JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Traditional Christianity vs. Modern Christianity

I once heard of a woman having an abortion because she wanted to spend the summer on the beach and didn't want a fat belly, she wanted to fit into her swimsuit.

God wrote His law on our hearts so we would know right from wrong even if we didn't know God. God does not condemn man for not accepting Jesus if he doesn't know about Jesus, but if man does not accept Jesus after knowing about Jesus, then man is rejecting Jesus, thus he is condemning himself.God condemns no one, He provided a way to escape the punishment of Hell( which is meant for Satan and his demons) if man refuses the gift of life, he choses to pay for his own sins, so he sends himself to Hell.

Big Jim, big jim, Big jim !

The Constutition gives the citizens the right to bear arms. We have numerous debates about that over here. I suspect it was mostly because of those Pesky Redcoats and our declaration of indendpendance. I don't know what the hell a Pacifist is. I am a conservative Republician! So don't be a calling me any names, hear. Us conservatives try to buy good equipment in the first place so we don't need no gaffa tape, hear!

What's your point, Everett? If you are pro-life, what's the difference if the woman was raped, or if she just wants to lose weight?"

Or are you pro-life just up to a point?

Or are you saying "well, making them conceive when raped ain't so good, but they ALSO try to abort to lose weight--so the two balance each other out"... ?!?

Or maybe..."this is just one more woman with one more wrong idea about why she should abort--raped...losing weight...it's all the same"

Of course you don't explain WHY you include that little tidbit--what exactly COULD you say?

Whichever way you mean it, it really rubs me wrong, coming after sensitive dialogue about raped woman, forced to conceive.

Ray for info a Pacifist is someone who abhors violence, death and destruction.....How silly of me to think that you could be such a person or even understand the concept. Even the best equipment goes wrong and gaffa tape is a great temp fix and a must for anyone regardless of how rich you are. So you are against abortion yet like most Americans encourage the carrying of guns to kill each other......Hmmmm speaks volumes. I rest my case.

Jim,
Most people over hear buy guns to hunt with and live in rural areas. No doubt a lot of people like guns just like you like Microphones. Most of the time they sit in a gun rack and are idle. We DON'T all carry guns everywhere we go just looking for an excuse to use them. It isn't the Old West anymore, if there ever was an Old West.
What I can't figger out Big Jim, is who told you about Gaffa Tape! Who let the cat out of the bag! Now we all know a Pacifist would never use gaffa tape! Too dangerous! Violent, you know.

So by YOUR definition God is NOT forgiving and He bears grudges........well that is a far cry from my morals, other Christian teachings and passages from the Bible. I wish Christians would make up their mind about such things and all sing from the same hymn book. You might as a religion gain some credibility. God did not write anything on our hearts cause if he did we would ALL have the same feelings and the same standards of right and wrong.......in the real world we do not. We are taught these standards by our parents, peers and the law of the land..... nothing to do with God....and our parents, peers and the law is fickle and hypocritical.

Your point about the woman not wanting a belly is a red herring pretty misguided and lame. I also heard about a woman who was gang raped and fell pregnant and another who was raped by her father. Would YOU insist that they went ahead with the pregnancy? I for one would not. It was not that long ago when illegitimate children were a huge stigma with religious folk and some church folk mocked or shunned these bastards. As I said before.....leave women to make their own decisions and support them whatever decision they make. That IMO is a more Christian attitude and better way to act.

How about the father, does the father have a say? Married or unmarried?

I never met the woman...

Yes......but the final say should always rest with the woman. Whether she is married or unmarried is irrelevant ...the father should always respect her final say and support her even if he disagrees....and if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest it goes without saying that the father should have no say at all. There should be proper counselling and support so that the woman can be helped to make the best decision given her circumstances. All that said in most cases unwanted pregnancy could be avoided with proper sex education. We should be trying to stop unwanted pregnancies by promoting a proper sex education program at schools and colleges...the only ethical way to reduce or stop abortion.

Even if the woman decides on an abortion because, for example, she doesn't want to ruin her figure, the father should respect her final say? And that is moral?

