what is that they are promoting deeper fellow junk?

[vle045]

Then what is it if it isn't pro-abortion? It has always been about "abortion rights".


It's about what the government has the authority to do. It's about providing medical care. The whole court case was not just about that one thing. It's about rights to medical care and privacy and a whole bunch of other things. There is too much tangled up there for it to be brought to one simple conclusion. You can look at something in two separate ways... politically and morally. It's messy and ugly, but there is no other happy solution... at least not one that someone has been able to come up with. Is there a way to take those unwanted fetuses and implant them elsewhere until they are ready to be born? Will there be adoptive homes for those kids?

And is the alternative any better? Desperate women who flee the country, kill themselves, or a whole host of other possible outcomes? Those are all very scary too. Shall we really say, hey you all have to follow this law and if you want to risk your own life and do otherwise, you are on your own? Go ahead and bleed to death in a alley?

I just have never seen a reasonable alternative that does not place more emphasis on one group's life over the other. Either way, people will die. Maybe fewer babies will die, but maybe more women will die. Is that better?

There is not an easy answer. It is not as simple as relating it to murdering an already living person.

Banning it and going back to the way it was is not a solution. It's still a problem.

But if somoene could tell me that there was a better solution, like another way for the babies to live with the pregnancy removed from the mother... and an adoptive home for them, I'd be all over that. Because that truly solves the issue in favor of everyone.

But whether you make it legal or illegal, someone is going to lose either way. Sure, adoption is definitely an alternative for women... But some women also just can not reconcile themselves with being pregnant. And I can not begin to understand all the reasons. Some are selfish, I am sure... but not all of them.

It's just an ugly ugly situation. There are no winners. And the government had to chose what role they should play in it... And I am sure it was not an easy decision. But they chose one that was the least chaotic (if that's possible) Would you really want to loose your daughther or sister or cousin because she was so scared of being pregnant, and the only alternative she thought she had was to drink a gallon of poison or something crazy like that?

It's just not so cut and dry as we WANT it to be.

 

[DaRev]

If women don't want to be pregnant, they should keep their pants on. That would solve a huge part of it.

I am greatly disturned at your choice of words here: "It is not as simple as relating it to murdering an already living person." You don't consider a living fetus "an already living person"?? God considers him or her an already living person. Life begins at conception, not at birth. This is in the Scriptures, the very word of God that is the Church's source and norm of teaching and practice.

If abortion on demand were taken off the table it would force the creation of other solutions. There are hundreds of couples who want to adopt. If abortion was outlawed it would facilitate the medical researchers to develope a method of fetal transplant. There are a host of alternatives other than the genocide of innocent human lives.

I have no problem with a woman choosing what she wants to do with her own body. But that does not give her the right to end another human life just because she's inconvenienced. That is murder, pure and simple. There is no way to argue around it.

 

[Jim47]

If the woman had a strong faith and was close to God she wouldn't be taking risks if getting herself pregnat in the first place. Adultry is a sin, just as is trying to get rid of the evidence. The taking of an innocent life is never justifed simpley because the mother may not want the child and the problems that go with an unwanted pregantcy.

Ad Rev said, there are other solutions. Give the child up for adoption.

 

[DaSeminarian]

Then what is it if it isn't pro-abortion? It has always been about "abortion rights".

It's about what the government has the authority to do. It's about providing medical care. The whole court case was not just about that one thing. It's about rights to medical care and privacy and a whole bunch of other things. There is too much tangled up there for it to be brought to one simple conclusion. You can look at something in two separate ways... politically and morally. It's messy and ugly, but there is no other happy solution... at least not one that someone has been able to come up with. Is there a way to take those unwanted fetuses and implant them elsewhere until they are ready to be born? Will there be adoptive homes for those kids?

And is the alternative any better? Desperate women who flee the country, kill themselves, or a whole host of other possible outcomes? Those are all very scary too. Shall we really say, hey you all have to follow this law and if you want to risk your own life and do otherwise, you are on your own? Go ahead and bleed to death in a alley?

