Planned Parenthood and Abortion

[Rex]

This is my first post on this site. I found this website by accident after reading information on "priests for life". After working in hospitals in the medical field for many, many years I can assure you "doubting, or in denial, Thomases" that the pictures shown on Priests for Life are real. Actually, they're not as real as seeing the product of abortion "up close and personal". Get your heads out of the sand for God's sake! These are tiny little human beings....miniatures of us...if we only allow them to grow. They suffer horrible deaths during their abortion, i.e., murder. It is sheer torture! Many, many times during late term abortions they whimper or actually cry. But not for long. If you care so much about "this is my body" fine...but this miniature child is NOT your body. It's a completely separate person's body your killing. Now, if you believe in abortion, which we all know is the slaughtering of the most innocent of all, just have the guts to say so. Don't ramble on about...oh, let's see, it's not human until such and such month, or, it doesn't feel anything, or those pictures aren't real, they're phonies. You're the phonies. Wake up and look at these little babies you believe have no rights to anything. If you're an atheist or a pagan or whatever the heck you decide to believe in or not believe in, if you have one iota of decency you will have to admit that the killing of these innocent children in WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. There is, quite simply, no justification in taking their life. Do whatever you please with your life or your body, but don't play around with the taking of another's life....especially one so defenseless and innocent. Just my ramblings for the day. (Oh, and I'd be willing to wager those who most promote abortion are the very ones who scream about the injustices concerning capital punishment...the humanely administered death penalty for our most sadistic, evil citizens.)

Irishgal...oh and God's Peace to all of you.

Irishgal,

I wouldn't be so quick to judge. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless of what any of us say. If someone want to be pro-abortion that is their right and doesn't make them any less of a person b/c you think different.

 

[Irishgal]

I'm not judging...God alone will take care of that. I'm stating my feelings and my opinions, which are completely anti-abortion. Or is this site only devoted to the ramblings of pro-choice/pro-abortionists? If so, I've found the wrong site for me.

Irishgal

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I'm not judging...God alone will take care of that. I'm stating my feelings and my opinions, which are completely anti-abortion. Or is this site only devoted to the ramblings of pro-choice/pro-abortionists? If so, I've found the wrong site for me.
Irishgal

Irishgal -
Rex is asking that you allow others to have their opinion without attacking them for it. Nothing more.

TVOR

 

[cardero]

THEOLOGIC OR RELIGIOUS FAITH BELIEF



This is best explained by considering three people who might state their respective beliefs as follows:

a) I believe in God. I believe He creates a soul. I believe the soul is created at conception. Therefore, I believe that human Life begins at conception.

b) I also believe in God and a soul but I don’t believe the soul is created until birth (or some other time). Therefore, I believe that human life begins at birth (or some other time).

c) I don’t believe in God or a soul.



Comment

- The above are statements of religious faith or its absence.

- None of the above religious faith beliefs can be factually proven.

- Each individual has a right to his or her own religious beliefs.

PHILOSOPHIC THEORIES



Human life can be defined by using a wide variety of philosophic beliefs and theories. These use social or psychological rationale which can involve biologic mileposts. Examples of philosophic definitions of when human life begins include the following: When there is consciousness; when there is movement; when there is brain function, or a heartbeat; when viable; at birth; when wanted; when there has been an exchange of love; when "humanized"; when this is a person (how-ever "person" is defined); if mentally or physically normal, etc.



Comment

While admittedly arrived at through a certain reasoning process, all of the above remain theories. None can be proven factually by science.

Each individual has a right to hold his own philosophic beliefs.

People of good will can and do differ completely on the correctness of any or all of the philosophic beliefs and theories mentioned.



It has been explained to me that the development of the human in the mother’s womb is NATURE at work. GOD has created NATURE and GOD created the human system (biological functions) to perform and operate in accordance to His Laws of Nature. NATURE does not judge right or wrong, NATURE performs a function until it cannot perform it anymore.

GOD does not create or assign your experiences or PURPOSE. This is an individual entity’s plan, an individual entity’s life, the individual entity’s experience, the individual entity’s existence. No two experiences or existences are the same. Though you may share experiences with other physical entities your paths or life PURPOSES are quite unique. This is how the soul develops/acquires personality and individualism. Personality cannot be developed in the womb. Individualism cannot be developed in the womb. Only when we are exposed to the outside physical environment (read: birth) can other humans observe/notice/recognize personality/individualism/spirituality. A baby’s leg kicking in the womb is not expressing personality/individualism/ spirituality, a baby stirring in the womb is not expressing personality/individualism/spirituality, a baby heartbeat in the womb is not expressing personality/individualism/spirituality, DNA though very important in defining the human shell and how will it look and how it will function is not an expression of personality/individualism/spirituality.
All of these biological examples that have been proposed throughout this debate are characteristics of a NATURAL physical human development not the evidence of the soul’s personality/individualism/spirituality.

