Abaddon said:
Undis;
Oh, so rather than having a discussion on whether the Bible supports anti-choice or pro-choice, you were just looking for ways you could make an ad hom attack on me. Wonderful, theocratic warfare at its best; you learnt well!
Abaddon, I have not used any ad hominen on you as far as I can tell, and I have not used any Theocratic Warfare that I can see.
All I did was ask your opinion of partial-birth abortions, and then I get accused of ad hominen and of Theocratic Warfare -- why are YOU so defensive?
I like to know what kind of people I am talking to on this Board, and what they believe, and what they approve of or don't approve of.
In fact, I assume that is why you posted this Thread, to get other people's opinions and beliefs, is it not?
Like I said, I personally, can tell a lot about a person by what they believe about partial-birth abortions.
I did not say that I was going to start a smear campaign against you if you believe that partial-bith abortions are okay. I would not use ad hominem or smear campaigns against anyone.
And, you have accused me of posting "off-topic", including this statement I made:
Why not claim that the spirit/soul does not enter the baby until the baby can talk? Afterall, when Adam became a living person, he could talk!
So, then, why not claim that it is perfectly okay in God's eyes to kill your baby until it can talk?
That statement is VERY "On-Topic", and I will explain why.
Your original post claimed that the Bible shows that a human does not become a living human being UNTIL HE takes his first breath. Your original post then used the account of Adam's creation to try to "prove" this as being taught by the Bible.
So, then I posted that statement above to show you that Adam's creation has nothing to do with when a child inside the womb becomes a living human being.
Think about this: When Adam became a living human being -- HE COULD SPEAK! So, does that mean a person does not become a living human being until he can speak?
So, why not say that a person has to speak before God views them as a living human being?
My point is, you cannot use the example of God creating a full-grown human being out of dust, to try and "prove" something about a baby inside of a womb.
That arguement about Adam's creation has NOTHING AT ALL to do with abortion or miscarriage, so in actuality, you have posted "off-topic" material as well.
Abaddon said:
First of all you say that ‘yasa’ does not apply to a dead foetus leaving a woman’s body. I then provide evidence that show ‘yasa’ is also used to apply to a dead foetus leaving a woman’s body, and you say;
(Quoting UnDisfellowshipped:) ‘The word "yasa" in that Verse has NOTHING to do with the child being dead.’ (End of Quote)
Straw man argument. I never said it did. It DOES describe a dead foetus leaving the woman’s body. As you yourself pointed out, as the Hebrew language has more specific words that would allow no room for interpretation, the fact that a word is used that CAN be used to apply to both a live and a dead foetus leaving a woman’s body indicates that the meaning of the sentence is open to interpretation.
The word "born" CAN also DESCRIBE an abortion or miscarriage, IF, AND ONLY IF, the CONTEXT says the CHILD IS DEAD. You seem to purposely ignore that part.
The ONLY time in the ENTIRE BIBLE that the word "yasa" is used to describe a dead child being born, has the CONTEXT say that the child is dead! If the word "yasa" was used BY ITSELF, no one would think of abortion or miscarriage.
Did the Jews think of the word "yasa" as miscarriage or abortion IF the context did not say the child died? NO!
Your arguement is NON-existent.
Abaddon said:
You can choose to apply it to abortion, just as the WTBTS use ‘deaden therefore your body members …’ to apply to masturbation. You are running ahead of the explicit command of god by doing so, just as the Borg are in that example. You are free to do so, but your own faith is quite clear on how individual conscience is important, and how judging others is unwise.
So, now you're accusing me of "going beyond what is written"? In what way, and by doing what?
Individual conscience is very important, but murder is wrong, even if someone has a perverted conscience that allows murder. Child molestation is wrong, even if someone has a perverted conscience that allows molestation. Rape is wrong, even if someone has a perverted conscience that allows rape. See my point?
Abaddon said (earlier in this Thread):
In the thousands of pages in the Bible, why is it that some things (like masturbation and abortion) are NOT explicitly referred to, even though they were widely known and practised at the time? God couldn’t have ‘forgotten’ to put in a line ‘and abort not a child, as this is a sin before god’, thus the dependence on non-explicit scripture seems to be bringing preconceptions to the Bile rather than taking belief from it.
That arguement is also weak, unless you are trying to say that the God approves of molesting children, because God did not put a specific command not to molest children in the Bible either.
Also, the Title of this Thread: "The word of God makes it clear to us that abortion is not a sin" is wrong, even if Exodus 21:22 is saying that a fine must be paid for killing an unborn child. Why would God's Law say that a fine must be paid UNLESS a SIN was committed?
Even if Exodus 21:22 is talking about paying a fine for killing an unborn child, it is obvious that the Bible says killing an unborn child, even accidentally, is a SIN, and a fine is charged against the one who committed this SIN.
Abaddon said:
Thus I would say you are entitled to your feelings and beliefs, but by your own faith seem to have to allow others freedom of conscience or condemnation. I’m sorry you find this so hard.
You are trying to say that Christians are supposed to NOT condemn what Christians believe to be MURDER, and you are just flat-out WRONG.
It is obvious that if someone believes that something is MURDER, then they should condemn it.
Try to read the Bible sometime before telling others what it says -- the Bible says that Christians are supposed to condemn wicked acts.
Everyone on earth has the "FREEDOM TO CHOOSE" to commit murder (whether of the unborn or otherwise).
It's just that some types of murder are against the Law and some are not.
God is the One who watches all things. He is the One who is the Final Judge.
Abaddon said:
Of course, if you’re happy to admit this, then we can move the discussion to what is a sensible framework for abortion; obviously partial-birth abortions (although not representative of 99.83% of abortions) are not something that most people feel comfortable with, and there is much agreement that an abortion by early in the second trimester (or earlier) is far better.
In Holland (a more religious country than Britain, less religious than the USA, but one with comprehensive sex education) teen pregnancies are very very low; I recall them being 1/8 th the percentage of American teen pregnancies and 1/7 th of British ones. The average age of loosing ones virginity is also higher in than either the or the .
It would seem that one way of reducing the number of abortions would be to actually teach children about sex so they are able to make informed choices and protect themselves; it doesn’t encourage them to have sex sooner, reduces teen pregnancies, and obvious protect them from STD’s.
You are free to believe what you want. I do not agree with your beliefs. I do condemn the act of abortion as murder (I do not condemn the people who do the act).
I believe that the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and abortion is by following the Commandments of Jesus Christ and the New Testament (No Fornication, No Murder, etc.), and by being "Born Again" as a Christian.
