Christianity and Abortion

page: 6
20
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by whyamIhere
 


Laugh out loud.. literally...

PA




posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
O.o I hear banjo's



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by gnosticagnostic
 


2 of em??



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by littled16
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 


That is possible as well, but until one has been in the position of being forced to make that decision one does not know. I can assure you that even though it may be the best possible decision for all (including the possible child) at the time the decision is made that decision will still come back to haunt you. Abortion is not an easy decision . . .



That's what I keep saying. Those are true words.

I said Never - - No Way - - right up until I was faced with that decision.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

What some may believe are Moral Imperatives or their concepts of Morality being so cut and dry...are NEVER SHARED by others with a total different concept upon what is acceptable. Split Infinity



Perhaps not overpopulating the planet and not having more kids then you can raise with quality is also morality.

Perspective.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American
reply to post by windword
 



In Job 33:4, it states: “The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”


So is this up for interpretation. Actually, it doesn't mean biological life at all. Elihu is talking about a fulfilled life here, that he is "full of life with the Lord".


What has this verse in Job got to do with anything that I discussed in this thread? You're responding to my post questioning the interpretation of the verse, used by another poster to claim that God sees the unborn as people, here in Exodus:


22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,



Context is king. And the author of the article has done what morons continue to do as a matter of course: use the words of the Bible to fit their agenda without even considering the context of the words that were written.



Numbers 5 describes "the Lord" ordering an abortion. Many argue that this is a misinterpretation. It's clearly stated in verse 22, "May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries."




Interestingly, this is part of a passage that doesn't have anything at all to do with a pregnant woman. Yet again, the author has tried to make a Bible passage prove his point for him. Only two translations that I could find (I stopped looking after going through 15 of them) mention miscarriage. However, most use the word "thigh", while others say what it really means: that the woman will forever miscarry because she will become infertile.

Did the author of the article, and the OP of this thread, forget that there are people like me to bring the light of truth to their lies? That there's a thing called "the internet", where people can find out information for themselves?


I have no idea what the author of the article in the OP thought about people like you.

I skimmed the OP's article, and only just now noticed the author's reference to Numbers 5, in the footnotes. If you would like to take this discussion any further, regarding the "context" of this scripture, please feel free to do so in my thread on the subject, that I assume you are ranting about. www.abovetopsecret.com... . Because this thread is about Christian viewpoints on abortion, and that thread is about a Hebrew law/ritual that suppressed women. It's off topic in this thread.

As other Christians have pointed out, the Old Testament is useless in the analyses of Christian dogma on the subject of abortion. While I disagree that Christianity, as it is today, can be separated from the Old Testament, because Christians keep citing it to back up their dogma, I do believe that early Christian origins claimed a different god than the wrathful, murderous god of the OT.

Actually, at the risk of going off topic, the purpose of my thread on Numbers 5, is to show that what the Hebrews did in the name of their God is not in line with what the Christian God teaches.



You decry the religious for disregarding science in matters of abortion and evolution, then you decry them for using religion in matters of abortion and evolution. It's clear that your only agenda is to decry the religious. Your clear agenda is get all up in their business about stuff that you don't like. Yet when they do the same, you get all butt-hurt.


I have reread all my posts in this thread, and I can't figure out what the heck you're talking about. Please show me where I have brought up abortion and evolution, and "gotten all up in anyone's business about stuff I don't like.'

Don't just accuse me of made up stuff that resides in your head and project all kinds of righteous indignation in my direction without specifics that I can address, please.

I am not "Pro-abortion," I'm "pro choice". That covers a lot of ground, including modern contraception and the morning after pill. I am for better education, easy access to contraception, and until we have a better model, medical procedures for terminating an unwanted pregnancy.

I have no desire to get political and start petitions and overturn laws. I am for keeping the law regarding woman's reproductive rights and privacy, Roe v Wade, in tact. I will continue speak my mind on my objections to the religious right forcing their brand of religious dogma through legislation, on people who don't agree with it.





edit on 12-11-2012 by windword because: grammar



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
the new health care says taxes pay for those who are unable to afford.
i seriously want to drop out of the tax -extortion - payrolls.
i've raised 3 daughters - and no abortions.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


Life does begin at conception. Life begins even before conception as there is life in our cells, but the process for creating a new human being has begun at conception and that is biblical. You can hear the baby's heart at to 21 days in and there is life in the blood and power.

People who support abortion are just supporting the new facelift Moloch sacrificial worship obtained, so that women can maintain prosperity and lifestyle. You're not a christian if you support abortion, you're an abomination in the eyes of God because you support the murder of the unborn. People forcing a baby to pay with it's life for the sins of the parent.


So what if you're anti-abortion but believe the federal government of the United States of American shouldn't force my religious beliefs on others who DON'T believe life begins at conception? I'm sorry, but that's me. Yes, I'm thoroughly against abortion, but I'm a U.S. Citizen, which means I have chosen to accept that others are free to do things which I may be personally against. I'm not against gay marriage, but if I was, I wouldn't want a government who prevents gays from getting married if that's what they want to do. Those who wish to nullify the freedoms of others in the U.S. are no better than terrorists, in my opinion, no matter how "noble" their cause.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by Quadrivium

Did you really think you could "Christian Bash" and no one would call you out on it?
Quad


Not "Chrisitan Bashing" at all, I AM Christian. I just don't happen to be an extreme right-wing, blinded, hypocritical, self-centered, judgemental bigot. There's a big difference


OH, I see now, you are not Christian bashing
Got it.