Ray ....... Guns kill more folk than microphones I thought even you would know that. BTW I use gaffa to stick down cable so the audience do not trip over and hurt themselves....I only use gaffa as a deterrent not as a weapon.... Now I would rather have a roll of gaffa pointed at me than a gun....If you think gaffa is dangerous then you are far too dangerous to be let anywhere near a gun. Good reason why the constitution should not have allowed guns in the first place....It should be changed and just allow citizens to bear gaffa tape.....much safer.

Mike D,

This is not the Marines, where, because Johnny stayed out past curfew, everyone must do 200 extra laps.

Your argument (and Everette's) seems to be, because some woman aborts for cosmetic reasons, there should be a law that denies ALL women the right to choose, ie--one vain woman messes things up for women who perhaps should have the power to choose. If this is not what you intend to convey, then please clarify your argument!

Why is the law so binary? Why can't we create a law that says, "no abortions for you, vain woman, but you raped women may choose what you want to do, since you were impregnated against your will.

Why can't there be such a law? One that differentiates? Why? Because we assume to know God's feelings about this?!?!?

Whether or not god exists is irrelevant to this conversation. If god DOES exist, people are STILL interpreting what that god wants. PEOPLE are STILL making the final decisions, NOT "god."

Michael you hit the nail on the head. Regardless of whether we were created or not or whether we believe in God or not...... Nobody....I repeat nobody.... has the ability to.....or the authority to...... or the right to.....or the knowledge to.....speak on His behalf or to second guess His will.
Nobody has the right to poke their noses into what a woman decides to do after becoming pregnant. We must respect and accept these decisions whether we agree with them or not.
I would never pace up and down with a placard outside a church protesting about the hypocrisy and stupidity of what I see going on inside no matter how offensive it is to me. So that same respect MUST be shown re abortion. Just because some deeply religious think different does not mean they are right in their thinking or have any right impose their will on others. Nobody is forcing THEM to have any medical procedures they do not want or preventing them from having procedures they do want. We live in a democracy where people have rights and freedoms protected by law.... lets keep it that way.
I would ask Mike and Everett how they feel about the parents who for religious reasons let their kid die because they refuse to let them have a blood transfusion or a transplant or some other acceptable life saving treatment? Should they be charged with manslaughter or some other charges....and should the kid be allowed to die or the parents rights of guardianship removed and treatment given against their will?

Hey Michael Zaneski! Good to see your return to JPF.

Best, John

Michael, I never said anything about a law. My question was: is this moral? I was talking about morality. In a democracy, laws reflect the majority, as they should.

Here in the U.S. there are laws against child endangerment that would cover that. I'm not a bible scholar, but as I understand Jesus, he would not like it that the parents witheld treatment. I don't recall in any of Jesus' miracles where he put someone in danger. Morally, it is a case of someone making life or death decisions for someone else, much as I believe abortion is.

Okay Mike...I'm game...

first...

moral-

of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior



Nothing changes. Who gets to have the privilege of deciding what IS, indeed, moral, under these circumstances? The daughter? The father? One vote each? Impasse...stalemate...

If a democracy is forced to choose between two extremes (abortion illegal/abortion illegal), how is that allowing a democracy to make a decision that truly reflects how people feel? Most people would not want to force a raped woman to grow a zygote for nine months. C'mon.

Now to answer your question. If it was my daughter, I would talk to her, and try to understand exactly how she could come to take potential human life so frivolously, and I would make sure she knew that living with this decision might be something she later came to regret.

Ultimately, I would let her decide.

It is her body, and we are assuming this is a newly diagnosed pregnancy. However, there would now be a space between me and my daughter that she would surely feel. Moreover, I would try to imagine that there was MORE going on, inside her, deep down...like she was really confused and scared and making excuses--excuses that made her seem cold and vain...it would shake me, as I would hope such a decision would shake her...maybe, ultimately, I might come to respect her for sticking to it, despite all the ridicule that she would surely get, figuring that if she could take all that, she had reasons that she just couldn't explain. I would try to come to respect her decision. She's my daughter--after all!

