What I Learned About Abortion & the Adventist Church

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

But EGW says: "The Bible points to God as its AUTHOR."

Yes, but you have to balance this statement she made with the other one which clarifies what she means by God being the author of the Bible:

Quote:

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. (Manuscript 24, 1886; written in Europe in 1886.)"

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/rev-egw.html

This is how I try to reconcile these two apparently contradictory statements:

To me there is no contradiction. She clearly makes a distinction between the her usage of "author" from "writer."

[Dr. Shane]

The fact that you are so reluctant to comply tends to weaken your position.

[Nic Samojluk]

NO! Not at all!. IMHO, it is you who has misplaced/misapplied the commandment. To charge someone who is merely trying to defend herself with murder is ridiculous!

[Nic Samojluk]

If I were you, I would be very wary making a statement like: "I don't believe that God is the author of the Bible."

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

NO! Not at all!. IMHO, it is you who has misplaced/misapplied the commandment. To charge someone who is merely trying to defend herself with murder is ridiculous!

Could you explain in what manner did I misplace/misapply God’s Commandments? I did compare God’s Commandments to the “Wrong Way” sign we find as we approach a freeway. Do you consider the comparison inappropriate?

6th commandment: "You shall not murder." You have been applying this commandment to a girl who is merely trying to protect herself from an invading object. Self-defense! I have been trying to tell you since the beginning of this discussion, and you want to charge her with murder?

[Gerr]

Sorry, but I don't want to be identified with your extreme position.

No problem! With this statement you have divorced yourself from the Adventist pioneers and from the Hippocratic Oath which was held in high esteem by the Christian Church for two thousand years. You must be aware that the legalization of abortion has a very short history: merely 37 years. My view was held for two millennia, and the Decalogue has a much longer history: about four thousand years.

Modern Version

The Hippocratic Oath (Modern Version)[10]

“ I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

Which one am I violating with my position?

[Gerr]

Quote:

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/rev-egw.html

Can you explain to me what is the fundamental difference between saying: "God, as a writer, is not represented" in the Bible, and stating that "God is not the author of the Bible"?

Should you not perhaps take this issue with Ellen White instead of myself?

The distinction seems clear to me, so I have no issue with her.

EGW's position as I understand it. From GC introduction:

1. The Bible points to God as its author; yet it was written by human hands; and in the varied style of its different books it presents the characteristics of the several writers. The truths revealed are all "given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16); yet they are expressed in the words of men. The Infinite One by His Holy 2. Spirit has shed light into the minds and hearts of His servants. He has given dreams and visions, symbols and figures; and those to whom the truth was thus revealed have themselves embodied the thought in human language.

2. As you quoted:

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. (Manuscript 24, 1886; written in Europe in 1886.)"

3. In short - God inspired it; men wrote it. God's thoughts, written out by men in their own mode of thought and language.

[Nic Samojluk]

Use google for your search engine.

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

Abortion advocates, relying on inaccurate maternal death data in the United States, routinely claim that a woman's risk of dying from childbirth is six, ten, or even twelve times higher than the risk of death from abortion.

In contrast, abortion critics have long contended that the statistics relied upon for maternal mortality calculations have been distorted and that the broader claim that "abortion is many times safer than childbirth" completely ignores high rates of other physical and psychological complications associated with abortion. Now a recent, unimpeachable study of pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland has shown that the risk of dying within a year after an abortion is several times higher than the risk of dying after miscarriage or childbirth.(1)

This well-designed record-based study is from STAKES, the statistical analysis unit of Finland's National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health. In an effort to evaluate the accuracy of maternal death reports, STAKES researchers pulled the death certificate records for all the women of reproductive age (15-49) who died between 1987 and 1994--a total of 9,192 women. They then culled through the national health care data base to identify any pregnancy-related events for each of these women in the 12 months prior to their deaths.

Since Finland has socialized medical care, these records are very accurate and complete. In this fashion, the STAKES researchers identified 281 women who had died within a year of their last pregnancy. The unadjusted mortality rate per 100,000 cases was 27 for women who had given birth, 48 for women who had miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies, and 101 for women who had abortions.

http://www.afterabortion.org/PAR/V8/n2/finland.html

I will cite additional information I have discovered in my next posting.

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

In the discussion of abortion, one of the "facts" that carries the most weight with most people is the notion that abortion, by comparison, is safer for the mother than childbirth. However, solid research is beginning to accumulate that undermines this conventional wisdom.

The latest research to examine the issue of death rates associated with pregnancy outcome was published in the August issue of the Southern Medical Journal. By carefully reviewing publicly accessible documents, the authors found that women who have abortions are at significantly higher risk of death than women who give birth.

"Deaths Associated With Pregnancy Outcome: A Record Linkage Study of Low Income Women," showed not only that there is a greater short-term risk of death for aborting women but long-term risk as well. Authors David C. Reardon, Philip G. Ney, Fritz Scheuren, Jesse Cougle, Priscilla K. Coleman, and Thomas W. Strahan found that in the first two years following their abortions women were nearly twice as likely to die as women who carried their children to term. This elevated mortality risk persisted for the entire eight years the study examined.

http://www.nrlc.org/news/2002/NRL09/franz.html

I will cite additional information I have discovered in my next posting.

