Pro-Abortion still on the aganda!!!

[Stan]

Thanks I had missed that...

[Dr. Shane]

My point is rather simple. On an internet forum board none of us have any way of verifying who others are. It would make one rather gullible to believe everything they read on one of these boards. So I am not going to believe that a GC president said something just because I read it on an internet forum. Not everything on the internet is true.

I know that Adventist hospitals have refused care to pregnant women that were unmarried because they were unmarried. Now I am asked to believe that the same hospital will not deliver the live child of an unwed mother because she is unwed but will abort the child? Something isn't right with that picture.

[Kountzer]

My point is rather simple. On an internet forum board none of us have any way of verifying who others are. It would make one rather gullible to believe everything they read on one of these boards. So I am not going to believe that a GC president said something just because I read it on an internet forum. Not everything on the internet is true.

[Outta Here]

Originally Posted By: Aubrey

Well' date=' this for one, really bothers me: "Therefore, any attempts to coerce women either to remain pregnant or to terminate pregnancy should be rejected as infringements of personal freedom." [/quote']

So you think it's ok to coerce a woman to remain pregnant or to terminate a pregnancy?

Here is the whole of my original response:

Well, this for one, really bothers me: "Therefore, any attempts to coerce women either to remain pregnant or to terminate pregnancy should be rejected as infringements of personal freedom." The language "infringements of personal freedom" is insulting to prenatal life.

When I read the guidelines I get the impression that ending prenatal life by choice is of little consequence. I get the impression that whatever the pregnant woman chooses is perfectly acceptable and that the church will embrace her decision whatever it may be. And yet, in the same church smoking is a terrible sin, as is drinking alcohol, eating pork, working on the Sabbath, and a multitude of other deemed inappropriate behaviors. There are actions that are far less evil (i.e., adultery, thievery), IMO, that will get a person excommunicated from the church.

It is my opinion that the moral standards are a bit skewed.

To answer your more pointed question: No, I do not believe it is okay to coerce a woman to remain pregnant nor to terminate her pregnancy. I do believe, however, that when a woman looks to the church for moral guidance, she should be able to have a clear understanding that choosing to end prenatal life is morally wrong for any reason other than extreme life-threatening circumstances. She should come away from her counsel with the church knowing full-well the value of human life and the value that God places on each us.

[Planey]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Accidents happen and unplanned pregnancy can be the result.

I am not sure how someone can get pregnant by accident. It isn't like stubbing one's toe. Two different people have to remove their clothing and physically connect in a sexual manner in such a way to achieve intercourse. How does that happen by accident?

Perhaps a good Catholic might believe this, as apparently people are not supposed to have sex except for the purpose of procreation. Now come on, if every case of sexual intercourse was followed by a pregnancy it would give the phrase "population explosion" a whole new meaning.

There are many cases of a couple (for the purpose of this discussion assume they are happily married) who might lovingly and joyfully enjoy the marital bed. With no intention of increasing the number in the family. Now it is most definitely possible that such a union may result in an (unwanted) pregnancy.

Now in this case would it be correct to say that the lady involved had become pregnant "by accident"? I believe that it would be fully correct to say that. Now multiply this scenario by a fairly large number - how many incidences do you think there are in the US every night? And how many of those are indulged in with the participants hoping that a pregnancy results? Probably not a real big percentage I would think.

So let's not get all judgemental on anyone who says they became pregnant "by accident".

Graeme

[bonnie]

Quote:

I am not sure how someone can get pregnant by accident. It isn't like stubbing one's toe. Two different people have to remove their clothing and physically connect in a sexual manner in such a way to achieve intercourse. How does that happen by accident?

My little accident is now 44 years old. Sometimes the most modern means of birth control fails. That is what I consider a accidental pregnancy.

I personally do not believe so many aborted pregnancy are accidental with the best of precautions taken.

Why worry about it as abortions are so much cheaper than a live child.

I think it is a fine line sometimes between condemnation and trying to help someone in this situation.

