Why Abortion is Immoral

[redleghunter]

Again you fall back on the scientific definition of what is and is not "alive". A plant is scientifically alive. Does that make it human? No. It is the presence or absence of the spirit that defines human life. When God formed Adam's body, Adam's spirit was not in that clay and dust God used to form Adam's body. The spirit did not enter the body until the first breath, the "Breath of Life".
Even in the case of a human body, when the spirit is absent we call it a dead body, or in some cases declare it "brain dead" even while its functions are maintained artificially. The spirit has left the body, but the body continues as if there's still a pilot steering the craft.

As I stated such life at conception from two human parents is human. We have an early stage human being. That life has the code of a human being.

With our advanced DNA research we now can better understand the mind of YHWH when He said:

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations."
Jeremiah 1:5 NASB
http://bible.com/100/jer.1.5.NASB

 

[redleghunter]

Show me how this objective morality is measured and determined. What repeatable tests are performed against?

I can give plenty of examples when people and cultures ignore objective morality.

 

[redleghunter]

All this terminology you're using sounds quite convenient for your view. In reality the lines between "for life" and "for care" and "live independently" and "live unassisted" seem much more blurry. Even the idea that newborns don't have to be connected to other people for resources is very problematic. Newborns may not be connected to a mother via umbilical chord for resources, but they are inextricably connected to other people and dependant on them for resources in numerous other (and equivalent) ways.

There were experiments in history which tested children in isolation one such approach is:

Language deprivation experiments have been attempted several times through history, isolating infants from the normal use of spoken or signed language in an attempt to discover the fundamental character of human nature or the origin of language.

An alleged experiment carried out by Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II in the 13th century saw young infants raised without human interaction in an attempt to determine if there was a natural language that they might demonstrate once their voices matured. It is claimed he was seeking to discover what language would have been imparted unto Adam and Eve by God.

The experiments were recorded by the monk Salimbene di Adam in hisChronicles, who wrote that Frederick encouraged "foster-mothers and nurses to suckle and bathe and wash the children, but in no ways to prattle or speak with them; for he would have learnt whether they would speak the Hebrew language(which he took to have been the first), or Greek, or Latin, or Arabic, or perchance the tongue of their parents of whom they had been born. But he laboured in vain, for the children could not live without clappings of the hands, and gestures, and gladness of countenance, and blandishments."[5]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_deprivation_experiments

 

[ChurchStumblingBlock]

There are 2 human lives to be considerate of not just 1 . If 2 lives are the issue both people should be treated with respect and fairness , and for those who cannot speak for themselves we need to advocate for them as human beings .

I have no problem with you speaking strictly for yourself and your own family, but when God Himself has given us the definition of when life begins, then I definitely have a problem with you going against what He has said and trying to impose your own beliefs on anyone else. Read my other posts in this thread for a clear understanding of why you are wrong. You have been misled by the master of deception -- Satan.

 

[redleghunter]

Pigs have a high degree of intelligence and even have personalities. Shall we say it is immoral to harvest them for food? After all, we can point to some humans with diminished capacities that have less ability than the average pig and we would call it a crime to slay such a human.

A pig is not a human being made in the image of God.

Yeah I know, pigs are wonderful creatures. My son raised one last year for FFA stock show. Loyal and gentle if you raise them right. Loved that Durok pig. Alas he is stock and not a human being made in the Image of God.

We sold the good beast to a breeder in hopes he would be successful as a stud. Don't know if he is still doing that or if he ended up a Sunday dinner.

But ol Hamlot is a pig and not a human being.

 

[redleghunter]

How long would you survived if completely abandoned? How does that in any way negate the fact that a newborn does not require the use of another humans internal organs to live. It has it's own organs at that point and anyone can take care of it.



Cool. So me the math.

How you assign personal worth?

 

[Belk]

I can give plenty of examples when people and cultures ignore objective morality.

No, you can not because you can not demonstrate objective morality.

 

[Belk]

How you assign personal worth?

I do not understand what you are asking. How do I assign what worth I find human beings to have?

 

[patricius79]

Show me how this objective morality is measured and determined. What repeatable tests are performed against?

Before I answer, would you answer my question?: are you saying that if there were not laws against killing infants, teens, or other persons, that there is no objective morality (moral science) to prohibit such a killing?

 

[patricius79]

No, you can not because you can not demonstrate objective morality.