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

Springfield, IL (March 5, 2004) -- A study of pregnancy-associated deaths published in the latest issue of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology has found that the mortality rate associated with abortion is 2.95 times higher than that associated with pregnancies carried to term. The study included the entire population of women 15 to 49 years of age in Finland between 1987 and 2000. The researchers linked birth and abortion records to death certificates.

The annual death rate of women who had abortion in the previous year was also 46% higher than that of non-pregnant women. Women who carried to term had a significantly lower death rate than non-pregnant women. Non-pregnant women had 57.0 deaths per 100,000, compared to 28.2 for women who carried to term, 51.9 for women who miscarried, and 83.1 for women who had abortions. The authors, led by Mika Gissler of Finland's National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health, concluded that pregnancy contributes to a healthy effect on women.

http://afterabortion.info/news/GisslerAJOG.htm

I hope this helps in determining the reliability of the undocumented statistics you provided.

[Nic Samojluk]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Yes' date=' but you have to balance this statement she made with the other one which clarifies what she means by God being the author of the Bible:

Quote:

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. (Manuscript 24, 1886; written in Europe in 1886.)"

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/rev-egw.html

This is how I try to reconcile these two apparently contradictory statements:

Originally Posted By: Gerry

To me there is no contradiction. She clearly makes a distinction between the her usage of "author" from "writer." [/quote']

Do you see a fundamental difference between writer and author? Could it be that what she attempted to emphasize is that God did not dictate the content of the Bible; that the Lord inspired them with thoughts and ideas, but let them express them with their own words and arguments?

[Nic Samojluk]

I have posted sources but the man with blinders on refuses to see.

[Nic Samojluk]

6th commandment: "You shall not murder." You have been applying this commandment to a girl who is merely trying to protect herself from an invading object. Self-defense! I have been trying to tell you since the beginning of this discussion, and you want to charge her with murder?

[Nic Samojluk]

Modern Version The Hippocratic Oath ...

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/rev-egw.html

Can you explain to me what is the fundamental difference between saying: "God, as a writer, is not represented" in the Bible, and stating that "God is not the author of the Bible"?

Should you not perhaps take this issue with Ellen White instead of myself?

[Dr. Shane]

I can read what you post, but I cannot access the context.

[Dr. Shane]

Please read my four previous responses to Gerry. The sources I quoted contradict Gerry’s argument.

Dr. Gerry is not arguing the same thing that I am.

I am against abortion except in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life.

I recognize that the lowest abortion rates are in nations and states that allow abortion but restrict it.

Restrictions I favor include but are not limited to:

• Banning abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy
• Banning tax-funded abortions except in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life
• Prohibiting private insurance from paying for abortion except in cases of rape, incest and to save the mother's life
• Mandatory pre-abortion counseling
• Mandatory 24-hour waiting period
• Parental consent laws

I also favor better access and education to teenagers about birth control.

I favor more government funding of Crisis Pregnancy Centers.

I favor making adoption easier without compromising the screening process which determines fit parents.

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Neil D

Perhaps I am playing with semantics....but the storys given did not display a restoration of teen life....they did accelerate the growth process, forcing the teens to become mothers, and the result was that one teen hated men, the other we are not told....but she became talkative [?]...

I believe that what happened was not a restorative process, but healing nevertheless occurred. How much healing, is questionable. These girls came to a place that forced them to become teen mothers...a catagory that is intuitively dangerous for the infants....due to the teens lack of maturity, and their conception of percieved dangers in life.

But a "restoration"....I don't think so..

Are you sure the girls were forced to carry their pregnancy to term?

The question is on "restoration"....not forcing to carry to term the pregnancy. By allowing the girls to give birth, the term restoration was used in conjunction with the teens...These girls never came back to thier same place of mind as before the pregnancy....In fact, the story stated that one hated men and the other couldn't stop talking...That is obvious...what part of these girls mental health was restored to these girls??? The answer is "There is no restoration"....

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Neil

Don't misinterpret the scriptures...Guilt is NOT sin.

Did I suggest that guilt is sinful? True guilt is associated with sin, but it is not sin to feel guilty. True guilt is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit and is designed to lead us to God in search of forgiveness.

[Gerr]

Quote:

I hope this helps in determining the reliability of the undocumented statistics you provided.

Abortion: What Are the Numbers?

The number of legal induced abortions has continued to decline in the U.S.

According to a recent CDC report based on voluntary reporting by 47 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City, the number of legal induced abortions in the U.S. dropped from 848,163 in 2003 to 839,226 in 2004. This 1.1% decrease fits into an overall 15-year decline that had been interrupted only during 2003. In 2004, the abortion rate (number per 1000 women aged 15–44) was 16 — a consistent figure since 2000 — and the abortion ratio (number per 1000 live births) was 238, down from 241 in 2003.