I just have never seen a reasonable alternative that does not place more emphasis on one group's life over the other. Either way, people will die. Maybe fewer babies will die, but maybe more women will die. Is that better?

There is not an easy answer. It is not as simple as relating it to murdering an already living person.

Banning it and going back to the way it was is not a solution. It's still a problem.

But if somoene could tell me that there was a better solution, like another way for the babies to live with the pregnancy removed from the mother... and an adoptive home for them, I'd be all over that. Because that truly solves the issue in favor of everyone.

But whether you make it legal or illegal, someone is going to lose either way. Sure, adoption is definitely an alternative for women... But some women also just can not reconcile themselves with being pregnant. And I can not begin to understand all the reasons. Some are selfish, I am sure... but not all of them.

It's just an ugly ugly situation. There are no winners. And the government had to chose what role they should play in it... And I am sure it was not an easy decision. But they chose one that was the least chaotic (if that's possible) Would you really want to loose your daughther or sister or cousin because she was so scared of being pregnant, and the only alternative she thought she had was to drink a gallon of poison or something crazy like that?

It's just not so cut and dry as we WANT it to be.

I'm sorry but I think you are wrong. I agree with DaRev on this issue. We live in a sinful world and there is not a lot of justice sometimes. Abortion is Murder. It always has been and always will be.

 

[WildStrawberry]

<snip>And is the alternative any better? Desperate women who flee the country, kill themselves, or a whole host of other possible outcomes? Those are all very scary too. Shall we really say, hey you all have to follow this law and if you want to risk your own life and do otherwise, you are on your own? Go ahead and bleed to death in a alley?

I just have never seen a reasonable alternative that does not place more emphasis on one group's life over the other. Either way, people will die. Maybe fewer babies will die, but maybe more women will die. Is that better?

Less than 1/2 of 1 percent of abortions are done because of the reasons "pro-choice" people state. These being: rape, incest, mother's life in danger...etc.

Why should fleeing the country or going into back alleys be the alternative to abortion on demand? Why can't everyone, Choice and Life, get together and decide that they are going to make a difference, to love the woman and the child no matter what, to educate those who are too young to decide for themselves and to offer hope for those who find themselves in these situations.? We as a nation have failed these women. How unloving it is to give them abortion on demand instead of hope, caring, love.

There is not an easy answer. It is not as simple as relating it to murdering an already living person.

I'm going to assume that you mean "living person" as an ex utero human being. As an adopted person who had a birth mother ready to abort her because her mother said she'd take both myself and my older birth sister away, and who realized that adoption really was a better choice...let me tell you, I WAS an already living person in the womb. I had possibilities from the moment that sperm met the egg. These possibilities are being realized day after day as I live the life that God graciously gave me through the "accident" of my conception.

Let me ask you, what is the difference between a fetus and an in utero baby? The in utero baby is wanted. There is no other difference than that. It's only when a person has to make themselves believe that the living breathing child they carry inside of them is just a "mass of cells" so they don't feel guilty over aborting, that the distinction is made.

But whether you make it legal or illegal, someone is going to lose either way. Sure, adoption is definitely an alternative for women... But some women also just can not reconcile themselves with being pregnant. And I can not begin to understand all the reasons. Some are selfish, I am sure... but not all of them.

Again, less than 1/2 of 1 percent of abortions are done because of extenuating circumstances. All other abortions are done because the women (and sometimes the men who are involved) are inconvenienced because of the pregnancy. They don't want to be pregnant because it doesn't suit their lifestyle or whatever. Whether or not you can "reconcile [yourself] to being pregnant" shouldn't matter. It's called responsibility. Let me say that again...it's called RESPONSIBILITY. If you're going to "do the crime" you ought to understand that you've got to "do the time". It's what is wrong with America today. People have a sense of entitlement to keep from being inconvenienced. They don't want to take responsibility for their actions. They'd much rather push it to the side or make someone else deal with it. Or get rid of it all together.

