VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:07:40 01/26/06 Thu
Author: Chuck in ND
Subject: Interesting
In reply to: Bembix 's message, "A question on the abortion issue" on 14:19:26 01/25/06 Wed

The church's use of the word "right" in the PotF is not the same as the "rights" referred to in the DoI or Const. So that argument is a false one.

He is rather vague about just what that "blurry line" is, so it's a bit difficult to know what to say there.

I've NEVER heard of any pro-lifers advocating criminalizing hysterectomies. That's just a red herring.

Kathy's right--either the child is a human and has a right (the unalienable kind) to life or he's a newt and we can do what we want and answer later to God for "cruelty to animals".

Why should a baby, whom doctors are absolutely sure cannot survive past birth, why should that baby be killed? If he's not going to live, let him die. Isn't it more humane to allow a natural death than chop him up into pieces?

There is absolutely no case where aborting a baby will save a mother's life. None. There are cases where in saving a mother's life (i.e. giving her Chemo) may harm the baby, but there is a HUGE difference between chopping a baby up and exposing him to medications that may harm him. (Actually, more women have been refusing abortions and doing chemo while pregnant and preliminary studies show that the chemo does not harm the baby. Imagine all the babies that have been killed because doctors assumed that the treatment would harm the baby!!)

Now as for pregancies resulting from rape or incest, dh and I have discussed this one at great length. Dh's feeling is that no one should be forced to endure a pregancy forced on them. I don't know. If the child is indeed human (which I think it's clear that it is) why should the child pay with its life for his father's crime? Both the Bible and the Law forbid it. That's a very hard one, I'll admit.

But we're talking about fewer than 1% of abortions and it seems to me wrong to set policy based on something so infrequent. Perhaps that's the one time when due process would take over, when someone might resort to the courts (juries) to decide the matter on a case by case basis.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.