I don't think it necessary or helpful to verbally smack someone with "don't you know better"

Sometimes I think the "church" has given a permission of sorts for abortion as on other issues so that the permission is all they need for help or support.

Upholding the standards and belief system of any denomination is seen as unloving and hypocritical. It is not about barring the church doors so they don't contaminate the rest of us.

It simply is not okay to engage in this behavior,bring a innocent child into this world without a intact family. Nor should it be looked on as abortion is a form of birth control to take care of the results

It should not be a flogging event. But itshould not be seen as a good thing to do or something we cannot prevent,so what we get is a shrug of the shoulders and moving on to what some see as the real sin. That is a dicussion that can go for days. As Aubrey pointed out there are no shortages of counsel on Tea,coffee,pork.alcohol,and tobacco.

Something I don't quite understand. Abortion is seen as a sad and difficult act but a necessary legal one.

If it is not a child why does anyone act as if abortions are a hard decision or require so muc compassion?

If it is not a child why would I feel guilty. If it is a child how can any church tell any human being that it is alright.

A few years ago a man beat his pregnant wife who was 5 1/5 months pregnant. He stabbed her several times but she survived.

The little one she was carrying was viewed by the law as human. The husband was sent to prison after being convicted of manslaughter. She wanted her baby so it was viewed as a child.

The women having abortions that same day were not viewed as aborting a child. How does this work.

It either is and we have the right to abort anyway,or it isn't so who cares

[bonnie]

Can someone please tell me why we care about abortion?

It always comes with heart wrenching,hard,difficult moral and spiritual statements.

WHY?? If it is not a child or human life,who gives a rip. If it is not a child why would the mother have a difficult time with the decision.

[Guest WilloMar]

Abortion is not right. No killing is right. God loves life because He is life. However, there is one thing God wants more than anything else, and that’s freedom of choice. Now we should ask the question: Which God wants us to have freedom to choose? The god who aborted precious babies during the flood? Who also aborted little ones when the first-born in Egypt was killed? How about Sodom and Gomorrah? No, it’s the Creator God who gives us freedom of choice, not the destroyer, “the god of this world (2 Cor. 4:4).” Now, if Jesus killed all those precious babies like those of the world believe, He would sanction abortion today! Right?

Let’s prepare for the Son of God’s advent!

[bonnie]

Abortion is not right. No killing is right. God loves life because He is life. However, there is one thing God wants more than anything else, and that’s freedom of choice. Now we should ask the question: Which God wants us to have freedom to choose? The god who aborted precious babies during the flood? Who also aborted little ones when the first-born in Egypt was killed? How about Sodom and Gomorrah? No, it’s the Creator God who gives us freedom of choice, not the destroyer, “the god of this world (2 Cor. 4:4).” Now, if Jesus killed all those precious babies like those of the world believe, He would sanction abortion today! Right?

Let’s prepare for the Son of God’s advent!

That has nothing to do with what I asked.

Why the "such a difficult decision" If what is being aborted is not a child who cares then if it is aborted.

It isn't given any more protection than a wart removal. It is no one's business if you terminate a wart. Is it anyone's business if a child is begin aborted.

I am not going to change anyone's mind. My mind has been made up a long time ago but the reasoning escapes me. A five month old something ceased to be at the hands of the man that would have been "it's" father. This man was sent to prison for manslaughter. How can that be. The mother wanted the child so is that what made this five month old something a child.

If the mother was on her way to abortion clinic what was it she was carrying inside her?

What is sad ,difficult,moral or spiritual about getting rid of an annoyance that is going to complicate you life?

I don't get it

[there buster]

The phrase " force a woman to remain pregnant" is very telling. It is formulated in such a way as to practically demand a negative answer.

But suppose the only way to "terminate a marriage" was to "terminate the spouse?" Would we then say, no one should "force a man or woman to remain married?"

I'm waiting for a lawyer to use that in his closing argument.

"Yes, my client terminated her spouse. But who among you would say we should force a woman to remain married?"

There is no other way to "allow a woman to end her pregnancy" except in birth or that marvelously neutral phrase "termination" of the child which is her pregnancy.

