Abortion

That abortion was not outlawed in the law points us in the right direction. Too much law is a human law. In the case of anti-abortion laws, they are too much; because they deny in principle the way God made us. Sure, they appear to be good but: 1. they are really useless and 2. they deny the authority given by God to mothers. 3. It is possible that they elevate men into judgment in a situation where men cannot really discern.

Abortion is a very strange thing; but its also strange that here in the US, many Christians believe they can change morality by changing the laws. In fact, they believe that by outlawing abortion they are engaging in a spiritual battle against Satan. A large voting block turns only upon this one issue, and it was this issue in the 80's that brought so much Christianity to the republican platform. While I agree that politics is about belief, Christianity is not supposed to be about politics. It is supposed to be different from other religions in that respect.

More, abortion really is out of the hands of the law. Its simply not something that God has given us control of. Look at the Law of Moses and you can see that while there is specific provision given for the important issues of orphans, women, poverty, and all kinds of social issues none is given to abortion. To understand why, look at Solomon's ruling between the two mothers: The mother loves her own child specifically in a way that cannot really transfer to another child. The mother protects her unborn instinctively, and I point out that women do not like to have abortions. There is not a real desire for abortion, but completely the opposite: women are overpoweringly driven to have children. Hence, no abortion law was given by Moses. We should take the hint.
 

an aside....love your current avatar dream....reminds me of Michangelo's Creation...

I love the contemplation about where Creation comes from...see G!d reaching from the frontal lobe....I think therefor I am...

200812314411973499.jpg
 
Thanks, Wil. You know I just borrow images under fair use. If this golden brain were truly mine I'd sell it, build an underground laboratory with a TV, and watch Dexter's Lab reruns.
 
kiwimac said:
Abortion is NOT murder. It is not the killing of a baby. A foetus is NOT a baby.
Click to expand...

greymare said:
beg to disagree with you there bru. conception is life. to take that life is murder.
Click to expand...
Ah, now there are two viewpoints we haven't heard yet..... or rather the two age old viewpoints which will never be reconciled.

However, the fact is murder is defined by law, and whichever way the law is half the people are disappointed.
 
wil said:
Ah, now there are two viewpoints we haven't heard yet..... or rather the two age old viewpoints which will never be reconciled.

However, the fact is murder is defined by law, and whichever way the law is half the people are disappointed.
Click to expand...
I don't know about everywhere else, but in the USA murder is all about the motive. If you hate someone, they have been shot, and you are holding the smoking gun then its murder. If you don't hate them, then it could have been an accident. Case in point, Dick Cheney accidentally shot his hunting partner, and he was not charged with crime. If it were verifiable that he had disliked or hated the person, then he likely would have been charged. (If Cheney is too political to be an example then you can swap him out for some unknown person and get the same result in the justice system).
 
I don't know about that one dream.... what if you kill them just because you don't want them around or don't want to support them, not because you hate them?

The question is when life exists, or when it is human. I do find it funny that most of those wombphones, designed so babies can hear mozart, are purchased by liberals who don't believe it is life yet, but do believe it can learn in the womb.
 
wil said:
I don't know about that one dream.... what if you kill them just because you don't want them around or don't want to support them, not because you hate them?

The question is when life exists, or when it is human. I do find it funny that most of those wombphones, designed so babies can hear mozart, are purchased by liberals who don't believe it is life yet, but do believe it can learn in the womb.
Click to expand...

Nobody, wil, said a foetus was NOT alive. It is simply potential life given the rate of natural miscarriage. Moreover until the brain<>Body linkage at around 20 weeks it is non-sentient life at that.
 
wil said:
I don't know about that one dream.... what if you kill them just because you don't want them around or don't want to support them, not because you hate them?
Click to expand...
If you kill them because you don't want them around or don't want to support them, then the law considers that to be motive for murder. Biblically then it corresponds to hating your brother. In that case, yes, you can be convicted of murder here. The fact about murder cases is often that no one can really prove you murdered someone, so proof is considered to be motive, opportunity, and a death with evidence that you were present which might included witnesses. I think it is just those three, but check with a court clerk. (Also witnesses might be used to establish any one of the three components of proof). So, I agree with you, Wil.

wil said:
The question is when life exists, or when it is human. I do find it funny that most of those wombphones, designed so babies can hear mozart, are purchased by liberals who don't believe it is life yet, but do believe it can learn in the womb.
Click to expand...
Lets pretend there is an answer to your question 'When does life exist'. My best answer would be that life begins not in the womb but in the mother herself. In the story of Adam and Eve, Eve was formed of part of Adam; so it makes sense to me that a woman gives of her own life to form a child.

