Abortion...

[Elendil]

Well I don't think there is a thread like this, and I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I want to have an abortion discution.

I'm saying, truthfully that there is not ONE good reason to have an abortion. Even if there was (and there's NOT) it would still be murder.

Sometimes people abort if the doctor says the baby has brain damage. I know some people who's doctor told them that. They WOULDN"T have an abortion, and there was nothing wrong with their son at all. I've heard of that happening atlot.

[darkestlight88]

I agree about not getting an abortion. It IS murder and there is too much of that already and for the good of getting rid of those who cause havoc for the rest of us, but there's no need to kill off something that hasn't even sinned ONCE. It doesn't make any sense at all. My cousin's HUGE on getting rid of abortions. I support her. Babies don't deserve to die if someone doesn't want them. They can be put up for adoption. They don't need to die. There's no good in that.

[glamel]

Abortion, termination of pregnancy, termination of someone's life.
Actually they said , well it is a heated argument over and over again, that
A woman has the right whether to get pregnant or abort the fetus,
Another thing is they state what a human is, that is they must have a feeling which is the feeling of happiness, pain, pleasure, love , joy etc.; then they too must know how to communicate and must have mental abilities like a human being. Fetus doesn't have that traits, so it is okay to abort it. They said that a week or two pregnancy is just some blood so basically if you were to abort it, it is not killing ahuman after all. That is why other countries made the Abortion legal.
Actually for me, Abortion is merely killing a child. As a Christian I do believe that everyone deserves to live. I don't know what kind of sick person a woman wanted to kill a part of her. or A man who wanted her partner to abor their child.

[Queen Swanwhite]

Yes, sometimes there are reasons for abortion. If the mother is too young and is too young to give birth, the mother is sick basically too weak, or the child is sick, or it was a,um, accident.. ;) :)

[EveningStar]

Do you folks realize that "disucssion threads" about abortion and, like another recent one I saw, drug use may jeopardize our standing as a "family friendly forum"? That drug use and abortion as topics are as quick to push a TV show from G (all audiences) to something much higher just because they are MENTIONED?

This is a hot button topic. The first sign it shows of going out of control it will be slapped with a lock so big I'll have to wheel it over on a dolly. :cool:

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Elendil, I appreciate your courage in starting this thread, and as a firm pro-lifer I agree with you. Unfortunately, these discussions often generate far more heat than light, so I hope it can retain a civil tone - despite the serious nature of the topic. Thus I would encourage all to heed Chakal's warning, and try to keep the tenor of a discussion.

The problem is often one of presuppositions - for instance, is the issue "the pregnancy" or "a child"? You can almost tell which side a person is on by the terms they use. For instance, Queen Swanwhite, you use the example of a mother "too young to give birth". By definition, if a woman is old enough to get pregnant, she is old enough to give birth - it's how women's bodies work. And if the child was "an accident"? If it's a human inside the womb, is the fact that his creation was not intentional justification for exterminating him?

As you can see, the issues get very complex very quickly. That's why human societies throughout history have closely guarded marriage and intercourse - to avoid just such complications. (Some even maintain that God Himself gave instructions on the topic! :))

[Queen Swanwhite]

[QUOTE=PrinceOfTheWest]Elendil, I appreciate your courage in starting this thread, and as a firm pro-lifer I agree with you. Unfortunately, these discussions often generate far more heat than light, so I hope it can retain a civil tone - despite the serious nature of the topic. Thus I would encourage all to heed Chakal's warning, and try to keep the tenor of a discussion.

The problem is often one of presuppositions - for instance, is the issue "the pregnancy" or "a child"? You can almost tell which side a person is on by the terms they use. For instance, Queen Swanwhite, you use the example of a mother "too young to give birth". By definition, if a woman is old enough to get pregnant, she is old enough to give birth - it's how women's bodies work. And if the child was "an accident"? [QUOTE/]

Maybe i didn't express myself right. When I say too young I mean, if she gives birth, it will probably ruin her life...say 13 - 16 years. An accident, as in, the didn't want to get pregnant but did. :rolleyes:

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Maybe i didn't express myself right. When I say too young I mean, if she gives birth, it will probably ruin her life...say 13 - 16 years. An accident, as in, the didn't want to get pregnant but did. :rolleyes:Ah - but that just pushes the question back a level. Is it just to kill one person so that another's life might go as she (or someone else) has planned? As you can see, it is a complex question.

[Queen Swanwhite]

Well, I'm gonna stay out of this then, cause I know that it is developing into a fight or whatever.
An I never said that abortion was right or wrong.

[PeterPevensie89]

Yes abortion is murder, God views even unborn babies as lives, so it would be the same as killing someone by chopping them up and throwing them in the trash!
Coz I heard that one way people abort babies is to use medical tools to mince the baby up! Is that any differant from doing it to an adult?!

[Queen Swanwhite]

Like i said, sometimes there are real reasons why people should have an abortion. If you were married, and your wife was having a baby, but she couldn't have it becuase if she did, she would die, you would have to get an abortion to live. And God sends aborted (i think thats the right term) to heaven. They're waiting to see their mothers, and I know someone is going to argue. I never siad aborting is right or wrong.

[PeterPevensie89]

Well the bible only says that 144,000 are going to heaven, the rest are going to live on earth.

[Aslan's Son]

I, like many other people in this thread, are pro-life and a Christian. I believe abortion is murder. If a mother doesn't want the baby, give it up for adoption! I'm sure there's someone who'd want it. When the mothers say that the baby is part of their body, they're completely wrong. Scientifically speaking, a baby is its own genetic identity; they have their own sets of genes and what not. Also, the only reason I can think of as to why an abortion would be needed is if giving birth to the baby would endanger the mother's life, its, or both of them.

[Queen Swanwhite]

Well the bible only says that 144,000 are going to heaven, the rest are going to live on earth.

The bible does NOT say that! :rolleyes:

[Señor Puntos]

I would give a load of writing trying to prove my point on the matter, but frankly, I can't be bothered.

I think if women want abortions they should just go ahead, I don't see fetus' as actual living beings with souls. And this thread is obviously gonna turn into a flame war with big words and bible quotes :rolleyes:

[EveningStar]

What bothers me most about the abortion on demand movement is the subterfuge. "Reproductive Health," for instance. Who could argue against health? Or "A woman's right to privacy extends to her body." Which means of course that the baby has neither a right to privacy nor its own body. And the term "pro choice" when the baby doesn't get one. As far as I'm concerned, the Oregon Assisted Suicide Law is the only law on the books that concerns a woman's right to control her own body. Whatever you're going to do, do it honestly.

[Gondorgirl]

have you read the Dr. Seuss book "Horton Hears a Who" ? it's definitely against abortion.

[EveningStar]

Ted Seuss Geissel (Dr. Seuss) was concerned with acceptance. He was light years ahead of his time on social justice issues. He never wrote on abortion, however. The "non-existent" Whos in Whoville represented the people we marginalize and ignore as if the did not matter. Such people, when they all speak up together, finally make the world know "We are here, we are here, WE ARE HERE!"

So before you slam the slue-slunkers and wham the gardinkers, don't take the book out of the context of his other works such as The Lorax and Oh The Places You'll Go.

[Señor Puntos]

I might be and interpreting The Sex Pistols lyrics wrongly but in the song 'Bodies' do they speak out against abortion? I dunno why I brought this up but Gondor[....]girl brought up the Dr.Zuess thing.

[EveningStar]

There were earth tremors before the eruption of Mount Vesuvius buried Pompeii...

RUMBLE RUMBLE RUMBLE...... Look out folks, Mount Lockathread is about to blow. Don't press your luck. :eek:

[waterhogboy]

The bible does NOT say that! :rolleyes:

It does - it says it in Revelations. Some people take it literally, but it could also be a symbolic number.

I would say abortion is wrong because it is murder. The only cases where it can be argued are in cases where the mother could die and certain other cases, which I may not be able to mention for Chakals reasons of 'family friendliness'. But I reckon you know what I mean. Don't wanna make nay trouble though!!! :rolleyes:

[Parthian King]

It does - it says it in Revelations. Some people take it literally, but it could also be a symbolic number.

Actually (to be totally off subject, but someone else brought it up) John the Revelator says he "saw" the 144,000 sealed. It never says these are the "only ones making it into heaven." That has been read into the text by certain sects.

And btw, no serious scholar of Revelation (not "Revelations"--argghhh--my pet peeve) would take this number to be anything by highly, highly symbolic. The Jehovah's Witnesses used this in the beginning of their sect to scare people into joining while there was still "room" (i.e., less than 144,000 members). After they outgrew that number (much to their own surprise), they came up with the "paradise on earth" thing so they could keep growing. This is not opinion I state, but the very printed materials of the sect itself.

OK, back to abortion...

[EveningStar]

Like all great numbers in the Bible, when Christ said not to forgive your brother seven times, but SEVEN TIMES SEVENTY, or 490 times, he didn't mean there would be a 491st time when you could kill him without qualms...

Listen to Parthian King. He has the right idea. ;)

[Gryphon]

Do you folks realize that "disucssion threads" about abortion and, like another recent one I saw, drug use may jeopardize our standing as a "family friendly forum"? That drug use and abortion as topics are as quick to push a TV show from G (all audiences) to something much higher just because they are MENTIONED?

This is a hot button topic. The first sign it shows of going out of control it will be slapped with a lock so big I'll have to wheel it over on a dolly. :cool:
you'd be surprised about how much kids know nowadays Chakal. Also, if we cant teach them these things from a biblical perspective than they might not get it from a biblical perspective at all.

