Abortion is "the same as killing a child"???

In short. You are making up stuff. You have no idea why christians are against abortion. So you make stuff up.

That is my point.

 

Your sky fairy created man and didn't like the way they turned out so he killed his own son to set things straight and you want me to believe it's followers have some kind of superior insight into a woman's personal decision why?

 

Hey , check out how many christians have abortions....LOTS

 

And there is a specific forum to discuss god...it's the religion forum, this is th abortion forum so take your "god " and ...get to the correct forum....PREACH somewhere else....

 

And you are totally entitled to those opinions just as I am very entitled to strongly disagree with them, which I do. lol

 

On the contrary, God told the Israelites to murder. To kill women and children .... all of them in some cases.. pregnant or otherwise. (Other times when God was in a good mood he allowed the women to be kept as slaves)

In any case, you have no argument for why a zygote should be considered equivalent to a living human so why are you talking about murder ?

 

Those who oppose abortion are actually smarter to leave God out of it. Not only is it a distraction which solves absolutely nothing about the issue, but God has a kill count that is higher than any human could dream of. Afterall, he is said to have engineered the human body that allows fertilized eggs, an individual life as someone here put it earlier, to not implant and never get the chance to grow. It's fertilized, it has the DNA of two human beings, it just never has a chance to grow because it's washed out of the body.

God's name as is on that, assuming you believe that type of stuff. And considering the rest of the death and atrocities done either at God's command or in his name, using God as any type of defense against abortion is bad form and in my opinion shows desperation.

 

It certainly is my belief that anyone and everyone of our sins are somehow recorded and part of our responsibility to Our Creator at the Final Judgement, the ONLY difference being that if we have expressed TRUE sorrow for any sin, it somehow alleviates at least some of the responsibility for that sin. All our sins were forgiven by the Lord's magnificent sacrifice on the cross, but that forgiveness doesn't allay our need for true sorrow.

 

Man does have a free will, and so usually man chooses his marriage partner. Thus if two people get married, it is due to THEIR choice, not God's. This couple has no way of knowing all the daily circumstances that their partner may have encountered or experienced in the previous years. Even each partner is likely unaware of his/her own circumstances in the past that may have led to or caused infertility. Since I believe it is man's free will that put this couple together, regardless of their fertility capabilities, then if it is their will to have children, I believe it is their responsibility to try and overcome any obstacles. God is not going to write them a letter telling them what He wants, so to have a child is THEIR decision. They may or may not accomplish what they want, but they are free to use any existing technology to at least try. Any couple taking fertility treatments has no idea if God wants them to do so, they are simply exercising their free wills. They are not breaking any of His commandments by doing so.

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you for being so honest.

 

Speaking of ignoring what is.......Many Christians support reproductive choice.

http://rcrc.org/homepage/about/

PRO-FAITH. PRO-FAMILY. PRO-CHOICE.

The mission of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice is to be the leading religious voice for reproductive justice in the country.

 

ah yes the usual sound bite from the usual source.

 

Read 1 Samuel 15:3

- - - Updated - - -

Because they disprove "pro-life" rhetoric. Otherwise, you'd be glad to answer them.

 

So RU-486 does not "kill a baby"?

 

Still waiting.

 

Despite the other posters inane comment I will attempt to answer this as honestly as I can.

It really depends on what you define individual as.

Is it individual in the sense that it is not a part of the woman's body, then the answer is yes
Is it individual in the sense that it is biologically independent of the woman's body, then the answer is no.

Individual as an adjective means single: separate, so no it doesn't meet that criteria, and that is the context of its usage when paired with life.

Though to be honest this isn't really a major issue as far as abortion is concerned, something I attempted to cover in the following topic - http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=320356

 

Then answer my questions...directly. Re-read the OP if you need to.

- - - Updated - - -

He has in the past ordered the exact opposite......again

1 Samuel 15:3

 

Like YOU answering the hypothetical questions in the OP? You can't do it.

 

Numerous posts from "pro-lifers"...maybe I'm missing it...


have ANY of them even attempted direct answers to my hypothetical questions? Any?

 

My answer to both would be YES!

Without hesitation.

 

Thanks for being the first to answer....so how MUCH force would you use to stop a woman from taking RU-486?

I mean, to stop a woman from shooting a 5 year old....I'd knock her unconscious if that's what it took.

Same deal with you and the woman about to take RU-486???

 

There's no way to know the answer to any of those until you are actually in that situation.

 

as opposed to pro choice rhetoric
hypothetically speaking of course

 

Further details the....she's fighting you. Kicking and clawing with her free hand (the one without the pill), as you try to force her other hand away from her mouth. Her hand with the pill is clinched tight.....if you broke her fingers, she'd drop it? You could punch her lights out....no harm to the "baby"...and then you could easily take the pill away from her.

How far do you go?

 

we have sparred enough here at PF and i feel you deserve my responses to these..if for nothing other than fair play.

been in that position and yes ..i told her that i wanted to watch more closely and that i did it before…she hesitated as i approached her closer and i grabbed the gun and accidentally shot her in the side of her chest.

i used to sell them for a hundred bucks a pill..when they were illegal in Canada.

no they are not the same

this reminds me of this really awful beer commercial in the 80's
this really annoying guy trying to sell ice brewed beer would say at the end of the horrid commercial
"If it's not ice brewed , it's not ice brewed"

he would say it with such conviction and tried to appear like this total intellectual about this new type of beer..
but the statement is puerile in form…totally lacking any intellectual semblance…in any case the beer is no longer available , never got off the ground…

well hypothetically speaking they lack any semblance of intellect..

hypothetically speaking if a tree grows in the forest does it grow in the forest?
does it???

if a man falls down does he fall down
Does he???

when the rain falls is it really falling

is it???

i have answered your questions now politeness would rule for you to do the same in kind to me, or forever be considered rude...

 

WHY are they "not the same"?