Abortion is Big Business

Yes its true there is one right here in the Seattle area which sell aborted body parts.
The abortuaries tell you that they cannot sell the "fetuses". However, the ghouls which supply the parts call it a "removal service". They show up at the abortuary and "remove fetuses". When a research facility wants a body part the "removal service providers" send it to them and ask for a remuneration for the service they provided (not the body part).

HankD

[ September 11, 2002, 12:26 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Here is the proper argument now that should be made on the floor by just one good Christian representative.

If congress claims that "aborted baby parts" should be treated with a certain honor and respect like that given to a deceased person, then that means congress knows that these are live babies being murdered in abortions. If they aren't treated like animal parts, then they must be something greater than tissue or animal parts. That would be a live human.

This outrage over selling these parts are from the very mouth of congress that this is not normal tissue, but is special human remains that deserve respect and special treatment. What clearer argument can one make to indict Congress with allowing the judicial system to promulgate mass murder.

It would be interesting to know how many agreed with this charge since the speaking rep. referred to aborted babies as "sanctity of innocent human life"

[ September 11, 2002, 02:43 AM: Message edited by: post-it ]

 

Seeing as how that would be a good "Christian Argument", what would be your argument against it?
I find it very disturbing that a person who claims to be a Christian knows the perfect answers but refuses to live them.
Or were you intending to say that the Christian should say that sarcastically to show that you should say they're just tissue and not body parts or you can't sell them?
You are such a......PUZZLE to me post-it!
Gina

 

Well, in the past presidential election my Christian friends (including most here on the BB) told me that I just HAD to vote for Bush because he was pro-life. I didn't vote for him but he won without my vote.

So, I'm sure our pro-life president will speak out and use the power of the presidency against this horrible situation very quickly.

Waiting...waiting...waiting...

 

Gee, another day has passed, and not a word from Mr. Bush. I know he's busy...but with many thousands of abortions per day he surely will speak out by this time tomorrow, being the Christian, pro-life man that he is.

Still waiting...waiting...waiting...

 

Two more days...What happened, did he stop fighting for the unborn...wait...did he ever start???

Babies dying as he remains silent...

Waiting...waiting...waiting...

Oh well, vote for him again...you don't want a Democrat in office do you...think of the unborn, how bad it would be if they died under another Democrat.

 

My, my, my, captalism is just like Drixoral cold medicine: the side affects can rock your world.

 

Still waiting...

Can anyone explain how such a Godly, Christian, pro-life President could remain silent? Well, let's give him another day, maybe he's waiting for the Lord's day to speak out.

 

Anyone?

 

Jim, maybe he finally read the Bible and didn't find it was wrong to abort after all.

 

Thanks for that contribution. I am sure you have convinced alot of people on this thread with your top-notch exposition.

Amos 1:13 (the unborn is called a child in Scripture ).

Like that one prochoice argument that made sense, I am out.

 

Well, at least Post-it took a shot at it. Somehow, though, I just don't think that's it. I'd really like to see if some of the Bush-backers can do any better. Somehow I think that Post-it's explanation, now matter how inadequate, may be the best one we see...

 

Sorry, but while I'm pretty anti-abortion, I'm a big enough boy to admit that the Bible is a bit vague on the issue of whether or not life begins at conception, as much as I'd like it to be more specific. Although, it's clear that in the Bible, life begins before birth. But to get an absolute "at conception" bible answer is stretching it a little.

I know I'm going to get branded a heretic, unbeliever, unsaved, or hellbound for posting this, but I'd rather than than put my own meaning into the Bible's words, as many well-intended believing, saved, heavenbound Christians unfortunately do.

[ September 30, 2002, 08:08 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

What is it, then, that begins at conception, if not a new life?

 

My point is not whether or not life begins at conception, but whether or not the Bible says life begins at comception.

 

Get out your Concordance. Look up the word "conceived" or "conceive." You will find that every time it is used it is in reference to the beginning of a new thing, whether it is a life, or trouble, or sin, or the Israelites themselves. All these are spoken of as conceived. All are referred to in that way as a reference to their beginning.

The beginning of a new human being is conception. If someone wants to argue that the beginning is not living and then somehow becomes living after that point, I think that will be an uphill battle both scientifically and biblically.

In Isaiah 46:3-4 we see that the Lord has upheld Israel "since you were conceived." It was in existence from that moment, as is any child at the point of conception.

 

Why should it take the Bible to let us know that grinding up a "whatever" in it mother's womb is SICK?!

HankD

 

Hank, I agree with you. I've made that determination without trying to make the bible say something it doesn't.