In the understanding of abortion there is no personality/individualism/spirituality you are destroying. There is matter. Matter can be modified, created, or destroyed. In the case of abortion, matter is destroyed. Whether you believe the soul incorporates during conception (or whether you believe the soul incorporates during birth) the soul/spirit/personality/individual is secured and has remained in/returned to the spirit world where it originally resides.

 

[huajiro]

Rabid anti-Planned Parenthood like this never fails to astound me. I'd like to know where you got the idea that PP is anti-Christian, seeing as how their mission statement is strangely devoid of parading anti-Christian morals. And.. anti-family? Have you even READ their mission statement?

"[font=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][font=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]It [reproductive freedom] helps ensure that children will be wanted and loved, that families will be strong and secure, and that choice rather than chance will guide the future of humanity.[/font][/font]"

I honestly don't see anything other than rabid anti-abortion sentiments in your post. Planned Parenthood is just the convenient thing to attack, it seems.

Isn't murder anti-Christian?

Last time I checked "Thou shalt not kill" was still one of the ten commandments

Abortion goes against just about any religion, how is it that it still exists?

 

[robtex]

Isn't murder anti-Christian?

Last time I checked "Thou shalt not kill" was still one of the ten commandments

Abortion goes against just about any religion, how is it that it still exists?

Huajiro, you can't use "thou shall not kill" as an absolute statement. Acutally the translation is "thou shall not murder" if you want to be technical. But either way the statment is not percieved in by the Christians as absolute. Examples of permissable killing are hunting animals, (christians do not required to be vegatarians) and murder via self-defense...say stabbing a rapist, or shooting a burger that is armed.

Argueing that abortion is an improper way to murder based on the theory life begins at conception and that removing it is murder....is valid....not neccessaily true but at least valid. To say "thou shall not murder" is an absolute statment with no stipulations, corallaires or exceptions is to go against our self-survival mechanisms...even if the probablity of using such mechanisms is dimished in probablity due to industrialzation.

You second statement, abortion goes against just about any religion....other than Christanity can you please provide examples from 2--5 other religions.....I am not aruging ...just curious what you are basing this statment on.

 

[huajiro]

Huajiro, you can't use "thou shall not kill" as an absolute statement. Acutally the translation is "thou shall not murder" if you want to be technical. But either way the statment is not percieved in by the Christians as absolute.

It seems nothing is "absolute" in Christianity. Exodus 20:13 says very clearly "thou shalt not kill". Interpretation most times is just an attempt to get around doing something that you really don't want to do. Remember when your mother told you to take out the garbage? You could interpret that as taking out only the candy wrapper on your bed, or taking out the garbage whenever you want even though you knew it was now.....you knew exactly what she wanted.

You mentioned that Christians accept hunting, etc. It is pretty interesting that in the beginning we were all vegetarians: Genesis 1:29 that says, "Behold, I have given you every herb-yielding seed which is upon the face of the earth, every tree that has seed-yielding fruit--to you it shall be for food."(until the Great Flood and all vegetation was wiped out). We were supposed to go back to being vegetarians, but men like meat.

You second statement, abortion goes against just about any religion....other than Christanity can you please provide examples from 2--5 other religions.....I am not aruging ...just curious what you are basing this statment on.

Christianity: Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill"

Buddhism: 1. First Major Precept

On Killing
A disciple of the Buddha shall not himself kill, encourage others to kill, kill by expedient means, praise killing, rejoice at witnessing killing, or kill through incantation or deviant mantras. He must not create the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of killing, and shall not intentionally kill any living creature. (24)

Hinduism:

He who sees that the Lord of all is ever the same in all that is -- immortal in the field of mortality -- he sees the truth. And when a man sees that the God in himself is the same God in all that is, he hurts not himself by hurting others. Then he goes, indeed, to the highest path. Bhagavad Geeta 13.27-28

Islam:

018.074YUSUFALI: Then they proceeded: until, when they met a young man, he slew him. Moses said: "Hast thou slain an innocent person who had slain none? Truly a foul (unheard of) thing hast thou done!"
PICKTHAL: So they twain journeyed on till, when they met a lad, he slew him. (Moses) said: What! Hast thou slain an innocent soul who hath slain no man? Verily thou hast done a horrid thing.
SHAKIR: So they went on until, when they met a boy, he slew him. (Musa) said: Have you slain an innocent person otherwise than for manslaughter? Certainly you have done an evil thing.