[Gryphon]

Like i said, sometimes there are real reasons why people should have an abortion. If you were married, and your wife was having a baby, but she couldn't have it becuase if she did, she would die, you would have to get an abortion to live. And God sends aborted (i think thats the right term) to heaven. They're waiting to see their mothers, and I know someone is going to argue. I never siad aborting is right or wrong.
there was once a mother who found out she had cancer when she was pregant. she was told she could take treatments that would kill the baby or not take the treatments, have the baby and eventuallly die.

she didnt take the treatment.

she's the mother if a friend of mine. if she didnt give her life for him i wouldnt know my encouraging friend today.

throws things into perspective doesnt it? :o

[onlymystory]

First to echo mod sentiments, this discussion has to stay appropriate. Starting off I am going to lay a couple main rules. Anyone stating only that either abortion is murder or women should have a right to choose will have their posts deleted. that causes nothing but flaming. Have some reasons why. If you think abortion is murder than discuss why. Why do you think it should be viewed as a child not a fetus and how is it murder. Have a calm discussion. If you read a post and want to respond in anger or lash out at someone don't post. Give it time. If we can do that and not just jump in and yell that people are either murderers or taking away women's rights this discussion can stay open. You have opened up a discussion that requires maturity. Let's use it.

[narniawarrior]

adopting is not bad but putting a child in adoption is bad.The people who adopt are some who cant have kids.

[inkspot]

adopting is not bad but putting a child in adoption is bad.The people who adopt are some who cant have kids.
Are you saying it is good to adopt a child, but bad to put a child up for adoption? But surely we could not have one without the other? I know a couple of wonderful kids whose birth mothers abandoned them for one reason or another -- drug addiction which drove them to do illegal things, I guess -- but the babies they gave birth to were placed in loving homes and are now fabulous teens ... I don't think it was any bad thing their biological moms did to give them up.

[Kitanna]

Maybe i didn't express myself right. When I say too young I mean, if she gives birth, it will probably ruin her life...say 13 - 16 years. An accident, as in, the didn't want to get pregnant but did. :rolleyes:
If you thought you were responsible enough to have sex, than you should be responible enough to have the baby. If you choose to put it up for adoption or keep it in the end is up to you. The problem is teenagers think they're mature enough to handle sex, but very few are responsible enough to deal with what could (and has happened afterwards) such as an unwanted pregnancy or some diesease.
While I am a pro-lifer, I must say I think a woman should have the right to abort if she was raped. I can't say what I would do put in that situation, but for some women they can't bear the thought of giving birth to a child that was conceived through rape. It doesn't make abortion right, but I could understand if a pregnancy was terminated because of that.
Outside of rape I don't think there's any reason a woman should have an abortion. It's not fair to get rid of a life just because it doesn't fit your lifestyle and plans. You are in charge of your actions and you should take responsibilty for them.

[Aravis Kenobi]

I'm very strong willed about this topic. I don't think it's right to abort a child, even if he/she has brain damage, birth defects, and other problems. What a lot of people try to argue is that a baby isn't a baby until it's born, which is totally not true. It becomes a human being at the time of conception, not when it's born. I had a cousin who died two years ago, and I think, though I'm not sure, that her mom had the choice on whether to abort her or not becuase the doctor said that my cousin wouldn't live very long. They said she would only live about a year or two years after she was born. Guess what, she lived for fourteen years! The reason the doctors wanted my aunt (my cousin's mom) to abort her was because my cousin had cerebral palsy. She couldn't do anything on her own, and she was sick a lot. But, in spite of all that, my aunt and uncle loved her as much as if she was normal. I loved her too, though she couldn't talk or walk or do anything. When she died, she left a hole in all our hearts, and I'm glad my aunt didn't abort her, because I would have never known her. She touched a lot of people's lives even though she didn't speak. Even if I had a child in my womb when I have kids that may have something wrong, I won't abort it, no matter how hard the struggle. I hope I haven't disobeyed any rules.

[Charn_Tim]

I was going to stay out of this discussion, because it really hurts me deeply to think about this subject, but instead of just giving my thoughts and opinions and feelings, I'm going to post some facts and statistics which I find startling.


The heart starts beating somewhere between 18 and 25 days.
The brain becomes active in the 6th week of pregnancy
By week 9, all structures necessary for pain sensation are functioning. Thus, the fetus or unborn child feels pain at week 9.
By week 11, the baby is breathing fluid and will continue until birth
Nearly all organs and critical growth features are in place by the 10th week. After this it is just a matter of maturation.
As early as 16 weeks, the fetus or unborn child can hear the mother's heartbeat and external noises such as music.
The following three facts are taken from this website (http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats2.html):
There were more than 140,000 second and third trimester abortions in 2000. 2nd trimester begins in the 4th month or about 30th week of pregnancy.
In 2000 more children died from abortion than Americans died in the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf Wars combined.
A survey of women seeking abortions indicated that only 7% of women cited typical “hard cases” (rape, incest, or some health concern with either the baby or the mother) as the primary reason they were seeking abortion.

Right now (in America at least), abortion is legal at ALL stages of pregnancy, from pregnancy until the unborn baby's body is completely out of the womb.

[Aravis Kenobi]

I agree with that post. I don't really have problems with abortion IF AND ONLY IF, there's a health risk to the mother.

[onlymystory]

I have two stories. First, I was recently watching an episode of Grey's Anatomy (not the best show but i liked this message) One of the interns had discovered she was pregnant and was then assigned to a patient who had cancer. The patient was also pregnant and had two choices. Either get an abortion and live or keep the baby and probably die within five years thus never seeing the child grow up. The intern (who was planning on aborting her baby) kept trying to convince the woman to just get the abortion since there wasn't much hope. At the end of the episode the patient told the intern she was keeping the baby. The intern exploded, "Don't you want to live?!" she said. The patient simply responded, "by having my baby, I am living."
I thought it was nice to see Hollywood portray a different look at that.

Second story: This is a difficult one for me as I'm very close to my aunt. But when my aunt was 16 she had an abortion. She didn't tell anyone and tried to put it behind her. She married in her early 20's and was happy for a few years. But then she and her husband tried having kids. they eventually adopted two kids but my uncle still wanted one of his own. So they went to the doctor to find out the problem. The doctor walked back into the room and said the problem was very simple. My aunt's abortion had complications and she would never have kids. My uncle was in shock. He had no idea that she had ever had an abortion. Six months later my uncle left her with two kids to raise. He was that hurt by what she had done and it hadn't even been his kid. My aunt is still single to this day and often speaks against abortion. She struggles constantly with an addiction to painkillers and has had to be hospitalized nearly every year when the anniversary rolls around. She told me once when she was too drunk to think about what she was saying that everytime that day came around she had nightmares where a little baby girl kept asking why her mommy didn't want her. My aunt to this day can't handle being around babies very well. Both the physical and psychological problems were so overwhelming. My aunt still struggles with that one decision she made almost 40 years ago. Abortion causes so many more problems than people want to talk about. and I have several friends who had abortions and everyone of them has so much mental trauma from it that it breaks my heart.

[Kermit With Sword]

Abortion is wrong in all ways.
everyone deserves the chance to live.
who knows? they might do something wonderful.
why would God make humans if he just wanted them killed?
How would people doing abortion to their babies feel, if their mothers were gonna do it to them?

Just food for thought...

[Monkeh]

I say people can have an abortion, but only under certain circumstances(sp?). Using abortion as a Contraceptive, No.
But I just want to give an example of a case where it is ok (Note. This is entirely made up. Sorry if it Offends anyone or the names are similar. I am just making it up.)

Say 'little Susie' is only 12 or 13(Old enough to get pregnant for some girls). One day, 'Uncle John' see's that 'little susie' is getting older. He starts to play with her, and be her friend. Eventually it leads to something different, and her Rapes her. She is scared and doesn't tell anyone straight away. A few weeks later, 'little susie' goes to mum or dad, or someone else, and tells them what happened. Are you going to be the one to tell her that she has to live with it, that she has to carry the baby to term, and then deliver the baby? If you were going to do that, then there is a good chance you would also tell her that the baby is her's and that she has to look after it when she isn't even old enough to look after herself.

Nobody can tell me that this type of thing doesn't happen. It does. This is not an ideal world. Case like this are being reported almost everyday. And these are only the ones that are being reported. There are also case where the parents are ashamed and don't tell anybody what happened. They keep the girl at home until she comes to term then, take her to the hospital(or sometimes not) to have the baby delivered. Sometimes things go okay. But other times, they don't. Sometimes one, or both of them dies, because it taxes the bodies to much and they can't handle it.

Examples like this are one of the few times I consider Abortion ok.

[Charn_Tim]

Monkeh, I think that's a really good point, but what would you say about the psychological and emotional trauma that would still be associated with ending the life of the unborn baby even if it happened in a terrible situation such as that? Given that not-so-hypothetical situation, would the termination of one life make up for the wrong that was already committed or would it make matters worse?

Of course, I am a male, and I may not be the best judge of how a girl would react in that situation. Maybe one of the ladies would like to speak up regarding this one? In other words, if what Monkeh described happened to you, would you want to respond by getting an abortion? Would that make things better?

The other issue is, how can you tell in a reasonable amount of time whether the pregnancy was actually a case such as one you described or not? Who would judge that?

[onlymystory]

As a girl, I've always told myself that if I was ever raped I would keep the baby and give it up for adoption. But at the same time I don't know if I could follow through on that. I know the concern is for those girls and women who should be going through therapy and trying to heal from their traumatic experience are now having to go through nine months where every time they look down or in a mirror they are going to be reminded yet again of the pain and anguish they went through. I hope I could be strong enough to at least give the baby a chance at life but I don't know if I'd be strong enough. I'd have to trust God for that one.

[waterhogboy]

Hmmmm.... I agree with monkeh. I'll disagree first though!

Kermit - you made a good point about the baby cold grow up to become and do some amazing stuff - however, what if Hitler had been aborted??

Charn tim came up with some interesting facts about times whenparts of the foetus (correct English spelling ;) ) develop. I believe these show that foetuses (foeta??) are living humans. However, I dont believe you can put a 'start' on someones life. Is a baby not a living human before the minute before labour starts?? If not, then why does having a beating heart make you any less alive than someone who doesn't. I belive life starts when the sperm hits the egg.

Secondly, and more importantly, if a woman is pregnant a life is growing. God is the only being who has the authority to take lives so we should not abort babies.

