Do aborted babies live on...

I am an aborted fetus, now channeling my thoughts through this living individual, slash vessel, known as WakeUpBeer.

Shai Hulud.

a reply to: DAVG1980

Think about it this way. I remember a movie, End of Days, I think, where some dumb actress was carrying a soulless child in the womb and all the evil priests were trying to kill it. Supposedly, it is the first soulless child because all the allotted souls had been exhausted, no more souls left in heaven to give, so this soulless infant was supposed to usher in the end of the world or something like that.

In essence, anything said here is no more than one person's assumption based on what they determine, or imagine it to be. Just like the movie, End of Days. Anyone here thinks God will run out of souls one of these days.

I don't think anyone here can answer those questions for you. These are the same questions every concerned individual deliberates over, and they all have to make their own decisions.

For me, life begins at conception, when the sperm fertilizes the egg, and that is the moment the spirit enters into this new living human being.
I do not believe in man's ability to communicate with the dead, no mater the age.
Aborting any living fetus is murder in god's eyes....
I am a Christian, through and through.
The answers you seek are in the Holy Bible.

a reply to: andy06shake

You back here again, filling minds full of BS?


Don't misunderstand this joke.

a reply to: DAVG1980

We existed before coming here, and continue after leaving this realm.

A spirit doesnt take possession a fetus until a certain point of its development.

a reply to: CharlesT

Appears so.

Just like yourself mate, i comment on whatever seems to take my interest.

The premise of the threads is "Do aborted babies live on".

So i don't think we need worry about what I'm filling there heads with if I'm honest.

We are in the grey area through, so hey'ho perfect place for such a debate i suppose.

a reply to: carewemust

So you follow the ancient Aristotle theory?

In the time of Aristotle, it was widely believed that the human soul entered the forming body at 40 days (male embryos) or 90 days (female embryos), and quickening was an indication of the presence of a soul.

I see many post here about consciousness and the brain.
Does consciousness reside in the brain? Is it just neurons firing up there in your head bone?

What if it actually exist outside of our brains but the brain is needed for Us (our conscious selves) to interact with one another in this dimension?

Hence, in Fenwick’s view, the brain does not create or produce consciousness; rather, it filters it. As odd as this idea might seem at first, there are some analogies that bring the concept into sharper focus. For example, the eye filters and interprets only a very small sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum, and the ear registers only a narrow range of sonic frequencies. Similarly, according to Fenwick, the brain filters and perceives only a tiny part of the cosmos’ intrinsic “consciousness.”

www.psychologytoday.com...

Personally, I believe life begins when a baby develops their own unique DNA. They become a distinct human being at that moment, different from any other. They still depend on their mother and will continue to depend on her or someone else for the first 10 years (or so) of their life.

a reply to: Quadrivium

Very interesting and thought provoking. Instead of taking ourselves as individual consciousness, we are what filters the collective conscious, possibly we evolve to be able to experience more of the whole.
I like this a lot, thanks for giving me another new angle

Children aren't really "conscious" until they're like 4 or something.

It all depends on the definition of "life" and whether you are a materialist or dualist.

But if a dead baby lives on in the ether, then why wouldn't a dead human?

For me it's simple, don't kill unborn babies. If the mother doesn't want it, plough money into care services rather than war and space programmes.

a reply to: DAVG1980

Davg.

My first question is what is a soul, that supposed being that moves on to an afterlife.

A general assumption is that a ''soul'' is inherent to a physical body, that is each physical body born of human woman has one which is that person until they die and then moves on to the afterlife upon death of the physical body.

This theory presents the debate over which point in the life of the physical body does this ''soul'' become attached to it. Is it at birth or is it prior to birth at gestation or some where along the line before birth. I hold with neither.
I think a ''soul'' is a creation of an individuals experiences. While a fetus may have ''experiences'' in the womb, they are not experiences of an individual, but rather experiences to a part of the mother. They are attached with the fetus growing as part of the mother. Until birth.

Once born, a baby does not stand up and say, ''Here I am, a conscious individual'' or '' I am an individual soul''. The baby is still a physical body with needs of it's own. And meeting those needs or having those needs met for them by parents and the rest of the environment are the beginnings of a slow development of the ''soul''along with the maturation of the physical body.

a reply to: CharlesT

That's conception, yes.

The begining of the makings of life.

But when does the SOUL enter the body?

When does CONCIOUSNESS begin?

a reply to: andy06shake

But im sure loads of religious nutters will chine in and disagree.

Yes so disagreeing with atheists and their childish insults is very easy.

If the question is, do aborted babies live on after abortion?

The vid I provided shows a conscious human being after abortion.

