Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Discussion-One on One: Abortion (red77 vs. Turbo)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Glenda View Post


    Now I'm the one who is really really confused sorry.
    I thought the discussion was that you see no allowance ever for terminating an innocent life yet this is what surgeons often must do to save a mother.



    I'm sorry, but do you feel that a case and circumstance for killing an innocent fertilized egg can in fact be defined and decided by an adult involved or not? I thought you must be against killing a fertilized egg for the welfare of the mother by adult choice. I really am confused. There are many possible pregnancy complications requiring this action that are thankfully covered by medical confidentiality so the public is not privy to the information regarding individuals. It is between the patient and doctor. It is not for me to know or define every possible complication scenario but tubal pregnancy is a very easy one that most recognise. I'm pro saving the mother at the expense of the fertilized egg if the mother's life is endangered. Why lose 2 lives instead of 1?


    I'm sorry but I'm still at a loss. So you would not condemn an endangered child?
    Is this your point?


    Thank you for explaining this. I appreciate it.

    Glenda, sorry you were so confused! ......by my post. It is oftentimes difficult to communicate complex issues, clearly, on internet.

    What I thought I said, or meant to say, was if one "must" die, that another may live, then a decision "has" to be made. In the case of the 11 year old, rape victim, the baby "should" die, so that she might live.

    You have brought up the case of tubal pregnancies. I thought my general reference covered that, but it obviously did not in your mind. So to be clearer, I know, and understand, that the baby must die, otherwise both will die anyway. It is always "necessary" to take this babies life, before the mother's life is endangered.

    I personally know of "zero" pro-lifers who disagree with this sad outcome. When abortion was illegal in this country, tubal pregnancies were ended medically-surgically, and no one was called a murderer, and no one was taken to jail. Doctors were payed, above board, and gratefully thanked, and appreciated, for saving the life of the mother, although it was accompanied by sorrow at the loss of life. It is the same now, even while abortion is legal.

    My beliefs and thoughts, cover any "other" circumstance, where a baby "has" to die, so that the mother can live. Again, sorry for the confusion. You don't have to accept that we have "different" opinions on this, since we don't.

    There are other conditions which become more pronounced, later in pregnancy, which put a mother's life at risk. I was also referring to these different circumstances, in general.

    Many courageous women will endure, great pain and suffering, and risk their own lives so that their baby has the best chance of surviving outside the womb. That is what I was talking about as well. They are not forced to do these things, but many will, and have, barely survived, or in fact, died, in their attempt to save life. That was her "choice."

    What you and I may differ on is something we could call, preventative abortion. In order to prevent, possible, or even probable health risks, and possible endangerment to your life, it is best that we abort your baby now, while it is relatively easy, rather than wait, when you and the baby, may be, in greater risk.

    I strongly disagree with this attitude toward life and faith, hope and love. No one knows the future in most circumstances, with certainty. Preventative abortions, even when filled with great motives, and compassion, may seem wise, but it still smacks to me of playing God, and deciding, life and death matters without all the information, or a true crises, impending.

    There is a football player, injured in Buffalo, about ten days ago who is defying all expectations, and who almost certainly will walk again, when ten days ago, doctors said, he almost certainly would not. Good thing that doctors did all the right things, to save his life and give him the best "chance" that they could, to allow this to happen.

    I say that we should have the same attitude concerning life. I think preventative abortions, give neither the mother and obviously not the baby the best chance, of walking with their heads held high.

    Obviously, most people alive today, disagree with me. I realize that.

    Hope, I have dismissed confusion, and not added to it.

    Shalom

    Comment


    • Originally posted by jeremiah View Post
      Glenda, sorry you were so confused! ......by my post. It is oftentimes difficult to communicate complex issues, clearly, on internet.

      What I thought I said, or meant to say, was if one "must" die, that another may live, then a decision "has" to be made. In the case of the 11 year old, rape victim, the baby "should" die, so that she might live.

      You have brought up the case of tubal pregnancies. I thought my general reference covered that, but it obviously did not in your mind. So to be clearer, I know, and understand, that the baby must die, otherwise both will die anyway. It is always "necessary" to take this babies life, before the mother's life is endangered.

      I personally know of "zero" pro-lifers who disagree with this sad outcome. When abortion was illegal in this country, tubal pregnancies were ended medically-surgically, and no one was called a murderer, and no one was taken to jail. Doctors were payed, above board, and gratefully thanked, and appreciated, for saving the life of the mother, although it was accompanied by sorrow at the loss of life. It is the same now, even while abortion is legal.

      My beliefs and thoughts, cover any "other" circumstance, where a baby "has" to die, so that the mother can live. Again, sorry for the confusion. You don't have to accept that we have "different" opinions on this, since we don't.

      There are other conditions which become more pronounced, later in pregnancy, which put a mother's life at risk. I was also referring to these different circumstances, in general.