However, I shall return to the point Monkeh made. I agree that abortion is ok in that circumstance. Being raped is hard enough psychologically to then have to raise a child that reminds you of what happened every time you look at them, and knowing what kind of person they're biological father is. However, I wouln't immediately condone a termination. There should be a lot of counselling and support to help the mother make her decision.

Finally, my true feelings are that, in any situation, whatever the mother decides to do, she needs peoples support. It can be damaging enough choosing to abort a baby, without having people sticking their noses up in disgust at what shes done. Christ would never have been like that.

[Kermit With Sword]

Christ Made the commandments saying, You shall not kill.

EDIT: people should look up to this.
seondly i don't know how someone could have the heart to do this. something like that would completely destroy my life.

+ looking at that as a mortal sin...
God made Hitler for his prupose on earth. u can;t say anything against it.
let God decide.

[Gryphon]

If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who
were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis,
would you recommend that she have an abortion?






























If you said yes you just aborted Beethoven...

[Kermit With Sword]

nope.
Human Life is Sacred. All men were created equal, and God has a plan for everyone.
Children are a gift. the one true thing, the one thing you'll ever fully own. u gave birth (women not men :p ) and no part of the child belongs to anyone.

[inkspot]

If we look at this from the Christian point of view ONLY and start with the supposition that life begins at conception, then there is never any way any abortion can be termed anything but murder. It's no good saying, "in the case of rape" because the baby (whose life began at conception) is not the rapist. The baby is an innocent human life. You can't say "to save the life of the mother" because the baby is not threatening the mother's life on purpose. The baby is an innocent human life with as much right to life as the mother. If you are Christian who says life begins at conception, then you must oppose every abortion, including the mini-abortion caused by the morning-after birth control pill.

There is a big difference, however, in believing this, in opposing abortion, and stating that women (non-Christian women especially) should be denied abortions. You cannot make them believe the way you believe; you cannot force them to have babies they don't want. Even when abortion was illegal, people could still get them -- so the legality of the thing really doesn't, to my mind, impact the spirituality.

While I oppose abortion, I do not think there is anything to be gained by making the procedure illegal unless we, as Christians, are willing to step forward and provide both for the expectant mom and for the new baby. Ideally, we could bring mom to Christ, and she would want to raise her baby in the faith. This is the way to stop abortion. This is the ideal way to save the babies. Perhaps if those of us who expend a lot of time and energy trying to have the abortion laws changed would pour that time and energy into crisis pregnancy centers and into sharing Christ's love, we would see a decline in abortions.

After all, nobody wants an abortion.

[EveningStar]

You can't say "to save the life of the mother" because the baby is not threatening the mother's life on purpose.Oh yes you CAN say it in cases where the mother is also not threatening the baby's life on purpose. Otherwise you are saying the Christian religion is the basis for making the decision on whether the baby or mother survives.

If two guys are on a life raft and there is food for one, does the Bible say which one lives and which one dies? Ok, so the baby is a full innocent human being, I grant you. But so is the mother.

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

Then the mother should have been more careful. It was her fault that she got pregnant in the first place. Ok in the situation of rape it wasn't the mother’s fault but does that give her leave to just murder a child? Would we allow a mother to kill a child that she was holding in he hands because it for some reason endangered her life? NO! She would be arrested and jailed but abortion slips our minds because we cannot yet see the physical child but the heart is still beating even if you want to ignore it.

[Euphrates]

I'm not sure if this discussion is in its infancy (pun intended) or ending, but I want to make a couple quick comments to inspire critical thought.

What is murder? I think that murder is unjustified killing. So, there are probably some types of killing that are justified. Some of you may think that the death penalty is acceptable, but some may not. It seems that hitting the switch on the train track in order to save the ten people tied to the track, but sacrificing the one person tied to the other track is a justifiable case of killing.

For something to be unjustified (or impermissible), it must be contrary to some right. What rights do people have?

Now, why is abortion murder? Are there any cases where abortion can be justified? If the fetus is threatening the life of the mother? Rape? Incest?

If the fetus has the right to not be killed, and the mother has that same right... how could aborting a fetus that is the result of rape and is threatening the life of the mother be considered unjustified? Does the fetus have a stronger claim to the right than the mother? Why?

Just trying to stimulate conversation.

[Gryphon]

honestly, you all say that the mother is wrong for aaborting a child, im not saying your wronge, but what would you say to the women on this forum that have had an abortion? surley if you take that into consideration you might say something diffrent.

If there is anyone out there that has been hurt by abortion than i am terribly sorry.

you all say you would never abort a baby, but in all honesty you cant say what you'll do in a situation until your faced with it.

i remember i always thought i would defend a friend to the death, when we thought there was an intruder in my friend's house i turned into a sudden coward and backed down in fear. there was no intruder but still, i had discovered what i really would have done, and i am now ashamed. i am diffrent and would in fact give my life for anyone, but i realized that day that you cant say how you'll react to something until you're faced with it.

[Charn_Tim]

There is a big difference, however, in believing this, in opposing abortion, and stating that women (non-Christian women especially) should be denied abortions. You cannot make them believe the way you believe; you cannot force them to have babies they don't want. Even when abortion was illegal, people could still get them -- so the legality of the thing really doesn't, to my mind, impact the spirituality.
inkspot, I respect this overtly gracious attitude, but the problem with this reasoning that I have can best be summarized in the following question: "What if the abolitionists, like Abraham Lincoln for example had this same attitude back in the 19th Century?" Was it wrong of them to tell the Southerners that they were not allowed to own slaves, just because it is against the Christian morality? I don't think it's wrong for us Christians to lobby against terminating a human life-in an attitude of grace and love of course.

[Eveningstarz_4]

Allow me to quote from the Bible..." Before I formed you in the womb I knew you...Now choose life, so that you and your children may live." Jeremiah 1:5 and Deuteronomy 30:19

Every year, the local pregnancy center holds a walk for life that I have been a part of for the past 3 years now. The center offers free ultrasounds so that mothers can get a picture of what their baby looks like before they decide to keep it or abort it. Maybe the center doesn't change the mind of every mother that comes in that door, but they have hope and faith in God for all of them. I know this has been said probably a million times already, but God has a plan for each and every baby. Yes, I believe every baby is innocent and shouldn't be punished for a rapist's or its mother's mistakes because it hasn't had a chance to have emotions, etc. As for a life or death situation, that's where faith comes in. Like I said, God has a plan for everyone He creates. If that's the mother's time to go, then who's to stop Him? And if it's not, well then, God will make it so the mother doesn't die. Adoption is always an option, and you don't have to hurt anyone by choosing that over abortion.

[Aravis Kenobi]

Abortion is wrong in all ways.
everyone deserves the chance to live.
who knows? they might do something wonderful.
why would God make humans if he just wanted them killed?
How would people doing abortion to their babies feel, if their mothers were gonna do it to them?

Just food for thought...

God didn't want us to kill children. It's the sinful human nature that taints our moral conscience. If Adam and Eve hadn't sinned in the Garden of Eden, then more children might still be alive. I'm not entirely blaming Adam and Eve, but sin and Satan get inside us so that we think, "it's okay if I do it just this one time." Like onlymystory said, there are consequences to the choices we make. (not the actual words.) And, if it's too painful to give up the baby, or to even have it, don't have sex until you're married. Period. That's a good way of preventing a lot of emotional problems tied to sexual relations outside of marriage.

[Narnia Man 2006]

I'm very strong willed about this topic. I don't think it's right to abort a child, even if he/she has brain damage, birth defects, and other problems. What a lot of people try to argue is that a baby isn't a baby until it's born, which is totally not true. It becomes a human being at the time of conception, not when it's born. I had a cousin who died two years ago, and I think, though I'm not sure, that her mom had the choice on whether to abort her or not becuase the doctor said that my cousin wouldn't live very long. They said she would only live about a year or two years after she was born. Guess what, she lived for fourteen years! The reason the doctors wanted my aunt (my cousin's mom) to abort her was because my cousin had cerebral palsy. She couldn't do anything on her own, and she was sick a lot. But, in spite of all that, my aunt and uncle loved her as much as if she was normal. I loved her too, though she couldn't talk or walk or do anything. When she died, she left a hole in all our hearts, and I'm glad my aunt didn't abort her, because I would have never known her. She touched a lot of people's lives even though she didn't speak. Even if I had a child in my womb when I have kids that may have something wrong, I won't abort it, no matter how hard the struggle. I hope I haven't disobeyed any rules.
I have an autistic sister and though she is different than us, and sometimes it is hard to understand her, I still love her. My mother hates abortion as much as I do. I am glad Mother never had an abortion; otherwise, Pamela wouldn't be my sister.

[Kitanna]

I live South Dakota and a law was recently passed that makes abortion legal. Now, while I hate abortion, I see this is law is not in everyone's best interest.
When talking to some friends about this issue I compared it to prohibition of the 1920's. The flow of alcohol did not stop when it was made illegal, people found ways to get around it. If abortion were to be made illegal in the US I think a similiar situation may rise. If a woman wants an abortion badly enough no law is going to stop her and if she does it herself there are serious side-effects. Abortion being legal isn't great, but a lot of damage can be done if abortion becomes illegal.
It's the way things are, so unless pro-lifers everywhere are willing to go to all the women thinking about abortion and say they'll support her and help with the baby, there's not much that can be done. It's a person's personal choice and the best anyone can do is try to talk them out of it.

[Aravis Kenobi]

That's what I'm talking about Narnia Man 2006! Exactly my thoughts! You know what it's like. People with disabilities can be the best things that happen in our lives.

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

honestly, you all say that the mother is wrong for aaborting a child, im not saying your wronge, but what would you say to the women on this forum that have had an abortion? surley if you take that into consideration you might say something diffrent.

If there is anyone out there that has been hurt by abortion than i am terribly sorry.



I know what you are saying here but my opinions that I stated before were partly formed by talking to women who had had abortions. They told me what a hellish experience it had been for them and the guilt that they had to deal with after the baby was killed. So when I say it is the mothers fault I mean it because I have had more than one tell me that they were wrong and they wish they could go back and save that baby.