I am not a mother. I somewhat understand, in a way, what Greymare feels when she says abortion is murder. She feels it deeply, and she could not bear it if one of her own children were to die, but that emotion she feels is something I can never feel. How do I think a mother feels when she has aborted or miscarried? I am guessing, but I just do not think there is any advice or punishment for me to give. There is nothing for me to say good or bad. How can I punish her or reward her for her loss? How can I involve myself?

They call it 'Women's right to her body' but to me it is a much greater authority. To make a law about it seems like I'm claiming some kind of jurisdiction over life when I am not able to make life. I can never even be a primary giver. Its like if I were a dad who never did anything for his kids, would I have any right to give input into their training or upbringing? No, because I'm not really supporting them. I know it is sad when a new life is stopped. I just think this is something that should not be handled with national laws from day to day. There is something wrong with that.
 
kiwimac said:
Nope, a foetus is POTENTIAL life nothing more given the pre-birth rate of miscarriages.
Click to expand...

Occurring naturally in between 25-50% of all pregnancies.

Every year there are between 273 million to 550 million spontaneous, natural abortions, over 5-10 times the number of elective abortions.
 
Dream said:
They call it 'Women's right to her body' but to me it is a much greater authority.
Click to expand...
When god brings two people together as one, the expression of that oneness is their baby. This is God's plan, and He is a God of life. She carries it; however, it is his just as much his as it is hers, and the spirit of that baby is from and belongs to God.
 
BlaznFattyz said:
When god brings two people together as one, the expression of that oneness is their baby. This is God's plan, and He is a God of life. She carries it; however, it is his just as much his as it is hers, and the spirit of that baby is from and belongs to God.
Click to expand...
So in the cases of teen sex, rape, incest, is G!d bringing two people together as one?
 
BlaznFattyz said:
When god brings two people together as one, the expression of that oneness is their baby. This is God's plan, and He is a God of life. She carries it; however, it is his just as much his as it is hers, and the spirit of that baby is from and belongs to God.
Click to expand...
Gen 1:20 The man called his wife's name 'Eve', because she was the mother of all living. Her name is Life or Living. His name is 'Dirt'. The life is combined with the dirt to bring forth mankind. I can see why you're thinking that the children might be an expression of oneness (He leaves his parents to join her, and the two shall be one flesh.) That is figurative. Literally though, the marriage is an expression of oneness for the sake of the children. Do you follow my meaning?

The 'Oneness' of marriage is for the sake of the children, to make wholesome children. On that I agree, however the children are not the expression of oneness. They are not married, but the husband and wife are married. Lets instead allow marriage is an expression of oneness for the children's sakes. Here is a verse that connects the oneness to the reasoning: RSV Malachi 2:15 Has not the one God made and sustained for us the spirit of life? And what does he desire? Godly offspring. So take heed to yourselves, and let none be faithless to the wife of his youth. Another way to put it: The children do not exist to cement a marriage. Absolutely not. The marriage oneness is a covenant for the sake of well-rounded children.
 
BlaznFattyz said:
Oneness is the marriage, the expression of that love is the baby.
Click to expand...
Now I would think the percentage of abortions that occur in a marriage are relatively low.

So to clarify your original post and your posted response to my question...

You are ok with aborting the results of non married coupling?

Pardon my questioning and surprise, I've just never encountered this line of thought.
 
BlaznFattyz said:
Is this a loving God's design for marriage?
Click to expand...
Marriage isn't God. God is one, but marriage is a committment to care for your wife. Plainly men break that committment easily and have no business perverting law to regulate the womb. Laws just cannot cover everything. Will you choose Saul as king in place of God?

It is like when ancient Israel chose Saul, the man, to be their king instead of the LORD. Sure, Saul went before them in battle; but he also took their land and made their children indentured servants! It is an example for us not to choose a 'King' for ourselves. We tend to put too much responsibility on the law and on temporary perspectives. Laws help keep us in line, but that is completely different from saying they can create righteousness. The law is there to teach and convince. "The law of the LORD is good, converting the soul." It is a teacher, but it is dangerous and perverse to make the law your protector and parent.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top