      Many courageous women will endure, great pain and suffering, and risk their own lives so that their baby has the best chance of surviving outside the womb. That is what I was talking about as well. They are not forced to do these things, but many will, and have, barely survived, or in fact, died, in their attempt to save life. That was her "choice."

      What you and I may differ on is something we could call, preventative abortion. In order to prevent, possible, or even probable health risks, and possible endangerment to your life, it is best that we abort your baby now, while it is relatively easy, rather than wait, when you and the baby, may be, in greater risk.

      I strongly disagree with this attitude toward life and faith, hope and love. No one knows the future in most circumstances, with certainty. Preventative abortions, even when filled with great motives, and compassion, may seem wise, but it still smacks to me of playing God, and deciding, life and death matters without all the information, or a true crises, impending.

      There is a football player, injured in Buffalo, about ten days ago who is defying all expectations, and who almost certainly will walk again, when ten days ago, doctors said, he almost certainly would not. Good thing that doctors did all the right things, to save his life and give him the best "chance" that they could, to allow this to happen.

      I say that we should have the same attitude concerning life. I think preventative abortions, give neither the mother and obviously not the baby the best chance, of walking with their heads held high.

      Obviously, most people alive today, disagree with me. I realize that.

      Hope, I have dismissed confusion, and not added to it.

      Shalom
      Oh I'm sorry for misunderstanding
      Thank you for clarification Jeremiah
      I absolutely agree that people should not play God on assumptions
      Peace to you
      God bless

      Comment


      • Wow Red. Some of your latest comments are mind-boggling. I don't think Eggo could make ANYTHING that waffles more than you do!

        You seem to take one position and then you seem to take another. You contradict yourself at practically every turn, and you have no clue you are doing it. I really do pity you in a way, except you have chosen to be this way because you reject clear teachings in the Scriptures for your own interpretations and views.

        Turbo has done a brilliant job bringing all of this out, and I think should be commended for his level-headedness. It takes someone with a level head to discuss issues with Red and stay on topic.
        Last edited by PKevman; September 27th, 2007, 06:24 PM. Reason: Red waffles more than Eggo!


        Comment


        • The CLEAR teachings of Jesus we MUST embrace IF we LOVE Jesus:

          LK 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

          JN 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
          JN 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
          JN 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

          Where does Jesus ever change his mind and suddenly APPROVE or CONDONE condemning anyone for doing the wrong thing ????????

          Jesus did NOT condone adultery, yet he did NOT condemn the adulteress!!!!!

          Who considers thay should reject the teachings and example of Jesus by condemning the wrongs of others?????????????

          Show me where Jesus gives you the right to condemn others in opposition to his clear teachings and example!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Glenda View Post

            Show me where Jesus gives you the right to condemn others...
            Try here. & here.
            http://prolifeprofiles.com/

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Shimei View Post

              I notice you failed to show where JESUS gave you the right to CONDEMN anyone!

              You pointed to HUMAN teachings and have not quoted anywhere that JESUS said YOU can CONDEMN anyone!
              MT 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
              MK 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
              MK 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.


              Again I ask you, where does JESUS command YOU to CONDEMN anyone???

              I showed where Jesus said do NOT condemn!
              Show me where he changed his mind!
              Scripture reference please rather than 'traditions' of men!

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Glenda View Post
                I notice you failed to show where JESUS gave you the right to CONDEMN anyone!

                You pointed to HUMAN teachings and have not quoted anywhere that JESUS said YOU can CONDEMN anyone!
                MT 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
                MK 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
                MK 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.


                Again I ask you, where does JESUS command YOU to CONDEMN anyone???

                I showed where Jesus said do NOT condemn!
                Show me where he changed his mind!
                Scripture reference please rather than 'traditions' of men!
                Did you read the article? Did you listen to the show?
                Why not give it a try???

                Here:

                Luke 12:57

                Matthew 7:5

                John 7:24
                http://prolifeprofiles.com/

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Shimei View Post
                  Did you read the article? Did you listen to the show?
                  Why not give it a try???

                  Here:

                  Luke 12:57

                  Matthew 7:5

                  John 7:24
                  I'll try AGAIN!
                  You keep trying to justify yourself with verses about JUDGING!
                  I did NOT ask about JUDGING!

                  We are discussion CONDEMNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                  NOW ... back to condemnation issue!
                  I notice you failed to show where JESUS gave you the right to CONDEMN anyone!

                  You pointed to HUMAN teachings and have not quoted anywhere that JESUS said YOU can CONDEMN anyone!
                  MT 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
                  MK 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
                  MK 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.


                  Again I ask you, where does JESUS command YOU to CONDEMN anyone???