[lions mane]

i hope i'm not really on the deffensive here!

well, i think that if a lady wants to get an abortion, it is completely up to her. it is really no one elses business what someone does to their own body and to the (whatever u want to call it, it's late and i can't really think right now) that she is carrying! ya know? i am so for pro-choice! ya know?

[narniawarrior]

Are you saying it is good to adopt a child, but bad to put a child up for adoption? But surely we could not have one without the other? I know a couple of wonderful kids whose birth mothers abandoned them for one reason or another -- drug addiction which drove them to do illegal things, I guess -- but the babies they gave birth to were placed in loving homes and are now fabulous teens ... I don't think it was any bad thing their biological moms did to give them up.Ok now u said that i guess it is good

[Charn_Tim]

No, gabe, I don't know, ya know? :p :D

I would have two questions for you in response to your post:

1) when does life begin? (see my post#31 (http://www.narniafans.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6051&page=4&pp=10) for some information if you'd like)
&
2) does a woman have a right to end a human life, even if it's her own (unborn) child?

Once these things are answered, I think some progress can be made.

[lions mane]

No, gabe, I don't know, ya know? :p :D

I would have two questions for you in response to your post:

1) when does life begin? (see my post#31 (http://www.narniafans.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6051&page=4&pp=10) for some information if you'd like)
&
2) does a woman have a right to end a human life, even if it's her own (unborn) child?

Once these things are answered, I think some progress can be made.
o.k. tim. i'll answer ur question as best i can! ya know?

the only answer i can come up for this is, do we live in america? where it's basically a free socity where we can do what we want unless it's illegal?

i mean, don't get me wrong, i do think that abortion is a horrid thing to do! but i say it's the mother's choice! don't forget, after doing something like this, the mother will never be the same! she will always wonder 'did i mess up? what would've happened if i kept the baby?' so the mother is basically screwed any way u look at it! ya know?


EDIT: sorry everyone, i seemed to have said legal insted of illegal. :o ya know?

[darkestlight88]

May I ask you on what terms you agree w/ the woman on abortion, Gabe? :)

I do NOT like abortion and I disagree w/ it completely. There is no good reason on the planet whatsoever to kill a being. The child could have actually done some good in our world. So, I might agree if it's a teenage girl who's giving birth but, a married woman getting an abortion is the thing I'm completely against. :eek:

[PrinceOfTheWest]

the only answer i can come up for this is, do we live in america? where it's basically a free socity where we can do what we want unless it's legal?Interestingly, that exact same argument was used to justify slavery. That was once legal in the United States, as well as several other places. The argument for slavery was, "they're my property, I paid for them - what right does anyone have to take them from me?"

You see, the core question is the same, and the issue will not be resolved until it is faced: is that being which is being killed (or enslaved) fully human? If it isn't, then the various appeals to privacy or property rights hold water. But if that being killed (or enslaved) is human, then you have to balance that being's rights against the other rights in question.

[Señor Puntos]

o.k. tim. i'll answer ur question as best i can! ya know?

the only answer i can come up for this is, do we live in america? where it's basically a free socity where we can do what we want unless it's legal?
I don't live in America, and I thought you could do things that are legal.

i mean, don't get me wrong, i do think that abortion is a horrid thing to do! but i say it's the mother's choice! don't forget, after doing something like this, the mother will never be the same! she will always wonder 'did i mess up? what would've happened if i kept the baby?' so the mother is basically screwed any way u look at it! ya know?
I agree with this.....well I kind of do. You're basically saying they're screwed either way, which isn't true.

[Narnia Man 2006]

What is even more upsetting is that one child can change the world; think about that. Just killing a bunch of babies will be written in the Book of Life that God has, abortion is a sin as well as a personal crime.

[inkspot]

Oh yes you CAN say it in cases where the mother is also not threatening the baby's life on purpose. Otherwise you are saying the Christian religion is the basis for making the decision on whether the baby or mother survives.

If two guys are on a life raft and there is food for one, does the Bible say which one lives and which one dies? Ok, so the baby is a full innocent human being, I grant you. But so is the mother.
In the example, the selfless/Christian thing to do is to give your life up so the other may live (from a Christian viewpoint, it is not a question of rights, but of Christ-likeness), and of course, a mother would gladly give up her own life to give the child a chance ...

[onlymystory]

I would encourage people to look at it from the guy's perspective too. (leaving rape and incest cases out of this) But when a young girl becomes pregnant but doesn't feel she's ready for a baby and aborts it no one really consider's the guy's point of view. I realize the girl is the one carrying the baby but I know several guys whose girlfriends got abortions without telling them (or told them and said they couldn't stop them) who would gladly have traded places with her. We talk about how its the mother's right to decide what to do with her child but what about the father? Its his child too. So why don't we ever consider his thoughts? He may not have the ability to carry the child but most guys are caring enough to want to stick it out and make sure their child has a good life. But the world doesn't really consider them. We tend to leave the argument focused on the mother and the child.


Here's a little story too. A man was once having a dream. In his dream he had the chance to talk to God and ask him some questions. The man had a few problems solved but as he was about to leave he hesitated. God asked him what was wrong. The man replied that he didn't understand why God still let people die of things like cancer. He wanted to know why there wasn't a cure for it and why God let people come into power who just caused pain and suffering. God frowned slightly and wiped a tear from his eye. "Follow me," He said as he led the young man into another room. The man walked into a room that appeared to be a giant nursery. There were children all over playing with toys, sleeping, eating and generally acting as children do. God pointed to a young girl playing with what looked like a chemistry set. "Do you see that little girl?" "Yes," replied the man. "who is she?" God looked sadly at the young man. "She was the person to whom I had given the knowledge needed to cure cancer. Thanks to her, no one would need to suffer from cancer ever again." The man didn't understand. "But why is she here, God? Why not send her to earth?"
"I did. I gave her to a young woman knowing that the struggles she would have growing up would cause her to fight for her education and give her the strength she needed to find the cure. But her mother had a choice too, and her mother chose to abort her in order to live her own life." the man looked at God as he continued. "And that young man over there? He was my answer to one of the world's worst dictators. He was going to be a strong leader one that would care for people and teach the world about loving each other. He would never have plunged the world into yet another global war. But his mother decided she was tired of having children."
the man began to cry as God pointed out teachers, doctors, leaders, missionaries and told the stories of what they could have accomplished. He wept as he learned of the people who had died because no one allowed one little baby to live. "How can we stop this?" he asked. "Surely there is an answer." God smiled. "Of course there is an answer. I will send more children who will grow up to do great things and help the world. The key is for the world to give them the chance. If you can convince one young woman to give her child life; well perhaps you'll have provided millions at a chance for a life of their own. The solution is simple. Its in each of you. Each person who already has life. You are the difference." the man began to wake up and as he did he heard the last words God had said to him yet again. "Everyone has a choice to make. What will be yours?"

[Charn_Tim]

oms, that's an excellent story...and great points about the guys perspective. Couldn't have said it better myself.

I wanted to raise one more issue as to why I think abortion should be illegal: even if the mother (this applies to young mothers mostly) doesn't want to have an abortion, she can be coerced into having one by her parents, and there's nothing the law can do to stop it. I've heard of cases where the mother initially didn't want an abortion at all, but the parents would either brainwash her into thinking it's normal and there would be no significant emotional and psychological consequences and literally physically forced her to the abortion clinic to have an abortion. Unfortunately, these cases are not highly anamolous, and if abortion was illegal, this would significantly reduce these types of cases.

[inkspot]

And vice versa, I believe in many states a minor can go for an abortion without the dr having to notify her parents, which I think is not right. If nothing else, it is a medical procedure, and parents should have consent any time anyone is going to operate on or medicate their child.

[Charn_Tim]

Yes, inkspot, that is another issue, although outlawing abortion would largely solve that problem too.

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

These are such great points and really solid arguments, but I have a few questions for the pro-choicers out there...you all believe that it is the mothers right to chose or what not but if the child had a voice what would he/she say?
Did y'all know that abortion has been linked to many different kinds of diseases and even cancer? ok one more, if the girl (unmarried) goes and gets pregnant should we enable her to just say "oh my bad, but I am not ready to live with my consequences yet", and exterminate a life just because she wants to have pleasure without the repercussions that inevitably fallow?

A point to ponder...if abortion was illegal wouldn't that help young women and men both to think it over a bit more carefully before plunging into that cycle knowing that they couldn't just erase the inconvenience?

[inkspot]

I don't think so. I am imagining an accidental pregnancy resulting from carelessness or naivete -- kids who think it can't happen to them. These people do not think they will get pregnant, so they do not seriously consider the availability of abortion before they need one. Imagine a couple of teens in a passionate clutch. The girl might think of a condom because that's what our weird culture has trained her to do, but I doubt she would think, "Abortion isn't legal, so I better be careful."

[Señor Puntos]

These are such great points and really solid arguments, but I have a few questions for the pro-choicers out there...you all believe that it is the mothers right to chose or what not but if the child had a voice what would he/she say?
The point is that they don't have a voice because they're not properly alive. They are technically, but they have no soul.
Did y'all know that abortion has been linked to many different kinds of diseases and even cancer?
If the woman new the risks but still decided to get an abortion, that would be her choice.
ok one more, if the girl (unmarried) goes and gets pregnant should we enable her to just say "oh my bad, but I am not ready to live with my consequences yet", and exterminate a life just because she wants to have pleasure without the repercussions that inevitably fallow?
Simple answer: Yes.
But everyone knows it's not as simple as that.

A point to ponder...if abortion was illegal wouldn't that help young women and men both to think it over a bit more carefully before plunging into that cycle knowing that they couldn't just erase the inconvenience?
I ditto what Inky says.

[Parthian King]

The point is that they don't have a voice because they're not properly alive. They are technically, but they have no soul.



How do you know they have no soul?

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

I was just going to ask that same question.

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

I suppose the underline question of this all is...when dose a baby become a humane being? if we can answer that question then we can say if abortion is or isn't murder.

