How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Abortion   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Abortion

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


0 posted 12-28-2006 08:22 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

It is wrong, it is murder.

I want to discuss this. And I promise to cut the sarcasm because of the seriousness of the topic.

The "inspiration" or should I say fuel for this bonfire of a thread is Local Rebel's statement to me to challenge his webpage. I willingly accept and throw down the glove.



And I said to the devil, "You better leave my spleen alone."
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


1 posted 12-28-2006 08:42 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi


Abortion is the ending of a human life, ( itís a not an apple
or a pear),  by the mother of that human life while he or she is within
that motherís  womb . . . and I personally have no problem with that
so long as no one pretends itís  anything else.


I think murder is a legal or moral term which may not apply here.

By the way infanticide was commonly practiced in the centuries before
around the world.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


2 posted 12-28-2006 08:57 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

You're dodging the challenge Edward -- unless you think Abortion is a silly topic for a thread.

But, allow me to help you -- this is the text from my site on Abortion:

quote:

Abortion
Theology


The book by which conservative Christian pro-lifers have espoused faith says that causing a miscarriage is not murder. The whole Pro-Life argument is predicated upon ' thou shalt not kill'

Kill what? Nothing? Not even a fly?

What does that commandment mean? Of course it means not to kill a human being in cold blood. A better translation from Hebrew would be 'Thou shalt not murder.'  The Mosaic Law is merely summarized in the Ten Commandments. As it is expanded throughout the course of the Old Testament it is clear this passage is talking about first degree murder of a human being.

The Fundamentalist Christian Pro-Life theology assumes though, this passage applies to a pre-born fetus. Which is in their eyes the same as a full term human being.

But, if this is the case then why did this God not write it in His book? In Exodus it says:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise." Exodus 21:22-25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a man accidentally kills a pregnant woman, that man should be condemned for committing murder. However, if he only kills the fetus - that is, if she miscarries - he is not condemned for murder. Clearly, then, God does not consider the pre-born fetus as being the same as a human being, in which case the Commandment of "Thou Shalt Not Kill (a human)" does not apply.

(It should be noted here that the most adamant pro-life proponents will claim 'miscarriage' means go into labor early and deliver a baby pre-maturely.  However -- this seems to be a rather convenient explanation considering 'miscarry' has never in history meant delivering early.)

Job says he would have been better off to be terminated as a fetus:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Why then hast Thou brought me out of the womb? Would that I had died and no eye had seen me! I should have been as though I had not been, carried from womb to tomb." Job 10:18-19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Ecclesiastes, Solomon declares much of life is futile. He writes repeatedly if life is good we should be thankful. But when it's not, he makes some interesting statements:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If a man fathers a hundred children and lives many years, however many they be, but his soul is not satisfied with good things, and he does not even have a proper burial, then I say, `Better the miscarriage than he, for it comes in futility and goes into obscurity; and its name is covered in obscurity. It never sees the sun and it never knows anything; it is better off than he.'" Ecclesiastes 6:3-5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a clear quality of life argument. He, like Job, makes the point that it would in some cases be better to abort than to bring a child into a miserable life. He even goes further here:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Then I looked again at all the acts of oppression which were being done under the sun. And behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and that they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors was power, but they had no one to comfort them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead more than the living who are still living. But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun." Ecclesiastes 4:1-3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here, the man to whom God gave the world's greatest wisdom (according to this sacred book) puts forth the idea that when life is miserable it is better to be ended or prevented.

This is a strong argument that Biblically speaking quality of a life is of paramount importance.  One could even extrapolate that the Bible supports ending a pregnancy in the face of a life without quality.

But the Bible neither condemns or supports abortion at all. Fundamentalist Christian leaders use verses out of context -- in the same way done here to support abortion -- to support their views against abortion.  They will, however, maintain they have the exclusive right to speak for God.

The early Christian Church at one time actually allowed the practice of abortion up to 90 days after conception. The Church followed Aristotlian principle that the 'ensoulment' did not take place until then. The belief was that a human male was ensouled after 40 days of gestation and the female after 90 days.