I might have had thoughts about forcing my will upon her--making it MY decision. I might even come to think myself "weak" for letting the final decision be hers. But how could I, or the state, or the church---anyone make that decision for her--given that she is a mature woman, and the zygote is newly conceived...usurping this one truth, that it is her body, takes us closer to a 1984/Brave New World scenario, where basic rights are rationalized away from the owner of said rights.

If the law said NO to my daughter, I would respect that, provided that the law had actual provisions for those women with "better reasons" for aborting, like the raped women we've been talking about. In a true democracy, people would really be able to create a law that could handle many circumstances. A law that is binary is not really a law at all. A choice between two extremes just inflames two strongly opinionated groups of people. This is where the judicial process should intervene, and just "do the right thing"...maybe decide on a case by case basisor, lacking that, the democratic process should petition for more a humane middle ground that can actually sort between understandable, moral abortions, and immoral ones.

So then is this ok?

Nothing changes. Who gets to have the privileged of deciding what IS, indeed, moral, under these circumstances? The banker? The occupy wallsteeter? One vote each? Impasse...stalemate...

Michael, wow, I just read this again. Who said that the father was the father of the person getting the abortion?

If people decide "what is moral" then people will have differing opinions...that's all I am saying there...just read on, Mike...

Of course people have different opinions of morality. That's what makes humanistic morality an impossiblity. BTW, read the post above.

How else could you possibly mean that?

How else?

If it's not the father of the daughter, whose father? I am not following you, Mike...

The father of the, well, what some folks would call the fetus.

Gotcha...I would have said HUSBAND, just to avoid such confusion.

Am I stupid for seeing father, not husband--or were you not exacting enough in your words?

Did you ever hear "father of the fetus" said lol...you just...NEVER hear that...

you hear HUSBAND of the woman with a newborn fetus...

At any rate, what I say about the father, the dad, lol, I will stand by.

I am too tired, now, to put myself in the place of the husband, lol...forgive me...

In my original post, I said: "How about the father, does the father have a say? Married or unmarried?" But the fotf is not necessarily a husband.

No forgiveness needed, Michael. Trying to sort out morality in a world where it is amorphous is indeed tiring.

Maybe so; I pulled your last quote.

Now we are bickering over who is at fault for me writing about something that you weren't suggesting. I would say that husband would have been clearer, but if I had kept your original quote in my head, or had formed a clearer picture, originally, that I would have seen a "husband" from the get go, and not a father.

At any rate, I'm tired, and I feel like sh*t because I really poured my heart into imaging something painful, and am told that it was for naught, cuz I, silly me, misread something...

OK Is it moral to insist that others cannot have abortions just because it does not please you? More important how can it be morally wrong to have an abortion but morally right to put someone to death in a gas chamber or by lethal injection or any other kind of capital punishment. If ALL life is so precious that every fetus regardless of circumstances has to be saved why do you have capital punishment where you kill fully developed humans?....I can never get my head around that huge piece of hypocrisy and so far nobody has replied to this statement despie me mentioning this several times in previous posts. I assume that there is no defence to what I see clearly as double standards and hypocrisy. If everyone has different ideas and standards of morality how do you know that your moral standards are any better than someone else. So how can you inflict your will on others who do not believe as you do.

I NEVER took it to mean anything but the father of the baby in the woman's womb.

If I was the husband, Mike, every I said about the father (of the daughter) stands, as written.

It would be complicated by my own personal feelings about her, the possibilities of "being a dad"...wondering about her value system...

...basically everything the father of the daughter might feel, times ten...I'd probably take it personally, and think that it was me, somehow...if it came "out-of-the-blue" ie, my wife and I weren't arguing, and I thought she always wanted kids then yeah, it would come as a shocker...but...this is me being "everyman"...which is me trying to be "moral" here...

But truly, I am probably the wrong guy to ask, cuz the girl of my dreams dumped me in my twenties, lol...and I've never been keen on kids...so...I would probably understand my wife's decision...