[Guest WilloMar]

Bonnie, I think I understand, now. You want to know is a fetus is a child. Depends on who you ask, but he/she is a precious child in the mind of the Creator God. Because He’s Omnipresent, He could be playing with the child even before she/he was born. And, to me, that’s a very beautiful thought.

Let’s be ready for Jesus!

[bonnie]

Bonnie, I think I understand, now. You want to know is a fetus is a child. Depends on who you ask, but he/she is a precious child in the mind of the Creator God. Because He’s Omnipresent, He could be playing with the child even before she/he was born. And, to me, that’s a very beautiful thought.

Let’s be ready for Jesus!

No,I want to know if this is not a child why all the hand wringing over such a difficult choice. I am opposed to abortion.

I want to know what this thing is that women terminate when they

have an abortion.

If it is indeed a child who has the right to "kill it" because it is inconvenient?

If it is not a child why give this topic anymore concern than you would if I were going to have a wart removed?

I want to know how it can be a child and then become something else when you don't want it.

[bonnie]

The phrase " force a woman to remain pregnant" is very telling. It is formulated in such a way as to practically demand a negative answer.

But suppose the only way to "terminate a marriage" was to "terminate the spouse?" Would we then say, no one should "force a man or woman to remain married?"

I'm waiting for a lawyer to use that in his closing argument.

"Yes, my client terminated her spouse. But who among you would say we should force a woman to remain married?"

There is no other way to "allow a woman to end her pregnancy" except in birth or that marvelously neutral phrase "termination" of the child which is her pregnancy.

I just have a little bit of a hard time with when is it a child and when isn't it.

We certainly are not aborting(killing babies) so what is it we are getting rid of and what makes it a difficult decision.

[Lutz13]

Quote:

I hope, and not all are going to agree with me on this, BUT I HOPE the Church never tells us what to think.

Amen to that Stan!

[Bravus]

Bonnie: the notion of 'potential' solves your conundrum. Every fetus is a potential child, and aborting destroys that potential, which makes it a hard decision. The fact that it is a hard decision does not automatically mean that the fetus is a child.

Please note, this is a theoretical response to a theoretical question: I am personally strongly opposed to abortion.

[bonnie]

Bonnie: the notion of 'potential' solves your conundrum. Every fetus is a potential child, and aborting destroys that potential, which makes it a hard decision. The fact that it is a hard decision does not automatically mean that the fetus is a child.

Please note, this is a theoretical response to a theoretical question: I am personally strongly opposed to abortion.

Are you saying that the pro-life rages such a continuing battle for a "potential"?

When does the "potential" become a child?

The father that I mentioned beat his wife so severely that the five and half month old "potential" was terminated. How can it be that he was sentenced to prison for destroying a potential? He was charged and convicted of manslaughter. Had the mother been on her way for an abortion she would only be exercising her right to terminate a potential? Seems pretty convenient to me.

When does this potential become a child? When a baby is convenient for me?

With the bar going lower each year on when these "potentials" become viable how many babies, not potential have been killed?

For me to decide to wait till later to carry the "potential" that will eventually become a child certainly does not seem to be this "gut wrenching" decision. I can always begin the "potential" at a more convenient time.

The mother can terminate these "potentials" at will,regardless of the wishes of the father. He does not count. Oh wait a minute,he counts when the mother decides to carry this "little potential" to term,he must support financially till age 18.

21 if the child goes to college. How does this work.

[olger]

Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen

Are you saying Neil Wilson owns those two entities?

I'm pretty sure she's talking about Bud Feldkamp. Olger already mentioned that he's the owner of Glen Helen National Motocross Park.

I've been involved in Motocross for over 25-years. I never participate in ANY motocross events on the Sabbath Day. In fact this year, the National MX curcuit decided to try Saturday Nationals instead of the longstanding Sunday races. I simply said, "that's that. We won't be going to any more events." Wish more people had those convictions... But I guess I'm just mean-spirited, judgemental, short-sighted and vengeful.