[Parthian King]

I just found that odd. And it seems that the reason they have no voice is far less philosophical and far more physiological: They don't have a voice because quite literally they cannot speak.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Another difficulty with allowing abortion is precisely what we're seeing around the world, particularly in the Western nations: the gradual "de-humanization" of other groups of people. Here in the States a perfectly healthy woman was starved to death because her husband wanted the settlement money from a lawsuit and a judge ruled that was legal. In the Netherlands, old people are getting afraid to go to the hospital for small ailments for fear that some bigger problem will be discovered and they'll be euthanized in their sleep. Again, here in the States, a nurse lost her job because she kept going into a room at her hospital where they put slightly handicapped newborns to die. She was giving them basic comfort care - holding, water, etc. - in violation of the hospital's policies.

So you see, Jimmy - once you say one category of human is worthless and can be disposed of for another's convenience, then you never know where it is going to stop. You could be next.

[Parthian King]

I suppose the underline question of this all is...when dose a baby become a humane being? if we can answer that question then we can say if abortion is or isn't murder.

Well, a living fetus is without debate a living being--otherwise why so much technology designed to take the life out of it. That said, if it is a living being, how can it not be human?

[Aravis Kenobi]

Everyone has a soul. Animals don't have souls; people do. Our souls are the things that exist after we're gone. Our soul will either exist in heaven or hell, depending on whether or not we choose to accept the gift of eternal life from Jesus Christ. Hope that made sense.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

I suppose the underline question of this all is...when dose a baby become a humane being? if we can answer that question then we can say if abortion is or isn't murder.The biological evidence of this in inescapable and admitted by even the most fervent pro-aborts: the being in the womb is a distinct entitity from the mother from the single-cellular stage. At no time is it "part of the mother's body" - it is contained within the mother's body, but it is a genetically different creature, so much so that it must build elaborate defenses to avoid being destroyed by the mother's immune system.

So, if you're saying that's the question, it's been answered, at least from science's point of view: the moment of conception.

[inkspot]

I agree with PoTW, life begins at conception. This is why I find it odd Christians will allow abortion is okay in the case when the baby is a product of rape or incest, or endangers the life of the mom. Granted, I cannot know how I would feel as the mom in any of the scenarios, but I do know, as an old gal whose girls are big teenagers themeselves now ... I'd risk my life for a little baby, no doubt, and certainly wouldn't kill one to save my own life.

What I wish is that all ladies facing such horrible decisions could have the strength and grace of Christ to give them wisdom.

[xovermyheadx]

I think its the mothers choice..

[Parthian King]

I think its the mothers choice..

Sadly, many mothers choose to kill. I'm glad my mother didn't....

[Eveningstarz_4]

True that it is up to the mother, and true is it that we can't make the decision for her. But true also that we need to put the facts out there...the mothers need facts and truths out there to base her decision on.

[SOS~]

The mothers just like to make them then when they founbd out they kill them.....makes no sense!

[Euphrates]

Despite everyone (and I mean, EVERYONE) ignoring my previous post about the definition of murder and possible rights violated by abortion, I have a couple things to say.
Well, a living fetus is without debate a living being--otherwise why so much technology designed to take the life out of it. That said, if it is a living being, how can it not be human?
There are plenty of living beings that are not human. Pigs, for example, are living beings but not human. I suppose that sperm are also living beings, but they are not humans in themselves.

Also, a living fetus is certainly living by definition, but it is not so clear that a zygote is living. If a zygote is a living being, fertility clinics are killing factories because most of the fertilized eggs (zygotes) are disposed of when no longer needed.
I suppose the underline question of this all is...when dose a baby become a humane being? if we can answer that question then we can say if abortion is or isn't murder.
I'm not sure why this is true. That may be because I'm not sure what you mean by "murder". Does murder only apply to human beings? Can I not murder an eagle or a polar bear?
I agree with PoTW, life begins at conception. This is why I find it odd Christians will allow abortion is okay in the case when the baby is a product of rape or incest, or endangers the life of the mom.
I also agree that life begins at conception, but I'm not sure why that necessarily means that abortion is always impermissible. My previous post may shed some light on my concern, but why is the mother's life less important than the life of the baby? In cases where the child's birth would absolutely lead to the death of the mother, why can we not consider the option of abortion? These seem like cases where the child poses a threat to the mother, even if not through intention. Why does the mother not have the right to purge herself of such terminal threats?

Most of my concerns will likely be answered by people calling abortion "murder" as if that ends the discussion. If it is murder, tell me what murder is and why abortion falls into that category.

Understand that I'm not advocating abortion or "the woman's right to choose" or anything like that. But if you're going to have a discussion like this outside of this forum, you should be aware that "abortion is murder" is not a successful argument in itself.

PS. PrinceOfTheWest, be careful of using logical fallacies to support your position, such as slippery slope arguments.

[she-elfwarrior19]

I dont think that abortion is right, i think its absolutey wrong. You made it and babies' are gifts from God to the parents. No baby has a right to be killed,
The baby has been created and made and now is being killed by abortion. Its just not right there are other ways to get through problems, people cans till have the baby and have someone adopt, maybe someone who is unable to bear children or w/e. But killing a life that has just begun, a babie's life thats ready to start in the world, is wrong i think abortion's wrong.

[Narnia Man 2006]

:sighs: Abortion was a crime; but that was yesterday. If I was a 17-year old girl and I was pregnant, I would have the baby; I would rather die while trying to give birth to a baby than killing it; because other peoples lives are more important than mine.

[Eveningstarz_4]

My previous post may shed some light on my concern, but why is the mother's life less important than the life of the baby? In cases where the child's birth would absolutely lead to the death of the mother, why can we not consider the option of abortion? These seem like cases where the child poses a threat to the mother, even if not through intention. Why does the mother not have the right to purge herself of such terminal threats?


It's pretty simple. The mother has had a chance to live in this world. The baby hasn't.

[Mar]

huhhh i just think its wrong to kill and inoccent child!! :eek: dont you? its just NOT RIGHT.


and i hate when people refur to a living person as a blob of tissue..

[Narnia Man 2006]

It's disgusting as well.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

I also agree that life begins at conception, but I'm not sure why that necessarily means that abortion is always impermissible. My previous post may shed some light on my concern, but why is the mother's life less important than the life of the baby? In cases where the child's birth would absolutely lead to the death of the mother, why can we not consider the option of abortion? These seem like cases where the child poses a threat to the mother, even if not through intention. Why does the mother not have the right to purge herself of such terminal threats?This is a red herring. Nobody has ever suggested that a pregnancy must be continued if the pregnancy itself threatens the woman's life. An example would be an ectopic pregnancy: in such cases, the question is between the death of the baby alone or the death of the baby and the mother. In such cases, the abortion is seen as an operation to save the life of the mother, with the regrettable but unavoidable side effect of the death of the child. This has always been understood and agreed upon by all sides of the abortion debate.

Now: do you know how many abortions are performed each year for such reasons? Less than 1%. In the United States (the country whose statistics I am most familiar with), that means less than 15,000 each year - out of 1.5 million abortions. In fact, for all the "hard" reasons - life, health, rape, incest - less than 2% of all abortions are performed. This means that 98% of the abortions in the United States are done simply because the child is inconvenient.

Over 45 million children have died in the U.S. since the late 1960s. The Holocaust wsa 13 million or so. Even Stalin's purges are put somewhere in the 22-25 million range. We've surpassed them both - combined.

[Saruman]

Over 45 million children have died in the U.S. since the late 1960s. The Holocaust wsa 13 million or so. Even Stalin's purges are put somewhere in the 22-25 million range. We've surpassed them both - combined.

This indeed is horrifying, and I remember only a few years back when it was only in the 30 million range. The one comfort I have, a hope to which I cling, is that I will be seeing some 45 million brethren in the Kingdom someday. :)

[Euphrates]

This is a red herring. Nobody has ever suggested that a pregnancy must be continued if the pregnancy itself threatens the woman's life.
While you may not have said this, it has nevertheless been said/suggested by others:
There is no good reason on the planet whatsoever to kill a being.
If you are Christian who says life begins at conception, then you must oppose every abortion...
As for a life or death situation, that's where faith comes in. Like I said, God has a plan for everyone He creates. If that's the mother's time to go, then who's to stop Him?
Abortion is wrong in all ways.
I'm saying, truthfully that there is not ONE good reason to have an abortion.
In addition, my argument is not a red herring if it is understood properly and not misrepresented. I was talking about cases where one must choose between the life of the baby or the life of the mother... NOT cases where one must choose between either the life of the mother alone or the lives of the mother AND child. In the cases I am considering, the abortion is also considered to be saving the life of the mother. These cases are not "agreed upon by all sides of the abortion debate". I am addressing the people who think that abortion is always wrong, no matter what.

It's pretty simple. The mother has had a chance to live in this world. The baby hasn't.
With all due respect, I'm not sure why this matters. The unborn baby is a sinner by virtue of being a human ("for all have sinned and..."). What is so important about allowing the baby to exercise its sinful nature in the world? This doesn't seem like reason enough to prefer the baby's life over the life of the mother.

[*IOWW the Iasc*]

Why is it that all the super controversial topics come up here? :rolleyes:

I will say my part and be off . And if you all reply saying that I am 'Anti-Christian' and should burn in the darkest pits of Hell, then so be it. It is my opinion.

If you are raped and get pregnant, do you want to go through all the pain and suffering to give birth to the child of your rapist? I wouldn't. I want to have a child with the man I love, not the one who I hate.

And I know your all gonna say, "ADOPTION!" but I would rather not go through all that pain if I'm just going to give the baby up.

And I know after reading that your all gonna say, " It would be better if the child was alive then dead!!!!" Once again I go back to the rapist. If a man has that low morale, what do you think the child will be like? Sure it'll get some of your traits too, but the man's traits will still be there.

"It's better to have a living human than a dead one!"
People with low-morale and bad character are a shame upon our society.

"They can learn!"
In an orphanage? Possibility, but not a high one. And even if they do get adopted (very slim percentage do), there is always the chance that the adopters are worse than the rapist.

There should not be a law against abortion, but there should be laws restricting it. That is my opinion and I stand by it.

