How Westernized Christianity Is

by Skeptic 16 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Rex B13

  Hi Rich,
  Billygoat nailed the photo down. He is right about the circumstances surrounding the child and mother. Gosh, Richard, have you ever seen how even 2 or 3 month fetus' look?
  I am not against choice if it is life or death. The mom wins hands down but that is a rare situation.

  >Rex, did you know that even the JWs are not 100% against abortion? They allow it for tubular pregnacies.

  >Rex, what is your opinion on:
  abortion for tubular pregnacies;

  See the above.

  >abortion for rape victums;

  Nope, not the baby's fault, give it to adoption if not wanted.

  >abortion for rape victums that are 12 years old;

  Will it severly endanger her health? See above.

  >the morning after pill;
  IUDs;culling when fertility pills make the mother pregnant with seven babies?

  Nope to all three.

  >You might want to email me privately to avoid being flamed. We can discuss it privately.

  Richard

  Thanks for the option but they really don't bother me. They usually come to the 'gunfight' with a 'butterknife'! ;-)
  BTW, abortion is just a sin, no worse than any other. A sincere, repentant person is forgiven.
  Rex
• 

  Skeptic

  Hey---I wasn't the one who said the woman 'had the baby in her belly.' It read a little funny to me, that's all.

  It's my right to be skeptical. Remember to believe half of what you see and none of what you read.

  I apologize if I offended you...LDH, you are a poster I greatly respect. I thought the type of picture that Rex referred to was well known. I have been unfair to you, and I apologize.

  And although I don't support abortion as a means of birth control, if you don't want your kid, by God I don't want you to
  have it.

  I agree completely and whole-heartedly. I think I is a great disservice to a child to bring it into the world unwanted; or into a world where it cannot enjoy a good life.

  And I do agree that Rex was trying, maybe not on purpose, to emotionalize the abortion issue. To me, practical realities are more important.

  Richard
• 

  Skeptic

  Gosh, Richard,
  have you ever seen how even 2 or 3 month fetus' look?

  I have see what a 21 day old fetus looks like...at a museum. It looked like a miniature baby.
  I was completely anti-abortion then, and knowing what such a young fetus looks like does not change
  my mind.

  I am not against choice if it is life or death. The mom wins hands down but that is a rare situation.

  Then we agree on more than you think. Our differences of opinion are not over abortion per se,
  but over when to perform an abortion.

  >abortion for rape victums;

  Nope, not the baby's fault, give it to adoption if not wanted.

  Very hard on the victum. Adoption is very hard on the child.

  >the morning after pill;
  IUDs;culling when fertility pills make the mother pregnant with seven babies?

  Nope to all three.

  When a woman is pregnant with seven babies, doctors recommend that they be culled to two.

  Most of the time, the choice is between seven children who suffer horribly for life, or two happy, healthy children. I would prefere that two live happily than seven in misery.

  BTW, abortion is just a sin, no worse than any other. A sincere, repentant person is forgiven.

  How can it be a sin when the Bible is silent about it and Jehovah clearly ordered the death of infants? There is
  no sin to forgive.

  Richard
• 

  LDH

  Richard you are right.

  They try to make a distinction between lives. God killed plenty of infants.

  These same bible thumpers who rally on and on about no abortions, well I've run into em in my lifetime.

  When I was 19 and pregnant, (wasn't sure at the time) I went to family planning to get a pregnancy test. They were outside with their banners and their pictures and all of thier other propaganda.

  If I was pregnant, I had no intention of having an abortion but they didn't know that. So I asked a few women, how could they help me if I decided to keep my baby instead of having an abortion? They had no answer but told me "God would Provide." As in, "Go in peace, stay warm and well fed."

  Needless to say, there are no resources out there for women in my situation, which is that I was working full time, had insurance, car etc etc. But still not enough resources for a baby.

  (side points here--Thank GOD for my worldly friends, the few I had. They gave me EVERYTHING they had from their own children (who I babysat for). The JW? Out of two congregations, I got three baby gifts. No shower, no congratulations cards. I can still remember the gifts. One, from an elder's wife (who was on the committee to df me/reinstate me four months later) gave me the most beautiful outfit. One elderly sister gave me a bag of diapers, and one sister whom the congregation terms as 'weak' hand made a little noah's ark with animals made of felt.)

  So my point is, the ones yelling and screaming about not having an abortion, well they aren't exactly putting their money where their mouth is, are they now?
• 

  Rex B13

  Hey Richard!
  I misunderstood the fertility question. By all means, if you can have two healthy infants instead of seven possibly disabled, then I have no problem with that, also, they can use the stem cells for research into many different diseases.
  As far as a rape victim goes, that must remain in the area of choice, as should incest. Each one of these is a conscience decision. Richard, like it or not it is a human life and we have gotten to the point now that life is way too cheap and taken too easily, don't you think so? Unjustified killing is a sin.
  When the difference between a preemie baby and a aborted fetus is a few inches down the tubes then we are splitting hairs on what we call human! What I can't stand is the NOW assertion that it is not human until it's birthed!
  Do you know what one of pet peeves are? People who are dead set against ANY cpaital punishment yet are supporters of abortion on demand.
  Later,
  Rex
• 

  Skeptic

  They try to make a distinction between lives. God killed plenty of infants.

  And they go through a great amount of warped thinking to justify God killing infants when they claim that the unborn should not be aborted.

  The usual argument is that the infants God had killed will get eternal life, so their deaths are acceptable. Using the same reasoning, if the unborn get eternal life, then abortions are acceptable. Actually, if you use that reasoning, then all killing is acceptable as long as the one being killed will get eternal life.

  The JW belief system is even more warped than the fundies. The WTBS claims that the unborn will not get eternal life. Hence, if a baby is born, then dies, it gets eternal life. But if it is miscarried or aborted even a day sooner, it does not get eternal life.

  Thus, the JWs are saying that an unborm child is not the same as a child that has born. The difference is so great that the unborn will not get eternal life.

  When I first read it in a QFR, I was very anti-abortion and very shocked. I did not agree with the article at all. The WTBS just presented a very strong pro-abortion argument. If the unborn are that different from a "normal" child, then what is wrong with abortion. Even God doesn't think the unborn are worthy of life.

  Plus, if God doesn't mind if infants are killed, then why would He care if the unborn were killed?

  At least the fundies aren't that loopy.

  LDH, you also bring out another good point. The anti-abortionists take no responsibility for forcing you to live your life by their standards. They don’t care if the child is completely uncared for or raised in complete poverty or raised in a home with a physically or sexually abusive father.

  I found your comments about the worldly vs JW baby gifts. My JW relatives were very good about giving baby gifts, even if the mother was unmarried.

  I was touched by the “weak” sister’s gift. Truly, it was an act of love.

  Richard
• 

  Rex B13

  Hi Richard,
  I just wanted to comment on the 'God killing infants' compaints.

  1) Some Christian faiths do not accept the accounts of this nature as anything other than Jewish apologetics, for they assert that Jesus provides the revelation of God's true nature and nowhere does Christ affirm these events.

  2) Those who do accept his as literal will specualte but in the end, must admit that these are events not justified by God to us, therefore it is a mystery.

  3) Divine judgment is the sole domain of God.

  4) God determines by predestination when we will die. He allows evil to exist within the sphere of His control, like the passages in Job. We only live as long as God allows us before He takes us home. God makes things happen that turn negative events into positive. We can't always see what they are.....and I admit that.

  5) By our very nature we are responsible for our own problems. We develop the warfare and the strife on our own quite well. We have affirmed that we (in our present state) cannot govern ourselves, nor manage our own affairs. We have 'free will.'
  Rex