Most abortions (88%) were performed during the first trimester, and more than one half (61%) were performed at 8 weeks’ gestation. Almost 10% of the reported procedures were medical abortions. The age distribution of women having abortions has changed little during the past few years. Among women for whom age was reported, abortion ratios in 2004 were highest (762 per 1000 live births) for teenagers younger than 15 and lowest (143 per 1000) among women aged 30 to 34. Abortion rates were highest among 20- to 24-year-olds (30 per 1000 women) and lowest among younger (age, <15; 1 per 1000) and older (age, 40; 3 per 1000) women. Ten deaths were attributed to legal abortions in 2003 (the most recent available data).

Comment: The decrease in abortions could reflect an aging population, use of effective contraception, or decreased access to legal abortion because of state restrictions and lack of abortion providers. Reporting is voluntary, so medical abortions (particularly those performed by private practitioners) might be underreported. In any case, the death rate for legal abortion remains far lower than the maternal mortality rate of 12 deaths per 100,000 live births reported in 2003.

— Diane E. Judge, APN/CNP

Published in Journal Watch Women's Health February 28, 2008

Citation(s):

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Abortion surveillance — United States, 2004. MMWR Surveill Summ 2007 Nov 23; 56:1

[Gerr]

U.S. Abortion Rates and Ratios Continue to Decline

According to this report from the CDC, the number, rate, and ratio of legal induced abortions in the U.S. continued to decline in 2000. The 49 reporting areas included 47 states, Washington, D.C., and New York City and excluded Alaska, California, and New Hampshire.

Overall, 857,475 induced abortions were reported in 2000, representing a 0.5% decrease from 1999 figures. When the 48 areas that provided data in both years were compared, the decrease was 1.3%. Further, for the same 48 areas, the year-2000 abortion ratio of 246 per 1000 live births and abortion rate of 16 per 1000 reproductive-aged women each represented a decrease of 3.8% from 1999 figures.

As in previous years, unmarried, white women younger than 25 were most likely to obtain abortions. Most abortions were performed before the end of the first trimester, with less than 6% done at 16 weeks' gestation or later. In 2000, 28 geographic areas reported medical abortions separately from surgical abortions; the 6895 medical abortions represented a 10% increase from 1999 data from 26 reporting areas.

The most recent data on maternal deaths due to induced abortion were from 1999. As in previous years, such deaths were rare: 4 deaths were associated with 861,789 abortions.

Comment: U.S. abortion rates and ratios showed a general downward trend throughout the 1990s, although they remained higher than figures for Canada and western Europe. The downward trend may reflect the aging population; more available, acceptable, and effective contraceptive methods; or decreased availability of abortion services. Access to emergency contraception (EC) also may have reduced use of abortion services; researchers estimate that EC prevented 51,000 unintended pregnancies in 2000. Finally, clinicians should recognize that the abortion-related maternal mortality ratio remains less than one tenth of the pregnancy-related maternal mortality ratio of 13.2 per 100,000 live births (MMWR Surveill Summ 2003; 52[sS-2]:3).

— Diane E. Judge, APN/CNP

Published in Journal Watch Women's Health February 11, 2004

Citation(s):

Elam-Evans LD et al. Abortion surveillance -- United States, 2000. MMWR Surveill Summ 2003 Nov 28; 52(SS-12):1-32.

As you can see we seem to be having problems with statistics.

[Gerr]

Here's the beginning of the classical Hippocratic oath:

The Hippocratic Oath: Classical Version

I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant:

Since no one believes in swearing by Apollo, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panaceia, this was replaced by the modern version when I went to med school.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

6th commandment: "You shall not murder." You have been applying this commandment to a girl who is merely trying to protect herself from an invading object. Self-defense! I have been trying to tell you since the beginning of this discussion, and you want to charge her with murder?

Originally the definition of murder was: “The illegal and deliberate killing of a person.” Of course, this definition was drafted at a time when abortion was illegal. This is why I have adopted a personal definition of murder which, I believe, agrees with the teaching derived from my study of Scripture:

Quote:

“The intentional and deliberate killing of an innocent human being.”

Those who defend the practice of abortion argue that the baby is an intruder and, therefore, it is acceptable to have an abortion in self defense. My response is that the baby is not an intruder. The intruder and criminal is the rapist. Punishing the innocent while letting the guilty live does not make moral sense in my book. It represents, I believe, a miscarriage of justice.

That's YOUR belief, YOUR own interpretation of the 6th commandment. You have already agreed that the conceptus resulting from rape IS NOT A WELCOME GUEST. If it is not a welcome guest, then it is an intruder, a party crasher, a home home invader!!!

Quote:

One of the biblical definitions of sin is “missing the mark.” Since there is a much better option which does not require taking the life of an innocent baby, I conclude that choosing to abort violates the biblical definition of sin.

And you are missing the mark regarding the victim of rape, and to add insult, you want to charge her with murder!!! That is way OFF the mark.

Do you support the death penalty for rape? If you don't, how can you support the execution of the innocent unborn babies?

I support castration for all rapists. I guarantee you they will never do it again!

You can repeat "innocent baby" till you are blue, but pregnancy from rape is NEVER innocent.

I sure would like to hear from the lawyers what they think about this.

[Nic Samojluk]

*********

You are obviously not interested in facts that contradict your preconceived opinions.