[onlymystory]

But I could argue that because my dad abused me growing up I should not have kids because the family genes will carry on and my kids could grow up to be abusive. While I am a bit on the fence in the rape and incest cases arguing that the baby should be aborted simply because it might have bad characteristics is an extremely faulty argument.

and also, none of us are going to say you're anti-christian. Several of us girls who are Christians have already stated that we would hope we would keep the baby to term and put it up for adoption. But we have acknowledged that we don't know for sure what we would do in the actual situation. The only thing I know is to trust that God will show me the answer.

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

So now that for the most part we agree that the being is inhabited by its spirit at consumption I still have a hard time understanding some of you. If a being possesses a spirit then killing it would be murder…right? I just am having a hard time with this. If I walked up to someone and shot him or her dead on the spot I would be charged for murder but every day millions of lives are being taken in the name of choice?

[Parthian King]

While you may not have said this, it has nevertheless been said/suggested by others:

Most respectfully, Euphrates, the quotations you offer to sustain this assertion can only be applied the way you do by reading that meaning into them. The people can stand up and defend their own words, but even at face value I don't even see a suggestion of what you are saying in many of them. This is a conversation where people don't expect someone else to come along and insist on lock-tight literalness in every syllable they utter, as if it's a court of law or something ("ah ah--you said in NO case--that must mean you don't care about the life of the mother"). Come on now. Most of them are made in the understanding that the reasons people give for aborting an infant are personal lifestyle ones and have little or nothing to do with the mother's health. Statistically, abortions performed to protect a mother's health, or in case of rape or incest are very, very few. It is a concept that is used excessively by an industry that keeps wanting to make money by aborting children as a convenience.

I'll cede the point and say: In the statistically infinitesmal number of cases where a mother's life is truly in danger (cases that are as likely when the woman never even imagined she'd consider abortion as in cases where it was considered), abortion may be a legitimate option, not least because probably both lives would be lost anyway. But in the vast number of cases where abortion is birth control after the fact, it is wicked and unconscionable. How's that?

With all due respect, I'm not sure why this matters. The unborn baby is a sinner by virtue of being a human ("for all have sinned and..."). What is so important about allowing the baby to exercise its sinful nature in the world?

Wow. While we're at it, why keep the human race going at all? Let's just sterilize everyone--that'll get rid of that sinful bunch. I wonder why God sent His Son to save anyone at all when He could have just done this....

All life is good, and is from God--sinful or not. The words you wrote are as stunning as I have ever read by someone who quotes Scripture in the same breath. They stand in diametrical opposition to the spirit of the Word of God in both Old Testament and New.

[Gryphon]

I know what you are saying here but my opinions that I stated before were partly formed by talking to women who had had abortions. They told me what a hellish experience it had been for them and the guilt that they had to deal with after the baby was killed. So when I say it is the mothers fault I mean it because I have had more than one tell me that they were wrong and they wish they could go back and save that baby.
im not saying it isnt their fault, im saying that there are women out there hurting because of it and we should still be there for them, not to condemn them.

[Elendil]

And I know after reading that your all gonna say, " It would be better if the child was alive then dead!!!!" Once again I go back to the rapist. If a man has that low morale, what do you think the child will be like? Sure it'll get some of your traits too, but the man's traits will still be there.

"It's better to have a living human than a dead one!"
People with low-morale and bad character are a shame upon our society.


That is crazy!!! Someone decides how they turn out, its not through genes!!! If they were raised in a home that had good moral, and all that, that is the kind of person that they will grow up learning to be. It is their choice what they do with their own life, not their mother's.


If a woman gets raped, it hurts, lots. (Please belive what I'm saying here, I KNOW!) But it doesn't have to continue hurting. God can take away that pain, and you CAN forgive the person who did it to you. You can contiue your life without the misery of hating someone.
And if you did get pregnet, (not all women do) you don't have to kill the baby. It was not THEIR fault, they had nothing to do with it. They have the right to live!

[Specter]

I have a link to ProLifeSearch.com (http://www.ProLifeSearch.com) here on NarniaFans.com, and am a proud supporter of the right to life movement. I believe that even in the case of rape of incest, that it is better to have the baby than to kill the child. I know that this is going to sound like a strange argument, but bear with me.

You have Bruce Wayne, the man who would become Batman, witness the death of his parents, as a child. Bruce becomes tormented by this, and seeks revenge for the atrocity. It consumes him, and becomes a part of him. It was something that was done to him, death that he could not take back. He wanted the killer dead. What happens? In some of the Batman stories, he does take revenge for it. But that's not enough... he has to keep fighting, because he made a promise to make Gotham better, as his father had wanted it to become. In the latest, he tries, but revenge is taken before he gets a chance, so he leaves, and gets the same motivation. That he must make Gotham a better place, as his father dreamed it to be.

But what does that have to do with a rape victim? Well, quite simply, killing the child won't take the pain away, and when that child laughs, smiles, and cries, when you spend time with that child, playing a simple game or singing songs together, in the end it is a human life that you're dealing with. Just imagine the warm smile of every baby that you've ever seen. The laughter, and how warm they make you feel.

The pain that comes with the choice to end a human life is nothing compared to the joy that the new life can bring. Ending a human life does not take away the fact that the rape happened. I'm sorry, it is true, and it must be dealt with, but having the child (which is less than 5% chance of a pregnancy occuring from a rape) isn't going to cause more pain in your life.

Also, a quick sidenote: Fetus is Latin for Offspring. Offspring is defined as both the progeny or descendants of a person, animal, or plant considered as a group and a child of particular parentage. Therefore, using the term fetus to make abortion sound better is out, because "fetus" therefore means "child."

[lions mane]

specter! you think that if a woman is raped she should have the baby? :eek: she could never love the baby the way ti should be loved! ya know? or, do you mean that she should just give the baby up for adoption?

[Impreza]

Pardon me but why should this topic be in this Narnia forum anyway?

[lions mane]

Pardon me but why should this topic be in this Narnia forum anyway?
i guess the maker of the thread thought it should be a topic in the christianity and narnia forum! ya know?

[Señor Puntos]

i guess the maker of the thread thought it should be a topic in the christianity and narnia forum! ya know?
Nice one, detective :rolleyes:
I'm still pro-choice on the matter. I believe the foetus does not have a soul until late into the pregnancy and that it's not really murder.

Perhaps people who are looking for a safe stance on abortion could be in the Regressive part. Against abortion, for killing babys. Don't ask me, some guy called Maddox made it up :rolleyes:

[lions mane]

Nice one, detective :rolleyes:
I'm still pro-choice on the matter. I believe the foetus does not have a soul until late into the pregnancy and that it's not really murder.

Perhaps people who are looking for a safe stance on abortion could be in the Regressive part. Against abortion, for killing babys. Don't ask me, some guy called Maddox made it up :rolleyes:
thank you! i am a bit of a detective huh? ;)

well, we finally have something in common! jk! we both say pro choice! ya know?

[Charn_Tim]

Nice one, detective :rolleyes:
I'm still pro-choice on the matter. I believe the foetus does not have a soul until late into the pregnancy and that it's not really murder.
Jimmy, if you don't mind answering, when do you think the foetus has a soul? At the end of the first trimester? the second? do you think partial birth abortion should exist too?

[lions mane]

Jimmy, if you don't mind answering, when do you think the foetus has a soul? At the end of the first trimester? the second? do you think partial birth abortion should exist too?
uhmmmm tim! i would like to answer that one.

didn't yourself post about the baby getting the heart beat and all this stuff like weeks into the pregnancy? i think once the baby can feel pain and all that fun stuff, it has a soul! ya know?

[Señor Puntos]

uhmmmm tim! i would like to answer that one.

didn't yourself post about the baby getting the heart beat and all this stuff like weeks into the pregnancy? i think once the baby can feel pain and all that fun stuff, it has a soul! ya know?
LM, when you go 'ya know' it becomes impossible to take you seriously, so don't say it in serious discussions.

I think when it develops all its emotions and gets its personality it has a soul, but I don't know when that happens.

[Euphrates]

Most respectfully, Euphrates, the quotations you offer to sustain this assertion can only be applied the way you do by reading that meaning into them.
When people say that there is never any good reason to have an abortion, I take them at their word. It takes some addition of meaning to say that they don't mean what they have said, as you claim. But thank you for conceding the point anyway.
Wow. While we're at it, why keep the human race going at all? Let's just sterilize everyone--that'll get rid of that sinful bunch. I wonder why God sent His Son to save anyone at all when He could have just done this....
This does not follow from my view or from anything I have said so far. You make it seem like my argument can be used to justify mass sterilization of the human race, but this is clearly not true. I'm not saying "get rid of all the sinners!!!!!!!11one1"... I'm just questioning why entering the outside world is reason enough to prefer the baby's life over the life of the mother. I should point out that you also disagree with the argument that I am disagreeing with. In addition to criticizing my response, you may want to consider making a response of your own.
All life is good, and is from God--sinful or not. The words you wrote are as stunning as I have ever read by someone who quotes Scripture in the same breath. They stand in diametrical opposition to the spirit of the Word of God in both Old Testament and New.
Wow. You think I'm stunning. Usually that's a good thing, but in this case I feel like you just don't understand. I'm distinguishing between being alive and being "in the world". Life is good, but that doesn't mean that being in the world is also uniquely good. You think I'm criticizing life, but I'm only wondering why exiting outside the womb adds some goodness to the life of the baby. It appears that you have failed to see this distinction, and have become offended in some degree based on the misunderstanding. Also, please notice that you are responding to a question that I raised, not a point that I made.

But, if I am wrong, and you do understand what I'm asking and still think that I am stunning and in "diametrical opposition" to Scripture, it might help me if you were to show this to be true instead of merely making claims and inflammatory assertions.

What good is it to gain access to the world, but have lost innocence?

[lions mane]

LM, when you go 'ya know' it becomes impossible to take you seriously, so don't say it in serious discussions.

I think when it develops all its emotions and gets its personality it has a soul, but I don't know when that happens.
i say my "ya know?" out of habbit! i don't say it in any other way! it just comes out when i type! and i said this many times before! ya know?

