Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Spear, Sep 27, 2009.
Not really....Thou shalt not Murder.
Amen to that brother ! Thank you Lord !
No, but what about the pregnancy for one so young? Which child's life are we talking about here?
I oppose all elective abortion. I do not oppose abortion in cases of endangerment to the life or health of the mother. As much as I feel for a 9yo who is the victim of rape, I cannot condone an abortion in that case unless the 9yo's life or health are endangered.
Can we say " mental health " is considered ?
Mental health is a farce. It means if the woman is "stressed" which is an excuse for unfettered abortion.
By this i was thinking of the delivery, which might be an additionnal trauma for the little girl (sorry, wasn't precise enough :s).
IMO, no. I'm referring to endangerment of physical health or life.
No baby murder, no exceptions.
Tell me, if a kidnapper took your wife, called you on the phone, and proceeded to tell you that in order to save your wife, you will have to kill your five year old daughter, would you do it? Of course not! Taking the life of the baby, then, to save the mother, is morally reprehensible.
Another thing: doctors tell us that in almost every case, with the exception of the very earliest in utero murders, the abortion is more traumatic and dangerous than carrying the baby to term.
Tell me, do we not trust God? Can we not leave the choice of who lives and who dies in His knowing hands? It is WRONG to take human life! How DARE a so called Christian support such a thing!
Amen, amen, and amen
Your analogy and conslusion aren't consistent. By your reckoning, it's murder to remove an ectopic pregnancy.
In your analogy, it doesn't matter if the person is your child, or some other random person. It would be wrong to kill them.
A better analogy is: If a person were pointing a gun at you and pulling the trigger, would you shoot them, or allow them to shoot you? Most people would agree that shooting them is self defense. It is no more or less self defense if that person is a stranger or your child.
Analogy aside, murdering an unborn child is always wrong.
Apples and oranges...you are not taking a life, you are saving one. Your analogy does not fit.
Who are these doctors?
Non Sequitur...do you go to a physician when you are ill? Do you not trust God? BTW...questioning the salvation of someone who doesn't believe as you do on this is against board rules.
Yet ripping her child from her womb is any better?
If they're truly worried, put her under general anethesia or give her a sedation that will help her to not know what is going on. Most likely at 9 years old, she cannot have a vaginal delivery but will need a c-section, I would think.
Yes, ending an ectopic pregnancy is murder. However, the child will almost certainly die and the mother will soon follow without surgery. This is a case of a justifiable murder, IMO, since the child will not survive and will take the mother with them so we can atleast try to save the mother.
'Justified murder' is a legal oxymoron. It's either murder, manslaughter or not homicide at all on the grounds of self-defence; IMO the ectopic pregnancy sounds more like the latter.
I agree, it is a form of self defense for the mother. The mother and the child will invariably both die if a fallopian tube pregnancy is allowed to continue.
There have been attempts in such cases to transplant the baby to the mother's womb.
I have only heard of one that actually worked and a report of another that worked but happened naturally. I'm not exactly sure how they determined that it happened naturally.
Certainly it fits. You are doing EXACTLY the same thing: you are purposefully killing one person, to save the life of the other.
According to the WHO (World Health Organization) and the National Center for Health Statistics, 13 out of 100,000 women, on average, die in childbirth. This is .013 percent. Compare this to their stated mortality rate for abortions, of about 2 percent.
(New York Times, 2001) see also:
This of course does not include the dramatic increase in the chance of depression (about 40 percent higher than woman who has given "live birth" according to the WHO): 28 percent of women who have and abortion attempt suicide thereafter.
There is a lot more, but, you get the idea.
Apples and oranges. you are comparing something that is not sinful (getting stitches, or taking some antibiotics) with something that IS sinful (murder).
I would take antibiotics to get well. I would not murder my child to get well. COMPLETELY different.
This is a ridiculous side track. Of course, you have no argument against "Thou shall not murder", so you have to do something; I understand.
However, my statement was in no way an infringement of board rules. EDIT::::
The Board rules say nothing about this whatsoever. Here is a link to the board rules...
The link DOES say that promoting abortion (no distinction of kinds given) is expressly against the rules. From the rules...
"In addition, topics and/or posts that seek to promote clearly unscriptural and controversial social and moral positions, such as abortion, are prohibited as well"
FYI: I did not break the rules: but you did.
That's not murder, that's justifiable killing. Murder is never okay. Killing is sometimes permissible, such as in self defense.
On topic, elective abortion is always killing, and generally always murder. Nonelective abortion is always killing, but generally not murder.
Aborting an ectopic pregnancy is not murder, not by any stretch. It's perfectly permissible. It is neither a sin, nor is is not trusting God.
You're using different definitions that I am, I presume.
Murder is taking a life on purpose. That is my definition that I'm using.
By your definition, all acts of war are also murder, and God is a murderer as well.
See above reply.
Did you miss the part about questioning the salvation of others in the rule? Are these your words, or did someone hack your computer?