Would you really want to loose your daughther or sister or cousin because she was so scared of being pregnant, and the only alternative she thought she had was to drink a gallon of poison or something crazy like that?

I wouldn't lose my daughter, sister, cousin, friend because of that. I would HOPE that they would know how much I love them and how much I would stand beside them and be there for them no matter what happens. This is where women are failed. This is where we as a country need to get off our collective mules and MAKE the changes.

DaRev said that there are hundreds of couples looking to adopt. I'd have to correct him and say that there are THOUSANDS. Why do you think that overseas adoptions are so common? Because so many pregnancies are ending in death through the murderous practice of abortion. Every single one of the people I've come in contact with through my Adoption support group/Lutheran Social Services that has adopted from overseas has said that they originally tried here in the States but could NOT adopt because of the dearth of babies. (we won't even go into the older children needing adopting.)

So yes, there would be families out there for these children. Abortion is not the way. Love and respect and caring and help is the way.

Kae

 

[DaRev]

Another problem I have with the pro-choice platform is that they are so overly concerned about the woman and not at all concerned about the innocent infant life. THAT is one of the major problems with this issue.

 

[RadMan]

You guys just don't get it... and never will. We will have to agree to disagree because you will only see what you want to see and not consider the larger picture.

1. Pro-choice is not the same as pro-abortion. It is far far more complex than that.

2. It is not our place to judge others unless we too are without sin.

Would you have aborted you son if he had had Downs Syndrome, AIDS, Childhood Alcoholic Syndrome, accident in the birthing process that would have caused drug syndrome, anomaly in the DNA or a defect from delivery procedure? You're pro-choice, that would be your right, correct? If you wouldn't have made the choice and would have lived with that child the rest of your life and loved them then what would you say to a lady that wanted to abort her fetus because of the child's disabilities?

Then after he was born would you euthanize him because you couldn't "handle" it anymore or maybe a boyfriend would say "I wouldn't marry you because the child is sick"? I mean what's the difference between before he is born or after? Is it just easier to do before they are born because the are just "tissue" ad you wouldn't be traumatized by seeing it face to face? SO you could say that "tissue" is even inconveniencing you after birth and it was part of your body "like cancer" so you have the right to destroy it.

Just because there are abortion laws doesn't mean they are just. It just means they are the law. Justifying that law only makes you a slave to that law.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Goodness...it's going to take me awhile to get all these great posts repped!!

Great points!!

 

[vle045]

but the problem is that not every woman in the united states of america is a Christian. so christian values will not be important to those people... and the government has no place to force christian values on to that person.

Would you like to continue this indefinitely? Or would you like to agree to disagree? You can not see the unfortunate fact that there are too many various issues involved and the fact that the entire country can not be expected to behave in the way that you want them to. And the fact that there is NO PERFECT SOLUTION.

I can not convince you to at least accept that a person CAN be a Christian even if they are not perfect. You want perfection from someone or you will call them unChristian.

I do not expect ANYONE to be perfect. And I will never assume to judege whether they are Christian.

THAT is what I take issue with... accusing someone of not being Christian based on YOUR expectations, experiences and understandings.

There are plenty of others out there that would call you unChristian simply because you are Lutheran. (I am not one of those people.)

This is NOT ABOUT ME OR WHAT I WOULD DO. It's about the whether I would call someone UNCHRISTIAN for not agreeing with me.

Gang up on me all you want for simply offering another point of view. You seem to want to place YOUR VALUES on an entire country of people.

If Lutheranism teaches you to judge other people and call them unChristian if they don't see everything that you do, then I want no part of if.

This is a BIG BIG world. None of us are perfect. We all do the best that we can.

At some point someone said that they can't see how someone can be pro-choice and a Christian. I offered how that could be possible.

You want to latch on to your own views and call anyone who dares to open up their minds to why someone could possibly see something a different way as unchristian.

As for me, I will love all of my friends, family, acquaintances and neighbors whether they are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Wiccan, Jehovah's Witness, Pro-Choice, Pro-Life, Democrat or Republican. I won't always agree with them, but I would NEVER question someone's heart, nor question a Christian's belief in Christ.