[Charn_Tim]

Yes, gabe, I sure did post that info (http://www.narniafans.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6051&page=4&pp=10) (post 31). So are you saying that once the foetus (i kind of like this spelling) feels pain, then it has a soul? Is there any medical or scientific evidence for this? or is it just an opinion?

Then are you saying that abortions shouldn't be allowed if and only if the foetus has developed the soul? Because this would limit abortions to before the first trimester phase (about 2 months into pregnancy).

[Elendil]

So Gabe, if you're unconsious, can I kill you? You won't feel anything!

[Elendil]

Maybe i didn't express myself right. When I say too young I mean, if she gives birth, it will probably ruin her life...say 13 - 16 years. An accident, as in, the didn't want to get pregnant but did. :rolleyes:

I'd say abortion would pretty much ruin the babies life! Why should the baby have to die, if the mother didn't want to get pregnet? It's not the baby's fault!!!

By the way, my sister (Shadowfax aka Faith) was born at the same age some babies are aborted. She's human!!!

(A foetus devolopes fingerprints at the age of three months, I'd say they have a soul long before then!)

[Impreza]

So Gabe, if you're unconsious, can I kill you? You won't feel anything!

Do u really have an intention of killing people who are unconscious around them? :p

Pain is just a warning system to our body...w/out pain...your body parts will suffer a lot.

[Impreza]

Jimmy, if you don't mind answering, when do you think the foetus has a soul? At the end of the first trimester? the second? do you think partial birth abortion should exist too?

I dont think science can describe soul. Can they? Even if the heart is beating...is there actually a soul in the body? What about people who're in a state of coma?

It reminds me so much of this dialogue...

Neo: If u die in the Matrix, u die here?

Morpheus: A body cannot live w/out the mind!

Another version of the Ghost in the Shell.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

I'm just questioning why entering the outside world is reason enough to prefer the baby's life over the life of the mother.Before saying anything more, I want to get some clarification here. Euphrates, you keep harping on the phrase "the life of the mother". That phrase is used many ways, so I want to be sure I'm understanding you.

One way it's used is to describe the actual physical life of the mother. One example would be an ectopic pregnancy. This is where the baby implants in the Fallopian tube instead of the womb and begins to grow there. This is physiologically untenable - the Fallopian tube cannot support the growing baby for longer than a brief period, and what growth the baby does actually endangers the mother's life by crowding her vital organs. In this case, the mother's physical life is immediately endangered by the growing baby.

Another way the phrase "the mother's life" is used is in regards to external circumstances. This is the sense of, "She can't have a baby right now! It's ruin her whole life!" In this case, the word lifestyle would be more appropriate than life.

So when you talk about the "life of the mother", in what sense are you using the phrase? The first, or the second?

[inkspot]

n cases where the child's birth would absolutely lead to the death of the mother, why can we not consider the option of abortion? These seem like cases where the child poses a threat to the mother, even if not through intention. Why does the mother not have the right to purge herself of such terminal threats?
I said this, what Euphrates is talking about ... and surprisingly, I said it as one who is not convinced outlawing abortion is the best way to end abortion. My thinking was purely personal: if I were pregnant with a baby whose situation was threatening my physical life, I would not think I had a right to terminate the pregnancy. I would think, rather, the baby's life now took precedence over mine, because this is what mothers do when forced to it: they die to save their children.

(I have not faced this situation and do not really know what I would decide, but the way I feel today, I do not see how being an adult gives me a right to terminate a pregnancy because the baby's birth might threaten my life. I do have a cousin who carried forward an ectopic pregnancy. Both she and her boy survived - thank God! - and now he is a wonderful grown-up doctor ... So this may have influenced my thinking.)

Anyway, it is a red herring in this discussion as most people agree the life of the mother should be the one exception, and as PoTW pointed out, only a tiny percentage of abortions actually are the result of this life-and-death decision between mom and baby, or even of known rape/incest cases. The vast majority of abortions are conducted because the birth is inconvenient for the parents.

[Sunrise]

Inky, I guess this is off the subject, but I am intrigued - how did she manage to carry an ectopic pregnancy? I was under the impression that it was a medical impossibility. Did she have it...um...transferred?

(I'm not asking in doubt, but in amazement, and wondering why I've never heard of any procedure to try and save an ectopic. My mother had one and I remember the emergency surgery/emotional trauma - there was never any alternative treatment proposed, nor the slightest indication that the pregnancy could be saved by any means at all.)

[Parthian King]

When people say that there is never any good reason to have an abortion, I take them at their word. It takes some addition of meaning to say that they don't mean what they have said, as you claim.
Euphrates, this is a rather thin justification for using people's words to paint them as intolerably one-sided and closed-minded, hence creating a straw man that can be toppled. Jesus tells us to cut off the hand that causes us to sin, gouge out the eye that offends, and hate our parents in order to follow Him. Surely you understand hyperbole? If you can, I am confident that you can understand that the majority of these statements were likely made referring to the 98% of abortions POTW spoke of that are gratuitous, and not the 1% where both mother and child will be lost anyway. To play the technicalities game in an open discussion where there is wide variance in age, education, and experience and suggest that there can be no tacit assumptions going into a discussion between forum comrades is inexplicable to me.
This does not follow from my view or from anything I have said so far. You make it seem like my argument can be used to justify mass sterilization of the human race, but this is clearly not true. I'm not saying "get rid of all the sinners!!!!!!!11one1"... I'm just questioning why entering the outside world is reason enough to prefer the baby's life over the life of the mother. I should point out that you also disagree with the argument that I am disagreeing with. In addition to criticizing my response, you may want to consider making a response of your own.

Wow. You think I'm stunning. Usually that's a good thing, but in this case I feel like you just don't understand. I'm distinguishing between being alive and being "in the world". Life is good, but that doesn't mean that being in the world is also uniquely good. You think I'm criticizing life, but I'm only wondering why exiting outside the womb adds some goodness to the life of the baby. It appears that you have failed to see this distinction, and have become offended in some degree based on the misunderstanding. Also, please notice that you are responding to a question that I raised, not a point that I made.

But, if I am wrong, and you do understand what I'm asking and still think that I am stunning and in "diametrical opposition" to Scripture, it might help me if you were to show this to be true instead of merely making claims and inflammatory assertions.

What good is it to gain access to the world, but have lost innocence?

Now we get to the substance of the exchange. Unfortunately, your response has done very little to allay my fears about your position. Really, you are bringing up two issues: 1) Is birth and a subsequent chance to live life out on earth really better than conception followed by slaughter before birth? (you seem to think not), and 2) Since the unborn is of sinful stock, shouldn't that fact come into play as we determine its value? (you seem to think that it should).

The biblical view of human life, Euphrates, beginning with the Creation narrative in Genesis and extending to the visions of John in Revelation, is that it is good. God wants people to be born and live on earth, to play out the drama of human existence for His glory. Ultimately, even those who reject Him are worked into His plan of eternal glory and purpose. Without exception, God condemns infanticide and murder of every kind, the only caveat being the wars of Yahweh and capital punishment--the majority of biblical references to the latter being for murder itself. Human life and history is precious, and only God Himself can determine its value. The entire drama of biblical history supports the view that God finds pleasure in human life lived out. So to answer the question--YES, it is better for a child to be born, grow to adulthood, love and relate to others, choose to serve and glorify God (only God knows who will serve Him and who will reject Him), then enjoy Him forever. That many (nay, the majority) ultimately rebel and reject Him doesn't seem to phase God in His determination to carry out this plan. Since it doesn't phase Him, I take as a direct affront to His sovereignty any suggestion that we should somehow even ask this question when determining the fate of another human being. Taking your last statement to heart, one would think it best to conceive then kill as many unborns as possible so as to populate Heaven with innocents! God can do without that kind of help. Pushed to this limit, the philosophical underpinnings to this position could justify suicide (the quickest way to stop anyone from sinning anymore, to be sure), though I doubt seriously you have considered it that far.

Second, (and this I feel, if possible, even more strenuously than the last point) is not that you defend the physical life of the mother (you can answer POTW's question in its own turn; for now I am giving you the benefit of the doubt). What stuns me is that you even bring the relative sinfulness of an unborn child into the discussion at all:
The unborn baby is a sinner by virtue of being a human ("for all have sinned and..."). What is so important about allowing the baby to exercise its sinful nature in the world? This doesn't seem like reason enough to prefer the baby's life over the life of the mother.
We consider human life of supreme value apart from its sinfulness because it represents imago dei--the image of God--and is intrinsically precious. However you come down in the debate of mother's life vs. unborn's life, the mention of an unborn's prospective sinfulness at all as a factor in determining its value is completely out of bounds. That territory is only for Holy God to tread upon. The Apostle Paul would be stunned to hear that his phrase "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom 3:23) had been used in any way to mitigate the value of an unborn infant who had never sinned in the least (in spite of being conceived in sin), especially when he made that statement only to follow it with this one: "and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus" (Rom 3:24). That you view a human being's birth and subsequent life as "exercising its sinful nature in the world" is almost unbelievable in any discussion, and is stunning (there's that word again, but I cannot find another) in a discussion where we are remotely touching on whether another human being lives or dies. To "take you at your word," one would think Inkspot is willing to risk her own life specifically because she wants more sin in the world, or is at the very least oblivious to the fact that that is the primary fallout of her decision! People fight for a child to live, and good women weigh this carefully, because in their heart resides the tiniest fragment of that great love that God has as Father and Mother toward all His children. While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us--meaning God the Father loves everyone as much as He loves Jesus. He's not out to condemn, or devalue, or kill sinners. When considering our sin, He did not say, "Wow, what's the use in letting these creatures 'exercise their sinful nature in the world'." No--He sent His only Son to die and give us life. Sinners are of supreme value to Him.