However I believe many a human being is born without a soul.
Psychopathy and extreme narcissism are said to replace entropy
in this skewed human being. I've read this phenomena is almost
certainly a result of a difference (not a mutation) in genetics. But
that has yet to be determined. Also it does make sense that lacking
a soul they are incapable of any concept of deity. So they are almost
always are atheists. The concept of a Creator means only someone
ultimately above them forever. And that is not even possible to
the atheist. I doubt living on for them after abortion is very
unlikely. But that's just my opinion.

a reply to: Randyvine2

Offence generally has to be taken, seldom given.

As to your Pro life nonsense video, im not quite sure what that proves with regards to "Do aborted babies live on" but pray-tell Randyvine2?

As you are aware the dude is taking about in a spiritual sense or world.

People born without Souls eh?

I think you have been watching to much South Park there buddy. LoL



And I'm not an atheist, im on the fence, we have been through this before.

Ile entertain the possibility of a creator but not in any sort of Biblical sense which is a product of Man.

Have a nice night.

originally posted by: Halfswede
This is a great question. If people could see what goes on in a place where abortions are performed in other dimensions, they would never consider it. The damage caused by disrupting the original path of life can be significant. People can refuse to believe whatever they want, but they would never ever do it if they knew. The suffering can be great and that debt must be repaid.

Maybe we all just think to much and think too much about ourselves as a species.

I raise rabbits and right now, while typing, I have a newborn baby rabbit warming up on my belly. It's mom had it outside the nest box and I found it cold. Warmed up a little it started to squeak and move, probably from the pain of blood recirculating, but it has stopped moving now. I'll wait a few more minutes but it's likely dead as usually the movement increases. Such is life as they say but I doubt it's spirit will continue on rabbiting. Of course, I don't really know, but if you think that they say 99% of species have gone extinct and how many individuals die daily it's more likely the collective consciousness of the planet takes it all back up.

A characteristic of life is persistence of the concept/species and I doubt if favours the individual soul in perpetuity.

a reply to: Randyvine2

However I believe many a human being is born without a soul.
Psychopathy and extreme narcissism are said to replace entropy
in this skewed human being. I've read this phenomena is almost
certainly a result of a difference (not a mutation) in genetics.

So, you believe that the soul naturally arises from reproductive biological chemical reactions, unless there's defect a in fetal development that omits empathy from the mix?

Also it does make sense that lacking
a soul they are incapable of any concept of deity. So they are almost
always are atheists.

Well, that's convenient.

a reply to: andy06shake

And I'm not an atheist, im on the fence, we have been through this before.

Ah I was correct not call you an atheist straight out as I did vaguely
remember. In the interest of justice I beg your pardon for the implication.
Now I'm going to order some prevagen.

a reply to: Randyvine2

No harm no foul from where im standing Randyvine2 nor pardon necessary.

Quincy Bioscience's Prevagen eh?

Just be careful with those, as side effects apparently include Nausea, Dizziness, Headaches, and even Cardiovascular problems.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well, that's convenient.

So it would seem.

So, you believe that the soul naturally arises from reproductive biological chemical reactions, unless there's defect a in fetal development that omits empathy from the mix?

No I clearly said difference and made note of it in parenthesis.
I also made it clear this is my opinion albeit thru many years of
dispensational study. That said I'm no expert in regards to the subject.
But the difference as I spoke of it would make a lot of sense out of what
is otherwise, so senseless in our society today. Even all back thru
our history to our very beginning.

We should be able to find some point in mans lineage wherefore this
difference was originally incurred into our genetic make up of the
original human being. If something happened to corrupt our DNA?
That made a lack of empathy a factor in our DNA? That entropy
can now be said be in our soul. So to be without entropy is to be
without a soul is to be not fully human. It's rather obvious that we
who possess empathy. (I said entropy earlier but that was a mistake
on my part). Have no big ambitions to run the world and control
everyone and everything. I see two kinds of people in this world.

Those who take control and those they will massacre.

So if a person is born with out empathy it can be said that person

is a psychopath
is a narcissist
is without a soul
is evil wicked
is a control freak
is a power monger

Or it can also be said that they are not even human beings at all.
Not a hard deduction to make if one simply concludes that EMPATHY
is the only virtue that must be present in humanity. Because it is
so obvious that with out empathy there really is no humanity at all.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Randyvine2

No harm no foul from where im standing Randyvine2 nor pardon necessary.

Quincy Bioscience's Prevagen eh?

Just be careful with those, as side effects apparently include Nausea, Dizziness, Headaches, and even Cardiovascular problems.

Holy hell glad I wasn't serious but the information is appreciated.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The fetus has been created by two balls a rod and an explosion, I joke but think about it. The seed of man germinating inside the fetus of a woman. It is the perfect Union of opposites and is cosmic when you compare much if the journey from blast off, till the baby takes that first step into the material world.
As within So withought