nurturing and an average investestment of about $233,610 from birth through age 17 for a middle-income family. (USDA average estimate) This support is likely to come from the mother that carries the child the first 9 months of development. The nutrition and personality of the adult 17 year old, will likely be highly influenced by the mother. Any drugs and physical dangers will impact the child's development and how it turns out after 17 years of support. After that, the unborn will no longer be a legally dependant child.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2019
  12. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    So a human being who just so happens to be small.
     
  13. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +5,264
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    That wasn't my answer.

    11 minutes ago - #11
     
  14. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +5,264
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    And occasionally unexpected, usually not with ones spouse.
     
  15. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    A human beling who is devloping into a complete person able to live in apart from his/her mother's body.
     
  16. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    What is a complete person? A partial person? No person?
     
  17. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    No person = unfertilized egg
    Partial person = unborn human being before it is fully formed
    Complete person = fully formed human being
     
  18. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    Where do you derive the definition of partially a person from?

    Complete person. My 14 year old is not fully formed yet. He is still growing. Does that make him a partial person?
     
  19. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats God Seeker

    +580
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Your son is a fully formed person, just getting bigger.

    A person is fully formed when he or she has all of the specific body structures - organs, bones, etc. and is not realted to growth alone.
     
  20. redleghunter

    redleghunter Thank You Jesus! Supporter

    +27,845
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    So is a human being in the womb. At whatever stage they are at they are fully formed just getting bigger. From conception we are a unique individual.

    The definition of person:






    per·son
    /ˈpərs(ə)n/

    noun
    1. 1.
      a human being regarded as an individual.
     
Loading...