Mike D,

Actually, Mike, what I think your second quote was (the one without "married/unmarried" in it)...

it was a Rorschach test, in disguise!

I think that those that don't recognize the zygote as being human life will tend to see "father" as "father of the daughter", and those who believe that new life starts at the moment of conception, will tend to see "father" as "father of the newborn"

WOW!

Because I wasn't recognizing that zygote as a human being, I was forced, by my own thinking, into see the father to be the daughter's father. Since there was no "new life" (in my preconceived thinking) for the dad to be the father of...

Does that make sense?

Just curious...I have this theory (see above) ...are you pro-life?

Well Big Jim I'll give you an answer.
Killing a Murderer as punishment for the life he/she took vs aborting a fetus. Innocent life vs an evil person. There is no comparison. Killing the murderer merits no debate, no option. The Murderer should be killed.
Killing a fetus is considered Murder by the folks who are against it.

Having said that
I also believe a Woman should have control of her own body and what happens to it. I also believe there might be circumstances where a woman would choose abortion. But Abortion should be done very early in the pregnancy. Before the Brain develops. I also believe the Father of the fetus should have a say in the matter. Having lost my own children as infants I might see it from a different perspective. I loved those babies the day I found out my wife was pregnant and it Broke my heart when my son died within a couple hours of birth.
From that perspective I can tell you I would NEVER allow my wife/Girlfriend to have an abortion. NEVER. If she doesn't want the Child then complete the birth and give it to me. The woman can take a hike.

As for Capital punishment. While everyone knows mistakes have been made in the past but with today's modern forensics it is pretty hard to convict an innocent murderer.
And in some cases the guilt is so obvious a trial is only a formality.
How should they be executed. As quickly and humanely as possible. But it should be immediately after the conviction. The murderer didn't give the victim any time and the Murderer shouldn't get any either.
BTW I also believe in capital punishment for some crimes less than murder.

And this has nothing to do with religion. Actually the opposite. I couldn't care less what a religious group thinks about it.
As for God. Well if there is a God I expect he will treat the Fetus just like any other infant death. What difference does it make if the fetus is still in the womb or it's three days old when it dies. It is still dead and supposedly God will take care of the Children.
Will God consider the Mother a murderer? That's for God to say.

Just a little note
In the USA 33% of all murders are committed with a weapon other than a gun. Studies have shown that if guns were outlawed and removed from society the rate of murders without a gun would be....you guessed it 100%.
And guess what. I own about a dozen guns and I haven't killed anyone....yet

There are double standards and much hypocrisy, Jim, I don't think anyone could deny that!

Maybe different people have different ideas about what democracy is. You would probably agree with me that giving people two extreme choices (abortion legal/abortion illegal) is not really really giving them a good choice. In the case of our examples with the vain woman vs the raped woman being newly pregnant, this is clear.

But we can't replace a democracy, albeit a flawed one, with an anarchy? can we?

And how much should an individual do? Should we all become activists? Phil Ochs tried to write topical songs, thinking that he was doing his bit, and it killed him.

I don't want to be an activist, nor do I want to write topical songs, LOL...does that make me bad?

BUT...Aren't I a hypocrite for pointing out how bad the system is, and then sitting back and doing nothing?

I think it's hard to see clearly how messed up things are, and to know how helpless it is trying to change anything, except little things, at the local level, as they "fall into our lap" --but that's what "changing things" amounts to, for most of us.

I sympathize with you, cuz I think your passion comes from a good place, that you might want to change things, and feel how futile it is...

But maybe you and I will change things, one day...just be yourself, and be ready, one day a situation may present itself, and you will be able to make a change, for the good, and then there will be a little less hypocrisy in the world..., maybe we already are...making changes...in little ways that we can't even see...

Well spoken stuff, Bill.

It's interesting that you feel the woman has control over her body, but that if she were your wife, your would still want her to go through with the pregnancy!

I guess when it's your kid, that changes everything. Logic and consistency are less important then emotion and fatherhood, perhaps.