                  I showed where Jesus said do NOT condemn!
                  Show me where he changed his mind!
                  Scripture reference please rather than 'traditions' of men!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Glenda View Post

                    You pointed to HUMAN teachings and have not quoted anywhere that JESUS said YOU can CONDEMN anyone!
                    Can I condemn an abortion doctor? Yes or no?
                    http://prolifeprofiles.com/

                    Comment


                    • Since the child is completely dependent on the mother while in the mother's womb, the mother has every right to decide what to do with it. Technically, this child is more of a parasite than anything else (I do not believe that it is a parasite; while it drains physical needs, it also bring unsurpassed joy to ones life), so the woman can choose to get rid of it if she does not want it.

                      This is simply my ignorant opinion, however.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by PyramidHead View Post
                        Since the child is completely dependent on the mother while in the mother's womb, the mother has every right to decide what to do with it. Technically, this child is more of a parasite than anything else (I do not believe that it is a parasite; while it drains physical needs, it also bring unsurpassed joy to ones life), so the woman can choose to get rid of it if she does not want it.

                        This is simply my ignorant opinion, however.
                        Are children dependent on their mother outside of the womb? Would it be ok to kill a one year old since the baby is kind of like a parasite and using up resources?

                        And by getting rid of it, what do you mean by that? Could you describe exactly what an abortion doctor does to "rid" of a baby? Can you give us an overview?
                        http://prolifeprofiles.com/

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Shimei View Post
                          Are children dependent on their mother outside of the womb? Would it be ok to kill a one year old since the baby is kind of like a parasite and using up resources?

                          And by getting rid of it, what do you mean by that? Could you describe exactly what an abortion doctor does to "rid" of a baby? Can you give us an overview?
                          1) No, because it can live outside of the womb--but not for a sustained amount of time without help from the mother. Inside the womb, it can't be transplanted to another womb, like a baby can be adopted once born (I hope I'm clearly communicating here, I'm sort of tired), so it is the mothers burden only.

                          2) It is disgusting and I don't like to describe it. If you'd like to know, you can google it.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by PastorKevin View Post
                            Wow Red. Some of your latest comments are mind-boggling. I don't think Eggo could make ANYTHING that waffles more than you do!

                            You seem to take one position and then you seem to take another. You contradict yourself at practically every turn, and you have no clue you are doing it. I really do pity you in a way, except you have chosen to be this way because you reject clear teachings in the Scriptures for your own interpretations and views.

                            Turbo has done a brilliant job bringing all of this out, and I think should be commended for his level-headedness. It takes someone with a level head to discuss issues with Red and stay on topic.
                            I can't stay on topic with Red. I always wind up talking about how stupid he is instead of throwing more facts at him to turn into slime.
                            Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                            E≈mc2
                            "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                            "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                            -Bob B.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Shimei View Post
                              Can I condemn an abortion doctor? Yes or no?
                              Can you answer my question yes or no??????
                              I asked first

                              Red and I have been following the teachings of Jesus by NOT CONDEMNING a rape victim's actions!

                              Jesus commanded we CONDEMN NOT!
                              Do you embrace the teachings of Jesus or do you reject them?
                              ie do you love Jesus or not?????????
                              (ONLY those who love him keep his teachings according to Jesus!)

                              Something else to chew on ... when David and Bathsheba had unlawful sex, God killed the resultant baby rather than the adults!

                              Neither Red nor I condone killing anyone! Neither Red nor I approve of abortion. Neither Red nor I CONDEMN actions of a rape victim!!!!!!! This is in agreement with the teachings of Jesus!!!!!!!!
                              If you love Jesus then you keep his sayings and obey him.

                              However ... back to the issue and question you have not yet answered:
                              The CLEAR teachings of Jesus we MUST embrace IF we LOVE Jesus:

                              LK 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

                              JN 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
                              JN 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
                              JN 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

                              Where does Jesus ever change his mind and suddenly APPROVE or CONDONE condemning anyone for doing the wrong thing ????????

                              Jesus did NOT condone adultery, yet he did NOT condemn the adulteress!!!!!

                              Who considers thay should reject the teachings and example of Jesus by condemning the wrongs of others?????????????

                              Show me where Jesus gives you the right to condemn others in opposition to his clear teachings and example!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Glenda View Post
                                I'll try AGAIN!
                                You keep trying to justify yourself with verses about JUDGING!
                                I did NOT ask about JUDGING!

                                We are discussion CONDEMNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                                NOW ... back to condemnation issue!
                                I notice you failed to show where JESUS gave you the right to CONDEMN anyone!

                                You pointed to HUMAN teachings and have not quoted anywhere that JESUS said YOU can CONDEMN anyone!
                                MT 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
                                MK 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
                                MK 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.


                                Again I ask you, where does JESUS command YOU to CONDEMN anyone???

                                I showed where Jesus said do NOT condemn!
                                Show me where he changed his mind!
                                Scripture reference please rather than 'traditions' of men!
                                Jesus did say not to judge "until you have removed the plank from your own eye"!
                                Here is the message He sent through His servant Paul.

                                1 Corinthians 6
                                Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? 2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? 4 If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren? 6 But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X