Seventh century CE, a series of penitentials were written by Theodore, organizer of the English church. These listed several sins, with the penance an offender must observe in punishment for the sin. Ironically "sins" which prevented conception had more severe penalties than abortion.

These included:
coitus interruptus (withdrawal of the penis prior to ejaculation)


oral sex or anal sex


sterilization
Oral intercourse required from 7 years to a lifetime of penance; abortion required only 120 days.

In a case of a monk who had arranged for his lover to have an abortion Pope Innocent III decided the monk was not guilty of homicide if the fetus was not "animated."

In the 13th century he said the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of "quickening" - which, according to him, was when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. After this so-called ensoulement, abortion was considered murder; before this occurred though it was a lesser offence, because it terminated only potential human life, not human life.


Biology


It is a fact that every person begins as a single cell. Oxygen and food alone are needed for it to grow into a full term human. (oh and a nice woman to be the host.) That person never existed before and will never exist again. The 46 chromosomes contained in that single cell will determine the entire physiology of the person it has the potential to become.

There is no scientific doubt that when the sperm and ovum meet to form a single cell a unique life form has been added to the bio-diversity of the planet. Previously this was the only way an individual could be developed. Cloning, however, has changed that picture.

But, the ovum was alive before. The mother, from birth, carried inside her all the eggs she would ever have the potential for carrying to term. And yet everyone agrees that the ovum is not a human life.

The father produces thousands of sperm per minute. The sperm are alive. The live until they cannot meet with an ovum. Everyone agrees that the sperm is not a human life.

Some people feel the transition to human life happens when the fetus loses its gill slits and tail and begins to "look like" a baby, or when the fetus becomes viable, (i.e. able to live outside the womb), or when its brain has developed to a particular degree. Hints of consciousness have been found in 7-month-old fetuses and measured brain-wave patterns similar to dreaming at 8 months gestation.

The medical profession appears to follow the viability criteria. Medical societies enforce regulations prohibiting abortions after (typically) 20 or 21 weeks of pregnancy. The US Supreme Court also seems to have used viability as a significant event; it allows states to prohibit abortions after viability for a wide range of reasons.

Some believe that the fetus becomes a human being only after it has been delivered and is breathing on its own. They may be reluctant to consider a fetus that is about to be delivered as human, because of the resulting "slippery slope" problem that would criminalize abortions at gradually earlier stages of pregnancy.

So... there is no compromise or easy answer.

A cell is not a full term human. If a woman decides to eliminate a pregnancy in the early stages..... It may be a sad event but it is not murder. Sad.. because it signifies a moment of what might have been had the world been a different place.

Are abortions desirable? No. Should they be encouraged? Certainly not as a means of simple birth control.
http://www.geocities.com/nighthawke700/abortion.htm




So, build your case Ed.  A declaration is not an argument.  Refute the information I present.
Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


3 posted 12-28-2006 09:02 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

"I think murder is a legal or moral term which may not apply here."

So when a child is aborted, it does not live, correct? It's life is prevented... That sounds like murder to me: the prevention of life.

"By the way infanticide was commonly practiced in the centuries before"

Yes it was, and so was decapitating and burning women at the stake; and wearing chastity belts. That arguement doesn't stand, they were wrong back then as well.

Thanks

And I said to the devil, "You better leave my spleen alone."

Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


4 posted 12-28-2006 09:04 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

"You're dodging the challenge Edward -- unless you think Abortion is a silly topic for a thread."

Ha, you're a natural instigator.

I'll review the material and post in a little bit.

And I said to the devil, "You better leave my spleen alone."

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


5 posted 12-28-2006 09:11 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

'"By the way infanticide was commonly practiced in the centuries before"

Yes it was, and so was decapitating and burning women at the stake; and wearing chastity belts. That arguement doesn't stand, they were wrong back then as well.'


Triage . . .

It' easy enough to talk such
in a fat country.  

I have respect for a mother then who exposed
her last six babies so her first six might live
to see maturity.

Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


6 posted 12-28-2006 09:22 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

"It' easy enough to talk such
in a fat country."

That's not necessary Huan. I won't respond to such nonsense. There is no need to be insulting. Ugly responses won't help your point.

"I have respect for a mother then who exposed
her last six babies so her first six might live to see maturity."

I'm not sure where you are getting at with this. Are you saying that a woman aborted her last six children to save her first six? You need to clarify if we are going to debate.

And I said to the devil, "You better leave my spleen alone."

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


7 posted 12-28-2006 09:35 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

I'll review the material and post in a little bit.



Ok.. but, I thought you already read my site and were prepared to debate.

What John means by 'exposed' is the practice of infanticide by exposing a newly born baby to the elements.
Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


8 posted 12-28-2006 10:04 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

"Ok.. but, I thought you already read my site and were prepared to debate."

You're one of a kind my man. Really, I want time to collect my thoughts. I like to process my thoughts before spitting them out, you should try it.

"What John means by 'exposed' is the practice of infanticide by exposing a newly born baby to the elements."

That might be the cruelest thing I've heard. That's absolutely evil. I guess adoption agencies are just a myth. That is murder no question. Anyone who argues that needs to read a dictionary. And I have no respect for a woman or man who does that.

"I have respect for a mother then who exposed
her last six babies so her first six might live"

Maybe she shouldn't of had 12 KIDS IF SHE COULDN'T TAKE CARE OF THEM! It's irresponsible.

And I said to the devil, "You better leave my spleen alone."

Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


9 posted 12-28-2006 10:08 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

From LR's website:
quote:
(It should be noted here that the most adamant pro-life proponents will claim 'miscarriage' means go into labor early and deliver a baby pre-maturely.  However -- this seems to be a rather convenient explanation considering 'miscarry' has never in history meant delivering early.)


You're begging the question here.  I could just as easily say that the translation "miscarriage" is a convienient attempt to justify abortion.  The question is, should the Hebrew language be translated as "miscarriage" or as "premature birth"?  Pointing out that miscarriage has never meant premature birth is a very shabby attempt to argue which word it should be ... We already know that they don't mean the same thing.
  

The fact is, the Hebrew word "yatsa" is a very general term which means to "go out", "appear", or "bring forth".  It does not carry the same specificity of meaning as the english word "miscarry", which means obviously that the fetus would necessarily die and then come out.  


If you admit the term is ambiguous, then you have to consider the remainder of the verse which says "... yet if no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the womanís husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life ..." (NKJV)


Taken in context, who would consider a miscarriage a small injury or no harm?  Close friends of mine suffered through a late term miscarriage and it was devastating.  Also miscarriages (other than early pregnancy) involve a presentation of a deceased human body with hands and feet and eyes, giving poignancy to the text when it mentions those things ... and adding difficulty to the text if we're going to insist that the fist part of the verse meant "miscarriage".  

So the whole passage taken together strongly leans toward the interpretation of premature birth.  But there are those who will insist that the word itself (meaning "depart from" or "coming out") is ambiguous enough that it tecnically could mean miscarriage.  I give them that, but they are ignoring context enough that I can present a fairly strong case that what the pro-lifers are saying is the best interpretation.  


And that is only the immediate textual context.  Next you have the rest of the Bible to square with.  I could, in more detail, refute your misuse of passages out of Job where a despairing sick man despairs of life and compares himself to a miscarried fetus, but I think the misapplication is obvious enough.  Though the Bible doesn't speak directly into the practice of abortion, it's overall statements about human life, and the unborn, make an attempt at pro-abortion theology dubious.  


It's not only the Biblical account of life which attests to the wrongness of abortion, but also the difficult existential realities surrounding it.  I don't know of a woman who's had an abortion, and hasn't regretted it, or felt guilty.  Misdirected social censure and conditioning or an operational and offended conscience?          


More later ...
(Ed why'd you have to do this?)    


Stephen.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


10 posted 12-28-2006 10:10 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

You're one of a kind my man. Really, I want time to collect my thoughts. I like to process my thoughts before spitting them out, you should try it.



