100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Is Abortion Right In This Instance? | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
CowboyGH
on
Thu 05/07/15 09:04 PM
|
|
there is legal and illegal, which is based only on the law there are religious laws where illegal is called 'sin' there are mans laws where illegal is called 'criminal' there is right and wrong, and then beyond all that there is understandable and unreasonable people can do things wrong, criminal, and sinful, but understandable because they are human and emotional and taking the 'right' path is sometimes very hard I believe the original question is about right and wrong and in a religious thread, is being asked in the context of religious law,,,, in which case, because abortion is mentioned only in the sense that God knows us BEFORE we are in the womb, most following religous doctrine consider life in the womb Gods creation and only Gods to take,,, it is not as clear and direct as though shall not commit adultery , for instance, so there will always be debate Again, the taking the life of another is just that. The taking the life of another. What's it truly matter if it's a fetus, a baby, a toddler, a teenager, a grown person, or an elderly? It's still that person's own life to live. i would argue they aren't people till they take their first breath... How are they not a "people"? What makes them change into a "people" at birth? What's the difference between the being inside the woman or the being outside the woman? just a difference of opinion, nothing more... if a fetus hasn't had a life, no thoughts, seen nothing, tasted nothing, probably can hear things, but can't possibly understand what it is hearing, how is that alive? it's heart is beating, not much else going on... When a doctor checks to see if a patient is alive, do they check the heartbeat? Or do they check to see if the person is thinking, seeing, tasting, or hearing? And there may not be a physical "heart" when the baby is in the early stages of being a fetus, but with the assumption the delivery will be a success *which is unknown from the start either way* then why is it not treated as it does have a heartbeat? As it's still a living soul at conception. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there is legal and illegal, which is based only on the law there are religious laws where illegal is called 'sin' there are mans laws where illegal is called 'criminal' there is right and wrong, and then beyond all that there is understandable and unreasonable people can do things wrong, criminal, and sinful, but understandable because they are human and emotional and taking the 'right' path is sometimes very hard I believe the original question is about right and wrong and in a religious thread, is being asked in the context of religious law,,,, in which case, because abortion is mentioned only in the sense that God knows us BEFORE we are in the womb, most following religous doctrine consider life in the womb Gods creation and only Gods to take,,, it is not as clear and direct as though shall not commit adultery , for instance, so there will always be debate Again, the taking the life of another is just that. The taking the life of another. What's it truly matter if it's a fetus, a baby, a toddler, a teenager, a grown person, or an elderly? It's still that person's own life to live. i would argue they aren't people till they take their first breath... How are they not a "people"? What makes them change into a "people" at birth? What's the difference between the being inside the woman or the being outside the woman? just a difference of opinion, nothing more... if a fetus hasn't had a life, no thoughts, seen nothing, tasted nothing, probably can hear things, but can't possibly understand what it is hearing, how is that alive? it's heart is beating, not much else going on... When a doctor checks to see if a patient is alive, do they check the heartbeat? Or do they check to see if the person is thinking, seeing, tasting, or hearing? And there may not be a physical "heart" when the baby is in the early stages of being a fetus, but with the assumption the delivery will be a success *which is unknown from the start either way* then why is it not treated as it does have a heartbeat? As it's still a living soul at conception. going to a doctor and coming out of a womb are two different things... when a child comes out of the womb, thats when it starts learning, seeing, eating, hearing and comprehending... someone going to a doctor has been doing all these for a while... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there is legal and illegal, which is based only on the law there are religious laws where illegal is called 'sin' there are mans laws where illegal is called 'criminal' there is right and wrong, and then beyond all that there is understandable and unreasonable people can do things wrong, criminal, and sinful, but understandable because they are human and emotional and taking the 'right' path is sometimes very hard I believe the original question is about right and wrong and in a religious thread, is being asked in the context of religious law,,,, in which case, because abortion is mentioned only in the sense that God knows us BEFORE we are in the womb, most following religous doctrine consider life in the womb Gods creation and only Gods to take,,, it is not as clear and direct as though shall not commit adultery , for instance, so there will always be debate Again, the taking the life of another is just that. The taking the life of another. What's it truly matter if it's a fetus, a baby, a toddler, a teenager, a grown person, or an elderly? It's still that person's own life to live. i would argue they aren't people till they take their first breath... How are they not a "people"? What makes them change into a "people" at birth? What's the difference between the being inside the woman or the being outside the woman? just a difference of opinion, nothing more... if a fetus hasn't had a life, no thoughts, seen nothing, tasted nothing, probably can hear things, but can't possibly understand what it is hearing, how is that alive? it's heart is beating, not much else going on... When a doctor checks to see if a patient is alive, do they check the heartbeat? Or do they check to see if the person is thinking, seeing, tasting, or hearing? And there may not be a physical "heart" when the baby is in the early stages of being a fetus, but with the assumption the delivery will be a success *which is unknown from the start either way* then why is it not treated as it does have a heartbeat? As it's still a living soul at conception. going to a doctor and coming out of a womb are two different things... when a child comes out of the womb, thats when it starts learning, seeing, eating, hearing and comprehending... someone going to a doctor has been doing all these for a while... No sir, that child is learning much longer then at birth. Maybe not actual things such a politics, weather, about the stars, ect. But it is learning and that never stops until the person's life is over. What's it matter if they've been doing it for a while or just started? Why is one more prevalent and more dominate then the other? And therefore my valuable then the other? And again truly answer me this question, if the mother has the choice to take the child's life before birth, why does she no longer have that choice later on? years maybe? What change is there? How is that life any more "valuable" then before, and why was it less of value before? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dodo_David
on
Thu 05/07/15 09:16 PM
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion.