I'm especially glad you didn't trivialize "god" by having him put a stopwatch on the pregnancy, LOL.

Thanks, John, good to see you, too.

Well Michael, whether I believe in God or not I would not trivialize "God" I have too much respect for my friends who are believers to do that. To say God is Preposterous, or silly, or to say the belief in God is stupid would only be insulting my friends who believe. And some are devout Christians. If I trivialize their God I trivialize them.
I might state my own beliefs but that's as far as I think I have a right to go.

You mention Zygotes. It is my belief a Zygote is a single Cell that exists after fertilization. Once the cell divides it is a Fetus.
Even then you still have two separate people involved in creating said Zygote. A female's Egg and a male's Sperm. Both are equal contributors to the new life. Both share the same responsibility for the union.
That is why I say even though a woman should have control over her body she does not have complete control over the new life that is created in the womb. She freely accepted the donation of the Sperm to complete the union and now she does not have 100% control over what happens to it. The Male donor has equal rights.
It is his child as much as the mother's.

Mike D,

Really sorry for belaboring this, at this point, but there is one more big way that you were inconsistent in your presentation.

Father (of the fetus)
is consistent with
Mother (of the fetus)

Husband (to the mother of the fetus)
is consistent with
Mother (of the fetus)

Daughter (of the father)
goes with
father (of the daughter)

Daughter, as a term, doesn't relate to the fetus at all!
"Daughter of the fetus" ? ...nonsensical...
Daughter can ONLY BE the daughter of the parents, ergo the father, in this case.

Just one more reason I saw "father of the daughter" in my head...

Okay, NOW I'm letting go of this...LOL...

Bill, I use zygote because it is the most absurd extreme case that pro-lifers would still abide by, if/when doctors actually catch it this early. Generally it is a zygote less than a week, then an embryo for several more weeks...But to pro-lifers, a zygote is still a life. Using "zygote" is my quick way of putting a distinct visual in the listener's head, and to show how extreme one side is, in its thinking. You and I aren't so extreme. You place the line at the development of the brain. No disagreement, here.

Just to be clear, I believe the life of the baby begins in week 3-4, with the development of the brain, but I still consider the woman to have final choice in whether or not to have an abortion, under most circumstances. Once the embryo is a full blown fetus a couple months in, I am against abortion, except in extreme cases.

Most women don't know they're pregnant until they're six to seven weeks along.

Roe v. Wade allows an abortion to take place from conception until birth. Being for abortion in the United States means that, by definition, you're for killing the human/zygote/embryo/fetus/baby (a rose by any other name) at any stage in its development. That's how the Supreme Court defined it by making no distinctions. Once the baby's navel is out of the womb, it's not considered a fetus anymore. Until that point, you can kill it.

There are a few ways to kill the human/zygote/embryo/fetus/baby. You can vacuum it out when it's small enough. When it gets bigger, the doctor can grab the legs with an instrument and pull the baby down until the head is at an angle where the doctor can stab the head so that the brains come out. This makes the baby small enough to pass through the vagina.

The doctor can use an instrument to pull the baby's limbs apart and take out each part as it comes out.

Or, the doctor can inject a poison into the baby (abortionists call it "harpooning the whale"), and the poison burns the baby until it dies. Some mothers report that they can feel violent thrashing from the baby. A severely charred and dead body is then removed.

The last option is to remove the baby surgically, in one piece, and let it die, or induce labor. This is the least used option, as it's the hardest on the mother. In the past, the babies could be disposed of in the trash, or set on a table, until they died. Or drowned. It was legal to do anything. However, several years ago, a "Baby Born Alive" law was passed which stated that certain comfort care must be given to the baby until it dies if it is born alive. I think it's often about an hour, from what I've read. Though they can live much longer, as witnessed by the recent news about the six-month premature baby found alive in the morgue in Argentina.

HiDee Again, Folks...

I used to be Very Pro-Choice...I'm very fond of Women & Underdogs... But..over recent years, I've become a Pro-Lifer...since The Unborn are the Underdogs of the First Degree.