If you mean that objective morality--such as the prohibition against killing infants or killing Jews (as the Nazis did)--needs to be tested according to the physical-scientific method, can you explain why?

 

[Belk]

Before I answer, would you answer my question?: are you saying that if there were not laws against killing infants, teens, or other persons, that there is no objective morality (moral science) to prohibit such a killing?

I'll go further and claim there is no objective morality period.

 

[Belk]

If you mean that objective morality--such as the prohibition against killing infants or killing Jews (as the Nazis did)--needs to be tested according to the physical-scientific method, can you explain why?

No, I mean objective morality can not be demonstrated to exist.

 

[ChurchStumblingBlock]

As I stated such life at conception from two human parents is human. We have an early stage human being. That life has the code of a human being.

With our advanced DNA research we now can better understand the mind of YHWH when He said:

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations."
Jeremiah 1:5 NASB
http://bible.com/100/jer.1.5.NASB

Thank you so much for falling back on Jeremiah. It proves your absolute ignorance of what He was trying go tell us all. If you think Jer.1:5 is proof of life before birth, how do you explain Eph. 1:4, where God is said to know us from before the universe existed (from before the foundations of the world)? At that time, no universe yet existed, much less a man, woman, egg, fertilized embryo, or fetus.

Why would He convey such a statement to us? What was His true purpose? I know you don't have the answer, but I am willing to share something with you that is definite food for thought.

Moses asked who he should say has sent him to those in the valley below. God told him to say I AM has sent him. Pretty strange name for a god, don't you think? Why would He choose that Name?

Picture a string stretched tight. Let the string represent time. Mentally segment the string as many times as you want and in every single one of those segments, just as the string is ONE THING, God is I AM all at the same time (from our perspective). He is not I WAS, or I WILL BE. He is I AM. God does not live a linear existence as man is forced to do. He is eternal not simply because He doesn't die, but because He is I AM yesterday, today, and forever, all at once.

All He was trying to convey to use in those 3 combined passages was this: the creation is subject to time, NOT the Creator.

 

[redleghunter]

I have no problem with you speaking strictly for yourself and your own family, but when God Himself has given us the definition of when life begins, then I definitely have a problem with you going against what He has said and trying to impose your own beliefs on anyone else. Read my other posts in this thread for a clear understanding of why you are wrong. You have been misled by the master of deception -- Satan.

Yes YHWH has indicated the beginning of life as the fathering of a child:

And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos: And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
Genesis 5:3-9 KJV
http://bible.com/1/gen.5.3-9.KJV

Yes it is clear. Life begins at "begating" which involves the father portion of procreation.

I'd give details of how this happens but am sure you are as well versed in the subject as any father would be.

 

[redleghunter]

No, you can not because you can not demonstrate objective morality.

I will consider that your subjective opinion.

 

[Belk]

I will consider that your subjective opinion.

There may be hope for you yet.

 

[redleghunter]

I do not understand what you are asking. How do I assign what worth I find human beings to have?

Yes how do you determine human worth? Also how do you measure your determinations against competing determinations when in conflict?

 

[ChurchStumblingBlock]

Yes YHWH has indicated the beginning of life as the fathering of a child:

And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos: And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
Genesis 5:3-9 KJV
http://bible.com/1/gen.5.3-9.KJV

Yes it is clear. Life begins at "begating" which involves the father portion of procreation.

I'd give details of how this happens but am sure you are as well versed in the subject as any father would be.

You equate the impregnating of a woman with when life begins??? LOL Wow! There is a cure for dogma, but not if you're unwilling to see and hear it.

So, when God gives us His definition of when life begins, His EXPLICIT definition, you choose to ignore Him?? Turn off your dogma switch and read, THINK, and gain understanding. Until you abandon the dogma, you'll never understand the Truth.

 

[Belk]

Yes how do you determine human worth?

I don't. Worth would indicate some sort of numerical grading system. I consider humans to either be at a stage where they are people or non people (ie a corpse or not yet cognizant)

Also how do you measure your determinations against competing determinations when in conflict?

I consider the case the other person has made to see if I find merit in their position and then adjust my view of person/non person accordingly.

 

[patricius79]

I'll go further and claim there is no objective morality period.

How do you know? In answer to your question--as far as I am trying to remember it--about how one can know that there is objective morality... I think one knows through the intuitive-rational light of human personhood. For example, I can know intuitively that women have dignity--that is is very good that they are--and that nobody should ever rape or kill them.