However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. Thou shalt not murder ;) As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. Abortion is intentionally causing a miscarriage. Maybe not physically hitting/harming the child in exacts. But killing the living soul being. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. that verse doesn't specifically address the DEATH either,, it only says if the child comes out and there is 'no harm',,,which to me means no death |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there is legal and illegal, which is based only on the law there are religious laws where illegal is called 'sin' there are mans laws where illegal is called 'criminal' there is right and wrong, and then beyond all that there is understandable and unreasonable people can do things wrong, criminal, and sinful, but understandable because they are human and emotional and taking the 'right' path is sometimes very hard I believe the original question is about right and wrong and in a religious thread, is being asked in the context of religious law,,,, in which case, because abortion is mentioned only in the sense that God knows us BEFORE we are in the womb, most following religous doctrine consider life in the womb Gods creation and only Gods to take,,, it is not as clear and direct as though shall not commit adultery , for instance, so there will always be debate Again, the taking the life of another is just that. The taking the life of another. What's it truly matter if it's a fetus, a baby, a toddler, a teenager, a grown person, or an elderly? It's still that person's own life to live. i would argue they aren't people till they take their first breath... How are they not a "people"? What makes them change into a "people" at birth? What's the difference between the being inside the woman or the being outside the woman? just a difference of opinion, nothing more... if a fetus hasn't had a life, no thoughts, seen nothing, tasted nothing, probably can hear things, but can't possibly understand what it is hearing, how is that alive? it's heart is beating, not much else going on... When a doctor checks to see if a patient is alive, do they check the heartbeat? Or do they check to see if the person is thinking, seeing, tasting, or hearing? And there may not be a physical "heart" when the baby is in the early stages of being a fetus, but with the assumption the delivery will be a success *which is unknown from the start either way* then why is it not treated as it does have a heartbeat? As it's still a living soul at conception. going to a doctor and coming out of a womb are two different things... when a child comes out of the womb, thats when it starts learning, seeing, eating, hearing and comprehending... someone going to a doctor has been doing all these for a while... No sir, that child is learning much longer then at birth. Maybe not actual things such a politics, weather, about the stars, ect. But it is learning and that never stops until the person's life is over. What's it matter if they've been doing it for a while or just started? Why is one more prevalent and more dominate then the other? And therefore my valuable then the other? And again truly answer me this question, if the mother has the choice to take the child's life before birth, why does she no longer have that choice later on? years maybe? What change is there? How is that life any more "valuable" then before, and why was it less of value before? not to be rude, but i answered it about 6 times now... no more circles here |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CowboyGH - Insisting that your religious beliefs take precedence over the choices these young girls may make shows a complete lack of empathy for the horrors these girls have endured.