So you see, Euphrates, my problem with your position is not that you think that the physical life of the mother is as valuable as the child's. If you want to argue that, that's fine (though to use this argument I think it would always have to be accompanied by the statistics POTW mentions). At the same time, if a mother chooses to run a risk, that's her decision, too. But my problem with your position is what you say the get there. You aren't arguing for the mother, which is legitimate and would be the basis of any response I would mount if I were to make one as you suggest. You are arguing against the child, creating a qualitative comparison between two beings (both of whom are stamped with imago dei) with an end that the child come up less weighty! You are saying the child's life is no more valuable if it is born, and the child is only going to contaminate the world with sin anyway! (I''ll refrain from my adjective again, but again, I almost cannot believe what I am reading here!) This mindset is unbiblical and dangerous, because instead of reaching the desired end by exalting human life as representing the image of God, it denigrates it. From there, God alone knows where we will end up. Oh, wait, we are already there...

[inkspot]

Inky, I guess this is off the subject, but I am intrigued - how did she manage to carry an ectopic pregnancy? I was under the impression that it was a medical impossibility. Did she have it...um...transferred?

(I'm not asking in doubt, but in amazement, and wondering why I've never heard of any procedure to try and save an ectopic. My mother had one and I remember the emergency surgery/emotional trauma - there was never any alternative treatment proposed, nor the slightest indication that the pregnancy could be saved by any means at all.)
I was fairly young at the time (she was young, too, her first baby!) but I was still more or less a child, so I did not at the time, understand the medical parts of it, nor how they managed to bring a live baby out of this unfortunate mess which did nearly kill the mum. They prematurely delivered her baby (how, I do not know) in a very painful procedure which could have killed one or both of them. (The mum was so traumatized by this delivery, she did not even want to see the poor pitiful baby for a week! I would not recommend this to anyone, but it did influence my thinking, especially watching her son grow up to become so charming and productive an adult.)

It was a horrifying experience for my cousin, and probably for the poor baby, too, had be been able to tell about it. But I think: if she'd had the abortion, there would be no Stevie ... and this makes me sad.

I never heard of anyone else taking this route, and I do not think it is a sin in any way to terminate a pregnancy of this type because there's no hope for baby or mum if it is allowed to play out -- I don't know how Sandy survived, either. It's one of those anecdotal things which is true, but unusual, and happened to influence my thinking because it happened in my family.

[Sunrise]

Wow. Sounds like a true miracle. What a blessed family! :)

[~Grateful * Surrender~]

Did y’all know that abortions are preformed in the first second and third trimester? That means that those who say that we only get our souls later on in the pregnancy are still saying that the baby has a soul when it gets aborted.

Inkspot I think that is such a god thing about the pregnancy! Praise God!

here is a great link (http://www.hscca.org/articles/aretheunbornhuman.html) for those who are interested.

[inkspot]

Indeed, the horrifying procedure known as "partial-birth abortion" can kill a viable baby at any stage; it is practically infanticide. Even the American Medical Association has condemned it as not good medicine, because it can cause more complications for the mom than it can prevent. If I am not mistaken, this hideous procedure, at least, has been outlawed in the USA, hasn't it?

[Queen Swanwhite]

I'd say abortion would pretty much ruin the babies life! Why should the baby have to die, if the mother didn't want to get pregnet? It's not the baby's fault!!!

By the way, my sister (Shadowfax aka Faith) was born at the same age some babies are aborted. She's human!!!

(A foetus devolopes fingerprints at the age of three months, I'd say they have a soul long before then!)

I'm saying, if she was too young, she would either have an adoption or an abortion. I know it's not the babies fault! But, the baby still as a soul when it's dead. Just because it doesn't live on earth, doesn't mean it doesn't have a soul. Aborted babies go to heaven.

[Señor Puntos]

I'm saying, if she was too young, she would either have an adoption or an abortion. I know it's not the babies fault! But, the baby still as a soul when it's dead. Just because it doesn't live on earth, doesn't mean it doesn't have a soul. Aborted babies go to heaven.
Yeah, every mother should get their baby aborted so it can go to Heathen the easy way :rolleyes:

[Parthian King]

Indeed, the horrifying procedure known as "partial-birth abortion" can kill a viable baby at any stage; it is practically infanticide. Even the American Medical Association has condemned it as not good medicine, because it can cause more complications for the mom than it can prevent. If I am not mistaken, this hideous procedure, at least, has been outlawed in the USA, hasn't it?

Unfortunately, Ink, I believe that though lawmakers have passed laws against it and the president has signed them, judges keep striking them down as "unconstitutional."

[Charn_Tim]

yes, partial birth abortion is unfortunately and mind-bogglingly still legal in the US

[onlymystory]

there are a lot of mind-boggling and stomach turning things about the US unfortunately.

[Sunrise]

Did you know that during a partial-birth abortion, if the abortion doctor "oopses" and the head of the baby leaves the birth canal, the doctor is then legally required to do treat the baby as a live birth and turn it over to neonatal pediatrics to do everything possible to save its life? Because once the entire baby is out, you can't kill it. Regardless of the mother's wishes. Six inches of space makes the difference between a living child and an unwanted "fetus".

There is just no logic to the issue at all. The root problem, as we see so often in such things, is money. Abortion will not be outlawed, save by some miracle, because it's a multi-million dollar industry.

I believe we have been warned that the "love of money is the root of all kinds of evil".

I'm also reminded of a fact: Pro-abortion advocates always bring up the small percentage of abortions performed to save the mother's life as grounds for keeping abortion legal.

What they fail to mention is that, even prior to Roe v. Wade (the case that legalized abortion in America), such abortions were not illegal, nor would they be if abortion were made illegal again. That particular argument is nothing but a smokescreen. To be pro-life means to be pro-life in every case, not just the baby's. No rational pro-lifer would say that a mother should sacrifice her life for the child (which, in the majority of such cases, would not survive anyway.)

And Inkspot, it is rare for me to disagree with you, but I do not support the argument for keeping abortion legal to prevent illegal, dangerous abortions. We have laws against burglary, rape, and murder, yet these things still happen. The fact that they happen does not mean we should make them legal. While hearts and minds do need to be changed, people underestimate the power of the law to mold thought. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless."

The number of abortions in the US skyrocketed after Roe v. Wade. As of 1992 (the publishing year of the book I am using as reference), there were fifteen times more abortions annually than in the year prior to Roe. It has probably gone up since then. In countries where abortion is legal and easily acquired, there appears a societal pressure to avail oneself of it that previously did not exist. Women have been socially influenced and conditioned to accept it because, "the law says it's okay."

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Actually, that may be the "official protocol", but the reality is far different. A baby that survives an abortion, whether by hysterotomy, saline, or D&X (partial birth), is considered a "complication", and set aside to die. That's part of the reason the D&X was developed - to try to insure that by the time the last part of the child emerged, he would be dead for certain.

[Eveningstarz_4]

With all due respect, I'm not sure why this matters. The unborn baby is a sinner by virtue of being a human ("for all have sinned and..."). What is so important about allowing the baby to exercise its sinful nature in the world? This doesn't seem like reason enough to prefer the baby's life over the life of the mother.

It is important to allow the baby to have a chance to change. True that we are all sinners, but that doesn't mean that a life should be stamped out just because the baby will just be another sinner. One of the main points of living is to learn what's right and wrong and to get a chance to choose between the two. There have been so many hard-core sinners out there that have made a complete u-turn at some point in time. Sure, we don't change so much that we're perfect, but we at least get somewhere close to that, you know? Everyone deserves a chance at that. What would be the point of giving us free will if we don't get a chance to exercise it? Don't think of babies as "just another sinner." think of them as a miracle...a piece of hope.

[Sunrise]

Actually, that may be the "official protocol", but the reality is far different. A baby that survives an abortion, whether by hysterotomy, saline, or D&X (partial birth), is considered a "complication", and set aside to die. That's part of the reason the D&X was developed - to try to insure that by the time the last part of the child emerged, he would be dead for certain.

Not being a doctor, I admit I don't know official protocol - the above was simply something I read.

The fact that the medical establishment could call a still-living baby a "complication" makes the point even better, though.

[inkspot]

Inkspot, it is rare for me to disagree with you, but I do not support the argument for keeping abortion legal to prevent illegal, dangerous abortions. We have laws against burglary, rape, and murder, yet these things still happen. The fact that they happen does not mean we should make them legal. While hearts and minds do need to be changed, people underestimate the power of the law to mold thought. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless."
Yah, I didn't make my point very well: I don't think abortion should be legal because of the possibility of people still getting them if they are illegal. I understand the rule of law and all. I just feel like, Christians are a remnant of Americans now, not the driving force, and pro-life Christians are an even smaller segment of society, and maybe our efforts could be better used by helping moms in crisis and providing for unwanted children, so a woman who knew she had little chance of providing a good home for a child would know there were good people who would provide for her baby should she have him. Changing hearts is where it's at on this subject, and I don't see pro-life protests doing that. But I could be wrong.

There has been so much activism, I wonder if the fervor, time and money spent on protesting a bad thing could be re-invested in trying to head off the bad thing before it becomes a possibility. I don't know.

[PrinceOfTheWest]

Actually, there have been people who've changed their minds on the topic due to the perseverence and persistence of pro-life protesters. Of course, we're not talking about destructive people here (a much smaller group than the mainstream media would have everyone belive), but folk like sidewalk counselors and prayer protesters. Believe me, I've heard some interesting stories.

The argument that abortion shouldn't be outlawed because it's primarily a moral issue is specious. Slavery is a moral issue too, as is child labor. I don't hear anyone protesting the laws forbidding those. Also, there was a time that abortion was not outlawed in America. It was a coalition of (ready for this?) early feminists like Susan B. Anthony and the American Medical Association who passed laws outlawing abortion in the United States. The argument they used was that women who didn't want to be oppressed shouldn't go oppressing the children they carry.

[Sunrise]

Yah, I didn't make my point very well: I don't think abortion should be legal because of the possibility of people still getting them if they are illegal. I understand the rule of law and all. I just feel like, Christians are a remnant of Americans now, not the driving force, and pro-life Christians are an even smaller segment of society, and maybe our efforts could be better used by helping moms in crisis and providing for unwanted children, so a woman who knew she had little chance of providing a good home for a child would know there were good people who would provide for her baby should she have him. Changing hearts is where it's at on this subject, and I don't see pro-life protests do