It was your choice Ed.  Obviously I very carefully researched and processed my thoughts five years ago before creating a web page with references and posting it on the web.

But, you indicated you were ready for this.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


11 posted 12-28-2006 10:11 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

I question how carefully Reb.  I'm ready!  

You didn't miss my post did you?


Stephen.
Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


12 posted 12-28-2006 10:14 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

I know LR. No one could form a good debate that quickly. Your work on your page is, I have to admit very thorough, wrong: but thorough.

I mean it when I say this, but I'm starting to like you. You challenge everything I say (needlessly yes) but still this is a good learning experience, for the both of us maybe.

And I said to the devil, "You better leave my spleen alone."

Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


13 posted 12-28-2006 10:20 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

Steph, you said that wonderfully! It's good to have someone on my side.

And why did I do this? Well, I've wanted to for a while but never had the gumption. I guess LR gave it to me.


Cheers

And I said to the devil, "You better leave my spleen alone."

Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


14 posted 12-28-2006 10:22 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Ed, I never said I was on your "side".  I just try to tell the truth.  I'll tell you when you're wrong too.     Just know that I respect and love my ideological opponents.  I know this is a tough issue for many women, and I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.  


Stephen.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


15 posted 12-28-2006 10:27 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Since I've already discussed it and demonstrated some understanding of the translational / interpretational task before us, I felt that I would also post a link that touches upon the one scripture which is most commonly misused by pro-abortionists.

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5700


Stephen
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


16 posted 12-28-2006 10:52 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Sorry to be interrupting your life Stephen but glad to have you,

Let's take a look at different interpretations of Exodus 21:22

(NKJV) Exodus 21:22 " If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges [determine.]  

(NASB) Exodus 21:22 "If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide.  

(KJV) Exodus 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart [from her], and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges [determine].  

(CEV) Exodus 21:22 Suppose a pregnant woman suffers a miscarriage as the result of an injury caused by someone who is fighting. If she isn't badly hurt, the one who injured her must pay whatever fine her husband demands and the judges approve.  

(TEV) Exodus 21:22 "If some men are fighting and hurt a pregnant woman so that she loses her child, but she is not injured in any other way, the one who hurt her is to be fined whatever amount the woman's husband demands, subject to the approval of the judges.  

(RSV) Exodus 21:22 "When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.  

(JPS1917 OT) Exodus 21:22 And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no harm follow, he shall be surely fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.  

(Rotherham) Exodus 21:22 And when men strive together and push against a woman with child, and she miscarry, hut there is no other mischief, he shall, surely be fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him, but he shall give it through judges.  

(BBE) Exodus 21:22 If men, while fighting, do damage to a woman with child, causing the loss of the child, but no other evil comes to her, the man will have to make payment up to the amount fixed by her husband, in agreement with the decision of the judges.  

(GodsWord) Exodus 21:22 "This is what you must do whenever men fight and injure a pregnant woman so that she gives birth prematurely. If there are no other injuries, the offender must pay whatever fine the court allows the woman's husband to demand."  

The actual English translation seems to be anyone's preference -- which is my point entirely.  You can't use the Bible to make this case.

If you want to talk about verse 22 you have to talk about verse seven.

Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


17 posted 12-28-2006 10:59 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
The actual English translation seems to be anyone's preference -- which is my point entirely.  You can't use the Bible to make this case.


Nice try Reb, but I already conceded the ambiguity of that particular word.  I won't concede however the ambiguity of the immediate context which you didn't respond to.  And I also won't concede that demonstrating that one passage is nebulous, proves that the Bible does not suppy the answer.  The pro-life argument is not built upon one lynchpin scripture, but rather the scriptural view of human life, which is sacred.


Stephen.

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


18 posted 12-28-2006 11:05 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

I'm afraid I'm not following you at the moment Stephen... I posted the entire verse.

If you're referring to this statement
quote:

Taken in context, who would consider a miscarriage a small injury or no harm?