No need to try to "correct" me. I have an open heart and and open mind and I will never call my pro-choice neighbors UNCHRISTIAN.

 

[vle045]

Would you have aborted you son if he had had Downs Syndrome, AIDS, Childhood Alcoholic Syndrome, accident in the birthing process that would have caused drug syndrome, anomaly in the DNA or a defect from delivery procedure? You're pro-choice, that would be your right, correct? If you wouldn't have made the choice and would have lived with that child the rest of your life and loved them then what would you say to a lady that wanted to abort her fetus because of the child's disabilities?

Then after he was born would you euthanize him because you couldn't "handle" it anymore or maybe a boyfriend would say "I wouldn't marry you because the child is sick"? I mean what's the difference between before he is born or after? Is it just easier to do before they are born because the are just "tissue" ad you wouldn't be traumatized by seeing it face to face? SO you could say that "tissue" is even inconveniencing you after birth and it was part of your body "like cancer" so you have the right to destroy it.

Just because there are abortion laws doesn't mean they are just. It just means they are the law. Justifying that law only makes you a slave to that law.

This is not about me, nor what I personally believe.

 

[vle045]

Another problem I have with the pro-choice platform is that they are so overly concerned about the woman and not at all concerned about the innocent infant life. THAT is one of the major problems with this issue.

there's problems on BOTH sides. People will die either way.

Do you have a better solution?

 

[vle045]

there is no point in my retuning here. you all have formed a bad opinion of me anyways, even though you don't know me.

It was nice in the beginning...

 

[PreachersWife2004]

You're defending abortion and you expect to get kudos for it? That's a little presumptious, especially considering this is the more conservative Lutheran forum. Most of the people who post regularly in here are going to argue against abortion. People have brought forth solutions, here and everywhere. Being responsible would be one of them. If you choose to have sex, then you deal with the consequences (or, as I prefer to call them, BLESSINGS). Adoption is definitely an option, and I so wish it was recommended more.

The problem is that abortion is used as birth control. It is used to get rid of unwanted babies. I've had a pregnant woman tell me that she didn't want the PARASITE inside her body.

When we can't value the life inside our womb, how do we expect people to value life outside of the womb?

 

[RadMan]

This is not about me, nor what I personally believe.

That isn't what you believe?????
You have stated UNCONDITIONALLY what you believe.

 

[Radiata]

How did we get on Abortion?

Just subscribing.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Not sure. I've thought about doing a derail thread, because a good debate on abortion is always needed. I'd have to see what the OP (Rockytrails) thought, though.

 

[DaRev]

This isn't about Christian values as much as it is about human life, especially innocent human life. Murder is murder, whether one is a Christian, Muslim, Budhist, Athiest, or whatever. That is what our laws should protect and it doesn't.

My statement was simple. I don't understand how a Christian who loves the Lord and all that He teaches us can be in favor of murdering innocent children. The Scriptures say this:

Proverbs 6:16-19, "There are six things which the LORD hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, And hands that shed innocent blood, A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that run rapidly to evil, A false witness who utters lies, And one who spreads strife among brothers."

It's pretty cut and dried.​

 

[Jim47]

I would say its all about Christian values. Who told us that taking another life was wrong?

 

[seajoy]

You seem to want to place YOUR VALUES on an entire country of people.

You want to latch on to your own views and call anyone who dares to open up their minds to why someone could possibly see something a different way as unchristian.

No need to try to "correct" me. I have an open heart and and open mind and I will never call my pro-choice neighbors UNCHRISTIAN.

These are not our own views, it is God's plan as to what is right and wrong.

Having an open mind does not have any bearing on this situation. It's plain in Scripture, as has been pointed out.

We are happy to answer questions here....though the answers may not always be what you want to hear, I hope you keep coming back anyway.

 

[maylor]

Not sure. I've thought about doing a derail thread, because a good debate on abortion is always needed. I'd have to see what the OP (Rockytrails) thought, though.

Think we might of scared him away......