Quran 18:74

I am sure with a lot of research I could show you that no religion promotes the killing of innocents, and unborn children are definitely innocent.

 

[Pah]

I am sure with a lot of research I could show you that no religion promotes the killing of innocents, and unborn children are definitely innocent.

Somehow I think the research to be very little to show that the Old Testament killed innocent children and women. Would you like me to cite the verses?

-pah-

 

[huajiro]

Somehow I think the research to be very little to show that the Old Testament killed innocent children and women. Would you like me to cite the verses?

-pah-

I am talking about the core beliefs. If you look at the core beliefs of most religions, they are pretty much the same. It is "man's" misinterpretation and distortion of these beliefs that has caused problems in history. If you look at any religion, there were examples of acts that went against the religion's core beliefs.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I am sure with a lot of research I could show you that no religion promotes the killing of innocents, and unborn children are definitely innocent.

I agree with everything you say in this statement, however, whether the unborn are human or fetus is at the very heart of the abortion issue.

TVOR

 

[huajiro]

I agree with everything you say in this statement, however, whether the unborn are human or fetus is at the very heart of the abortion issue.

TVOR

It is just a way for people to justify something that in their hearts they truly know is wrong. If you end a life that without your interference would have resulted in the birth of a child, you are killing that child.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

It is just a way for people to justify something that in their hearts they truly know is wrong. If you end a life that without your interference would have resulted in the birth of a child, you are killing that child.

Man alive, I hate this. I just went through this argument with Parapakrti in another thread. Let me boil it down to this.
1) YOU are entitled to YOUR opinion.
2) I am entitled to MY opinion.
3) You cannot read my mind, so please do not tell me what I know.
4) In my opinion, it is not a child until the moment of delivery. Your opinion may differ (in this case, it does), and I respect that.
5) The fact that your opinion is different than mine does not make you right.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[linwood]

Isn't murder anti-Christian?

Last time I checked "Thou shalt not kill" was still one of the ten commandments

Last time I checked the Christians were telling me that murder and killing were two different things.
Now you`re telling me they`re not?

 

[huajiro]

Man alive, I hate this. I just went through this argument with Parapakrti in another thread. Let me boil it down to this.
1) YOU are entitled to YOUR opinion.
2) I am entitled to MY opinion.
3) You cannot read my mind, so please do not tell me what I know.
4) In my opinion, it is not a child until the moment of delivery. Your opinion may differ (in this case, it does), and I respect that.
5) The fact that your opinion is different than mine does not make you right.

Thanks,
TVOR

I could never state your opinion, it is a given that everything that I say is my opinion

 

[linwood]

I am sure with a lot of research I could show you that no religion promotes the killing of innocents, and unborn children are definitely innocent.

I`d take that debate.
I know I could show that Judiasm/Christianity does indeed promote the killing of innocents when it is beneficial to their cause.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I could never state your opinion, it is a given that everything that I say is my opinion

Huajiro -
I truly do not want to get into an argument, and I appreciate that you realize that we have differing opinions. However, in your initial statement that I quoted, you said "It is just a way for people to justify something that in their hearts they truly know is wrong."

I took it that you were saying that you KNOW what is in my mind. If you were just using this as a figure of speech, I apologize. If, on the other hand, you literally meant that everyone KNOWS this, then my point stands.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[huajiro]

We should just call a truce

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I'll take your offer of a truce, provided that a friendship remains intact.

TVOR

 

[huajiro]

I'll take your offer of a truce, provided that a friendship remains intact.

TVOR

Of course. I need someone to keep me in line, and I sure the heck don't want you as an enemy, lol

 

[jindy]

In reading the introduction to this thread the autor stated that uneducated opinions were not welcomed, and indeed would not be replied to.

However, upon reading the rest of the thread I found it difficult to respond with anything other than an 'opinion'. Descriptions such as, 'killing centers' and 'chambers' (which hark back to the Holocaust) are being purposefully used to invoke emotion (either for or against) and are so value-ladden that the rest of the script becomes nothing more than a platform for agressive anti-abortion lobbying.

If it is an educated response that is wanted one must begin with a neutral description of the facts.

If I have offended the author of the statement, I apologise. But an educated debate, necessarily requires an educated value-free opening.