So if I say...
IMHO, The OP was written by someone who seems to be a non-Christian, left-wing, blinded, hypocritical, self-centered, judgmental, moron who puts their life above all others; It would be perfectly ok.

Got it
Thank you for the clarification.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
PurpleChiten,
You never did explain how my first post here www.abovetopsecret.com... had nothing to do with this thread. I am interested in hearing a reply.
If you do not have any meaningful content to add, it would suggest that you started this thread as a means to troll.
Quad



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by borntowatch
 


Thanks for telling me how I feel, but it doesn't haunt my life. It's also not a burden I am carrying forever and becoming a mother is NOT the thing I "mostly desire."

Any other facts I can help to clear up for you? Or would you like to continue speaking on my behalf?



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by dogstar23

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


Life does begin at conception. Life begins even before conception as there is life in our cells, but the process for creating a new human being has begun at conception and that is biblical. You can hear the baby's heart at to 21 days in and there is life in the blood and power.

People who support abortion are just supporting the new facelift Moloch sacrificial worship obtained, so that women can maintain prosperity and lifestyle. You're not a christian if you support abortion, you're an abomination in the eyes of God because you support the murder of the unborn. People forcing a baby to pay with it's life for the sins of the parent.


So what if you're anti-abortion but believe the federal government of the United States of American shouldn't force my religious beliefs on others who DON'T believe life begins at conception? I'm sorry, but that's me. Yes, I'm thoroughly against abortion, but I'm a U.S. Citizen, which means I have chosen to accept that others are free to do things which I may be personally against. I'm not against gay marriage, but if I was, I wouldn't want a government who prevents gays from getting married if that's what they want to do. Those who wish to nullify the freedoms of others in the U.S. are no better than terrorists, in my opinion, no matter how "noble" their cause.


I agree with you dogstar


That's the thing about being "pro-choice". We are free to make our own choices and other people are free to make their own choices. Too many on the "religious right" don't understand that. Nobody is going to force them to have an abortion. However, they also don't have the right to force someone else NOT to have one.

They seem to want to dictate how everyone else in the world lives and what they can and cannot do. We do not live in a dictatorship or a monarchy. We are a Democratic Republic and we have freedoms that other forms of goverment don't have.

That same group that wants to dictate to the rest of the world are the first to jump up and scream about their rights but they ignore the rights of others. I guess their hypocrisy isn't limited to just their religion



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


I think I see the idea of choice a little differently than you do. As you say, I might be one of those on the religious right that don't understand that, so I'm asking for help understanding.

Everyone I know is in favor of choice, so am I. By "choice," I mean freely selecting from among various options. Sometimes these options are limited by law. I could use some money, but blackmail and armed robbery are not among the options I'm free to choose from. As far as I can see, the abortion question is whether or not to include medically unnecessary abortions as one of the various options we are free to choose from. It seems more appropriate to label the two groups pro-abortion and anti-abortion, since it's not choice which is being debated but whether abortion should be an acceptable option.

Because we don't live in a dictatorship or monarchy, the people have a voice in the laws we live under. Those same laws describe what the acceptable options are from which we may choose. Except for laws which are considered to be unconstitutional, we are free to encourage or ban what we wish. We are also free to change those laws, and to try to persuade people to join our side.

Your last paragraph seems a little over-heated, but what the heck, it happens to all of us.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


Sorry baby and I am fully pro choice but you cannot say the fetus is not alive until it takes a breath. It gets oxygen from the mother through the umbilcel cord so it is using air (breath) for developement way before it gets to take its own first breath. It moves can see and can hear. If everything is good in the developement department that is. I dont pretend that I can say were or when life begins but I know a living fetus when presented with one and I've been presented three times to date. They kick and spin around in there and if thats not life I dont know what is. Or that unliving thing inside my uterus sure is a busy little unliving thing. (No I am not pregnant at this time. ) What happened to sheldon?



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   
It is blasphemy and an abomination to put the precedence on a pile of cells rather than that to which it belongs to and is a part of—the living mother in which it survives.

If life begins at conception, why don't Christians offer to take care of the zygotes, embryos and fetuses when they're removed? I don't see any harm in the handling of someone else's bodily processes and tissues—they are human after all.


edit on 12-11-2012 by NiNjABackflip because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I could have gone my whole life without seeing that. I don't think it serves a purpose really. Anyone of sufficient brain power to have a debate or an argument about abortion can imagine what the results are especially as the pregnancy progresses. But just a horrific image with no information does nothing. I don't know maybe I'm too sensitive.

Well that's another image to add to the ol' can't sleep on account of the screaming in my brain file.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


See, that's one of the problems. The picture you posted isn't from an "abortion". The radical right wing does this often. they take the pictures that are the most grotesque and attribute them, falsely, to abortion.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by dogstar23
 


As with all things you have a right to choose between what is right and what is wrong. But destroying an unborn baby is wrong, and just because a person believes a baby isn't alive until theyre born or 15 days old like the Spartans thought, does not make them right..


I could post thousands of pictures of LIVING CHILDREN - - - who are abused - maimed - in refugee camps - starving - beaten - etc etc etc.

Call me PRO-LIVING.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by karen61560
 


I'm only stating the biblical stance on it. According to the bible, until it takes the first breath of life, taking the soul into the body, it may be "living", but it's not a "human child".

I didn't make the "rules", I'm just saying what they happen to be according to that source.





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join