They and only they should be the ones to make such decisions and frankly it is none of your business. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. Abortion is intentionally causing a miscarriage. Maybe not physically hitting/harming the child in exacts. But killing the living soul being. read what he wrote again... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. Abortion is intentionally causing a miscarriage. Maybe not physically hitting/harming the child in exacts. But killing the living soul being. read what he wrote again... and he shall pay as the judges determine. So it's still saying that it is wrong and not condoning this method of "abortion". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. Abortion is intentionally causing a miscarriage. Maybe not physically hitting/harming the child in exacts. But killing the living soul being. read what he wrote again... and he shall pay as the judges determine. So it's still saying that it is wrong and not condoning this method of "abortion". your the one doing the judging... read what happiness2u wrote, that pretty much sums it up... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CowboyGH - Insisting that your religious beliefs take precedence over the choices these young girls may make shows a complete lack of empathy for the horrors these girls have endured. They and only they should be the ones to make such decisions and frankly it is none of your business. I understand where you're coming from, you just don't seem to see where I'm coming from. - Is that fetus not a living being? - Does that fetus not have life? If either of those are a yes, then who's right is it for anyone to take it away? Even if the parent didn't intend to be impregnated for any number of reasons. That child's life is not a possession, it does not belong to the mother. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. Abortion is intentionally causing a miscarriage. Maybe not physically hitting/harming the child in exacts. But killing the living soul being. read what he wrote again... and he shall pay as the judges determine. So it's still saying that it is wrong and not condoning this method of "abortion". your the one doing the judging... read what happiness2u wrote, that pretty much sums it up... Excuse me? I judged no one. Did I ever in any instance say anyone was lesser? Or make any derogatory statement on anyone's salvation? Secondly Exodus 21:22 22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. The "abortion" method did not go unpunished. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CowboyGH - Insisting that your religious beliefs take precedence over the choices these young girls may make shows a complete lack of empathy for the horrors these girls have endured. They and only they should be the ones to make such decisions and frankly it is none of your business. I understand where you're coming from, you just don't seem to see where I'm coming from. - Is that fetus not a living being? - Does that fetus not have life? If either of those are a yes, then who's right is it for anyone to take it away? Even if the parent didn't intend to be impregnated for any number of reasons. That child's life is not a possession, it does not belong to the mother. Oh yes, I see where you are coming from. I'm saying that where you are coming from is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CowboyGH - Insisting that your religious beliefs take precedence over the choices these young girls may make shows a complete lack of empathy for the horrors these girls have endured. They and only they should be the ones to make such decisions and frankly it is none of your business. I understand where you're coming from, you just don't seem to see where I'm coming from. - Is that fetus not a living being? - Does that fetus not have life? If either of those are a yes, then who's right is it for anyone to take it away? Even if the parent didn't intend to be impregnated for any number of reasons. That child's life is not a possession, it does not belong to the mother. yes it does, until it's an adult... your trying to force women to have babies they might not be able to afford, deal with, or even want... so much for god letting people make their OWN decisions... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CowboyGH - Insisting that your religious beliefs take precedence over the choices these young girls may make shows a complete lack of empathy for the horrors these girls have endured. They and only they should be the ones to make such decisions and frankly it is none of your business. I understand where you're coming from, you just don't seem to see where I'm coming from. - Is that fetus not a living being? - Does that fetus not have life? If either of those are a yes, then who's right is it for anyone to take it away? Even if the parent didn't intend to be impregnated for any number of reasons. That child's life is not a possession, it does not belong to the mother. yes it does, until it's an adult... your trying to force women to have babies they might not be able to afford, deal with, or even want... so much for god letting people make their OWN decisions... No it doesn't. A baby's life is just that, the baby's life. The baby is not a possession, a thing, or an object. Not trying to force anyone to do anything, if they did not wish to get impregnated they should not have been having sex. If it was from rape, can always put the child up for adoption. As life begins at conception. So again, how can anyone have control over if someone keeps their life or looses it especially when they've done absolutely nothing to influence the possibility of either choices? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CowboyGH - Insisting that your religious beliefs take precedence over the choices these young girls may make shows a complete lack of empathy for the horrors these girls have endured. They and only they should be the ones to make such decisions and frankly it is none of your business. I understand where you're coming from, you just don't seem to see where I'm coming from. - Is that fetus not a living being? - Does that fetus not have life? If either of those are a yes, then who's right is it for anyone to take it away? Even if the parent didn't intend to be impregnated for any number of reasons. That child's life is not a possession, it does not belong to the mother. yes it does, until it's an adult... your trying to force women to have babies they might not be able to afford, deal with, or even want... so much for god letting people make their OWN decisions... No it doesn't. A baby's life is just that, the baby's life. The baby is not a possession, a thing, or an object. Not trying to force anyone to do anything, if they did not wish to get impregnated they should not have been having sex. If it was from rape, can always put the child up for adoption. As life begins at conception. So again, how can anyone have control over if someone keeps their life or looses it especially when they've done absolutely nothing to influence the possibility of either choices? well, the law says your wrong... does god teach this baby or does the mother? if something happens to the baby, is god going to jail? is god paying for everything for the baby? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I stated earlier, the Bible does not specifically address the topic of abortion. However, the Torah addresses the issue of causing a pregnant woman to have a miscarriage (Exodus 21:22). In such a case, the Torah does not treat the miscarriage as a death. that verse doesn't specifically address the DEATH either,, it only says if the child comes out and there is 'no harm',,,which to me means no death English versions of Exodus 21:22 tend to have footnotes which indicate that the verse could also be talking about a miscarriage. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
uche9aa
on
Fri 05/08/15 12:32 AM
|
|
CowboyGH - Insisting that your religious beliefs take precedence over the choices these young girls may make shows a complete lack of empathy for the horrors these girls have endured. They and only they should be the ones to make such decisions and frankly it is none of your business. |
|
|
|
|