That's a great question.  Moreover -- who can consider a pre-mature birth at the time of Exodus to be anything but a mis-carriage?  And, why is it only to be compensated for financially?  

Scholars disagree.

But, there is little disagreement in verse seven.  If you want to talk about the Bible presenting a picture of the sanctity of life you have to talk about verse seven.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


19 posted 12-28-2006 11:08 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
If you want to talk about verse 22 you have to talk about verse seven.



Not really.  I think the fallacy is yours which says that if one subject comes up in the Bible then every subject must come up.  Slavery is not a simple question in the Bible.  Neither is God's forbearance.  But that God chose to begin with the Jews within their social order and customs, and even gave mitigating rules concerning it, does not nullify any statements against abortion.  


Bringing up every possible argument about human dignity, before we even get started good, is obfuscation ... (not that we wouldn't get there eventually )


Stephen.


Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


20 posted 12-28-2006 11:17 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
That's a great question.  Moreover -- who can consider a pre-mature birth at the time of Exodus to be anything but a mis-carriage?  And, why is it only to be compensated for financially?

Survival of pre-term birth is possible, perhaps even without modern medical intervention.  But I think the important thing to note about the verse is that it doesn't preclude miscarriage from happening ... hence "if there is any harm... life for life".  In that case a miscarriage would not be merely compensated for financially, but with a man's life.  Only if "no harm", would financial restitution be made.  


Stephen.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


21 posted 12-28-2006 11:19 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Why should your interpretation be exclusive Stephen?  There is no single 'Biblical view of life'.  But, construct yours.  

Explain the contrast between your present interpretation, the Vatican's modern interpretation, and the early Church's interpretation(s).

I haven't looked at your resourse yet -- I apologize -- I will tomorrow.  

I'm an old man.

I'm going to bed.  
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


22 posted 12-28-2006 11:24 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
Why should your interpretation be exclusive Stephen?  There is no single 'Biblical view of life'.  But, construct yours.  


I'm not denying differences of interpretation even among those that oppose abortion.  However there is more evidence for a substantial unity, than otherwise.  Unless you're edging toward that deconstructionist stance of "no truth to be interpreted", and "it's anyone's guess".  In that case, your use of the Bible is questionable to begin with.  But I'll be looking forward to your contrasts anyway.  


But by all means old man, go get some rest.     


(ding ding)


Stephen.  
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


23 posted 12-28-2006 11:39 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
But that God chose to begin with the Jews within their social order and customs, and even gave mitigating rules concerning it, does not nullify any statements against abortion.

What statements against abortion?

quote:
The pro-life argument is not built upon one lynchpin scripture, but rather the scriptural view of human life, which is sacred.

Perhaps then, Stephen, you would like to document for us this sanctity of human life?
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


24 posted 12-29-2006 12:05 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Ron:
quote:
What statements against abortion?

For now, mine and Ed's ... the Pope, Muslims, Protestant leaders, and countless other pro-lifers.    

But didn't I already mention that the Bible does not directly address this?  (We could discuss the possible reasons why- not least the popularization and elevation of abortion to clinical efficiency in modern times)  But it's probably similar to the practice of pederasty which is not directly mentioned in scripture.  It would be foolish to say that such a practice cannot be solidly denouced based upon Biblical principles of sexual and human morality, just because it isn't directly mentioned.


quote:
Perhaps then, Stephen, you would like to document for us this sanctity of human life?


I can Ron indeed.  I figured most of the scriptural references would end up being discussed in reaction to Reb's refutation of the main scriptures used to argue pro-life on his website.  Give it time.  I know you're trying to force my hand early, but when have you ever known me to skimp on threads?  (My wife's the one who does that.  I have to beg her to buy new clothes)      


Lastly, I'm not just here to argue from the Bible alone, (though I think that it is the foundation for life being sacred).  A host of religious and non-relgious aspects combine in the anti-abortion argument.


(yawn)


Guess I'm not as young as I thought.  I'm right behind ya Reb.

Stephen.      
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Abortion   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors