Abortion

[BilliardsBall]

Don't get too carried away here because the word for "brother" in Koine Greek also included male cousins (extended family).

BTW, I think it's his "brother" James that actually was from a different Mary, but I don;t have the time to look it up.

ἀδελφός, (οῦ, ὁ (from ἆ copulative and δελφύς, from the same womb; cf. ἀγάστωρ) (from Homer down);

You can indeed use a different word for brother that means "in the same congregation" but not here.

 

[metis]

ἀδελφός, (οῦ, ὁ (from ἆ copulative and δελφύς, from the same womb; cf. ἀγάστωρ) (from Homer down);

According to Young's Analytical Concordance, the reference to Jesus' "brother" can be interpreted either way, namely as a biological brother or some other male relative.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Indeed: "if people tell you that you're wrong, ignore them. They're saying it because there's something wrong with them. You don't need to worry about the possibility that their point of view might be valid. Don't question; just believe."

I don't know the source of this quote. But I believe one should perpetually question assumptions and beliefs, of all kinds.

 

[BilliardsBall]

According to Young's Analytical Concordance, the reference to Jesus' "brother" can be interpreted either way, namely as a biological brother or some other male relative.

What are the uses of the word in the NT elsewhere, not referring to Jesus?

 

[leibowde84]

How come the people who watch thousands of hours of TV and read hundreds of newspapers towing the party lines never have confirmation bias, only the people who adore God? C'mon.

People who adore God are certainly not the only ones guilty of confirmation bias. Where did you pull that strawman from? Have I ever claimed that only believers in God were guilty of confirmation bias?

And if you say I have a confirmation bias, how come all the people who don't want to be a Christian lack a confirmation bias? I've shared Jesus with people who wept as they heard the story of God's redemption yet refused to convert. How come people who don't want to follow Jesus because they love marijuana, or fornication or pornography or money more than Jesus, never have a confirmation bias?

Again, I have never made any claims even resembling that all people who don't want to be a Christian lack a confirmation bias. Where are you getting this stuff from?!

To be frank, the scriptures indicate moral degeneracy tends to pull with quite a bit of confirmation bias against truth.

Sure. Never said otherwise. This has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about though.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't know the source of this quote.

It's a paraphrasing of what I see as a common sentiment.

But I believe one should perpetually question assumptions and beliefs, of all kinds.

Except for the Bible, because questioning the Bible implies "moral degeneracy", right?

 

[BilliardsBall]

It's a paraphrasing of what I see as a common sentiment.


Except for the Bible, because questioning the Bible implies "moral degeneracy", right?

No--I question the Bible constantly. Every time someone brings either a proof text of a doctrine or a contradiction - a Bible yeah or nay, I look it up, do the homework. I know very few "true" Christians who accept everything in the Bible at face value without considering historical context, original languages--and how it is that skeptics constantly take it out of context.

 

[BilliardsBall]

People who adore God are certainly not the only ones guilty of confirmation bias. Where did you pull that strawman from? Have I ever claimed that only believers in God were guilty of confirmation bias?
Again, I have never made any claims even resembling that all people who don't want to be a Christian lack a confirmation bias. Where are you getting this stuff from?!

Sure. Never said otherwise. This has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about though.

We've spoken before about your personal stance, you affirmed to me you are a Christian. So why are you protesting your righteousness to me?

 

[leibowde84]

We've spoken before about your personal stance, you affirmed to me you are a Christian. So why are you protesting your righteousness to me?

I'm not. You made a false accusation/assumption about me that was insulting. I never once said anything about Christians or religious people being the only ones guilty of having a confirmation bias.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I'm not. You made a false accusation/assumption about me that was insulting. I never once said anything about Christians or religious people being the only ones guilty of having a confirmation bias.

It wasn't my intention to be insulting. I sincerely apologize.

 

[leibowde84]

It wasn't my intention to be insulting. I sincerely apologize.

Wow ... long time, buddy. Not a problem. Already forgotten.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I am pro-choice, but anti-abortion. While I understand that it is virtually impossible to divide women's rights from the issue, Buddhism historically has taught that abortion isn't ideal. Casual abortion is destructive karma. This is because it is unnecessary destruction of a form of life- womb life. It might also be seen as not ideal because a human rebirth is rare and precious. When you're born a human, you have the ability to pursue spirituality, and even the Buddha path.

If asked about casual abortion, I would have to tell the person that I believe it's wrong. It would still be their decision and consequences to live with after that.

 

[JesusMyFriend]

I'm a Christian and totally support abortion. In my opinion, abortion is NOT and cannot be a crime. When the mother's life is on danger, do we really think of an unborn life rather than on a living person. I think that when necessary, abortion should be made legal. This isn't saying or telling mothers to start aborting children, this wouldn't be right. And what does science tell me? Exactly the same. .

 

[Valjean]

I'm a Christian and totally support abortion. In my opinion, abortion is NOT and cannot be a crime. When the mother's life is on danger, do we really think of an unborn life rather than on a living person. I think that when necessary, abortion should be made legal. This isn't saying or telling mothers to start aborting children, this wouldn't be right. And what does science tell me? Exactly the same. .

But most abortions are not to preserve the mother's life, most are more matters of convenience; to preserve the mother's quality of life, mental health or future prospects.
Is an "unborn life" not a "living person?"
"When necessary" can be interpreted in various ways.
What does science have to say about this? Science does not deal in questions of ethics.

 

[columbus]

I'm a Christian and totally support abortion. In my opinion, abortion is NOT and cannot be a crime. When the mother's life is on danger, do we really think of an unborn life rather than on a living person. I think that when necessary, abortion should be made legal. This isn't saying or telling mothers to start aborting children, this wouldn't be right. And what does science tell me? Exactly the same. .

What does science tell you?
Science tells me that human beings begin when two gametes merge to form a unique new human being. That is, life begins at conception. Individual lives, that is.
My belief in the inherent worth and dignity of every individual, however, didn't come from science. Science has no ethical components, it's only about data.

Perhaps you disagree?
Tom

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I wonder if people are desensitized to a fetus, or womb life to the point they don't feel anything for it? Does it seem right not to feel compassion or anything toward what is developing into human life? How do we decide when life is precious? If you start thinking of a fetus as being alive, then casually terminating it seems really terrible. I remember when I had to change my mind about abortion. I was horrified in a sense that I had been desensitized toward this living being enough that I had convinced myself that casual abortion is nothing.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Regardless of what one's position on abortion is, I think the question needs to be asked:

Is it right to talk about a fetus as though it's nothing and worthless? Is it right to shut down empathy and morality toward a developing life?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Regardless of what one's position on abortion is, I think the question needs to be asked:

Is it right to talk about a fetus as though it's nothing and worthless? Is it right to shut down empathy and morality toward a developing life?

This appears to be a bit of a strawman. I think that casual abortion is very rare. Usually it is a very difficult decision for the woman involved. But I do agree that in the rare cases of casual abortion it is a bad idea. But you can't legislate away a bad idea. I am not sure when a fetus becomes a human being. It has to be a personal choice since there is no way to decide logically or even based upon religion. Contrary to what Christians claim the Bible does not oppose abortion. Anti-abortion people appear to understand this and have even changed the interpretation of one verse over the years to make it look like that is the case. I can't say anything for other religions. But from my understanding the Hebrews used to believe that life began at birth or even later.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Regardless of what one's position on abortion is, I think the question needs to be asked:

Is it right to talk about a fetus as though it's nothing and worthless? Is it right to shut down empathy and morality toward a developing life?

A question for you to ask yourself: is it right to talk about a woman as though she's nothing and worthless? Is it right to shut down empathy and morality toward an actual life?

After all, about half of those fetuses are female. If you're happy to disregard their value and well-being as adults, why are you so worried about them while they're in the womb?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I agree it has to be the woman's choice ultimately, as said above- I just think it'd be good if women were educated about it. That hopefully, they wouldn't casually have an abortion.