I remember in the 'Nam War, we DE-Personalized "The Enemy" by calling them "Gooks" and whatever...then killing them wasn't so hard.

With Babies, it's "Zygotes" and "Fetuses"...

& then, I reflect how 2 of my Best Friends were both "Mistakes"..and...my Wife's the daughter of a Bastard Son, as-well.

Oh..and THAT story's a Dandy One...for a Question of Morality, &..Ties-In with Kurt's Original Question, too...

My Dad-in-Law's Mom was a Deaf Mute..Swiss-Living-in-France..border-town. Fell-in-Love with Son of local Count...(just found out last year HE was a Deaf Mute, too)..who got her pregnant. HIS Very-Catholic Family wouldn't let Him marry Her..since she was a Lutheran. His Childhood...& Their Poverty...was Nightmarish...& the shame he endured thru all his childhood in a Small Town must've been near-unbearable.

He didn't tell my wife the Family Name of her Grandfather until she was 50 years old.

Anyways, I'm indebted to his Mom for the Love..and Courage..she had in bearing a child that basically brought much discomfort and dishonor to her. And to the Mothers of my 2 good friends...

I think that the "inconvenience" is a mere 9 Months...out of hopefully a woman's Long Lifetime...and that Every Baby Conceived...deserves a Shot at a Future Life. (Even if Neither Parent's gonna raise it.)

That's Moral...in My Book. Babies deserve Rights too.

Best Wishes & Big Hugs,
Stan

I think I missed something here. I don't recall ever writing the word "daughter" in this thread until right now.

However, I do think if my language were more accurate, there would have never been any misunderstanding.

Nice to see you back, Michael, you're a good man.

Mike

Mike D,

You're absolutely right!

OMG! You wrote "woman." I guess I felt embarrassed, and then couldn't admit to myself that I just flat out misread you. Then I misread you again.

My apologies, Mike.

At least you got to find out my feelings about what a daughter's father might feel, about her wanting an abortion under those conditions!

I've been trying too hard, upon returning. I'll ease back a bit.

Mike

This woman was not raped, she just got pregnate, did the math and knew she would be showing her pregnancy at a time she wanted to show her body at her best,on the beach in her swimsuit. Which to me was the worst reason to abort a child. Vanity. I am pro life, but there may be times whan abortion is necessary, but this was not one of them.

This breaks my heart. Doctors that do this will have to answer for it. They take an vow to do no harm, this is harm. There is a group of very intelligent people now saying a baby is not considered a person until three days AFTER its birth, and it can be killed. God help them. To those that don't believe in God, this statement will not mean much, but the bible and God said " before I formed you in the womb,I KNEW YOU". So that fetus is a person at the instant of conception, not even hours or days or weeks, instantly.

Sorry Bill do not follow your logic. If someone who takes another life is a murderer then capital punishment is also murder. So by your logic the hangman should also be murdered and his hangman murdered and we should be murdered for being a party to all of this......two wrongs do not make a right.

Michael I do not follow your logic about anarchy.....I am an Atheist and a Socialist....but that certainly does not mean that I do not believe in laws or codes of conduct to live by. I can assure you that if people like me ran the country there would be no anarchy or disorder. That is a pure myth spread by right wing propoganda. If anything laws would be fairer for all not just the rich. Yes I often think of the futility of trying to change the system.........basically man can be so intelligent and inventive in certain areas and so damn stupid in others. We should take a step back and have a cold hearted look at ourselves and look for the wood cause the trees sure as hell hide it.

Just for info I do not know about USA but here in UK it is illegal to carry out an abortion after 24 weeks pregnancy. At 24 weeks a baby is considered viable.
Over 50% abortions are carried out pre 9 weeks
about 35% 9-12 weeks
less than 10% 12-15 weeks
less than 5% after 15 weeks
Every abortion must have two doctors approval stating valid reasosn why the abortion is required. The main reason is health problems of the mother...although this can interpreted as mental health.
Perhaps if the USA had less barbaric laws and practices than those stated by Lisa there would be less controversy and a more humane and rational approach.