I was surprised to discover that Bud Feldkamp is an Adventist (three weeks ago). I would never have guessed.

og out

[GreatLakesGramma]

Well, you know the saying that standing in a garage doesn't make you a car, & going to church doesn't make you a Christian. And there will always be tares among the wheat. Jesus said it is hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.

When someone has big money, it seem church members fall all over themselves currying his favor, so as to get big donations for the church (and so they don't have to personally come up with as much to get their pet projects financed). Thus the wealthy member gains almost complete control over the church. If anyone dares protest, it's the protester that gets censured, not the rich person. This is not unique to the Adventist church.

[Dr. Shane]

If someone plays Russian Roulette and kills themselves are we going to say they committed suicide by accident? Of course not. They know the risks they are taking when playing Russian Roulette. Suicide is a natural and common consequence of playing that game.

By the same logic we cannot call a pregnancy an accident regardless of what measures were take Unless one or both partners have been made sterile, there is always the known risk of pregnancy. The idea that an unplanned pregnancy is an accident is foolish in the extreme. If two fertile people have sexual intercourse with each other they ought to have a contingency plan of what happens in the event of pregnancy.

[bonnie]

If someone plays Russian Roulette and kills themselves are we going to say they committed suicide by accident? Of course not. They know the risks they are taking when playing Russian Roulette. Suicide is a natural and common consequence of playing that game.

By the same logic we cannot call a pregnancy an accident regardless of what measures were take Unless one or both partners have been made sterile, there is always the known risk of pregnancy. The idea that an unplanned pregnancy is an accident is foolish in the extreme. If two fertile people have sexual intercourse with each other they ought to have a contingency plan of what happens in the event of pregnancy.

It is not an accident in the sense of not knowing how the pregnancy occurred.

When you are more than reasonably certain of birth control methods it is an accidental pregnancy when it fails

[Dr. Shane]

That is true but it is also true that the longer one uses birth control the more likely it is to fail. For example, condoms have a 99% success rate. That means that if 1 million American couples are using condoms each year that 10,000 will get pregnant. (BTW, more than 1 million American couples use condoms each year)

OK let's say that you are one of the lucky 99% that did not get pregnant that first year. So you continue on. The next year another 10,000 couples will get pregnant. If condoms are 99% effective that means that over a 10 year period they are 90% effective. So of a group of 1 million couples that use condoms for 10 years, 100,000 of them will get pregnant.

So the odds are better than Russian Roulette but it certainly shouldn't be assumed that birth control is going to completely prevent pregnancy. Abstinence, on the other hand, does work. It has a 100% success rate.

[bonnie]

That is true but it is also true that the longer one uses birth control the more likely it is to fail. For example, condoms have a 99% success rate. That means that if 1 million American couples are using condoms each year that 10,000 will get pregnant. (BTW, more than 1 million American couples use condoms each year)

OK let's say that you are one of the lucky 99% that did not get pregnant that first year. So you continue on. The next year another 10,000 couples will get pregnant. If condoms are 99% effective that means that over a 10 year period they are 90% effective. So of a group of 1 million couples that use condoms for 10 years, 100,000 of them will get pregnant.

So the odds are better than Russian Roulette but it certainly shouldn't be assumed that birth control is going to completely prevent pregnancy. Abstinence, on the other hand, does work. It has a 100% success rate.

The numbers in your explanation does not explain the number of abortions that occur each year.

I don't believe the law permitting abortion for any and all reasons will ever be overturned.

I am still curious what they think is being terminated. There Buster was right on target I believe.

You would never hear anyone say in public "excuse me,I have an appointment to kill my baby"

When do those that are pro choice believe whatever they are terminating becomes a little tiny human being.

So far the earlist surviving "potential was delivered at 20. Baby lived.

If that can happen at that stage can someone tell me what those that aborted as late as that?

That is not just a choice,that is something all together different

[Bravus]

I reclaim the term 'potential'. Stop using it.

You asked a question, I answered it, and was rewarded with a mouthful of sarcastic abuse even though I'd made it absolutely clear that my answer was not my opinion.

Well, I want my word back. Find your own.

[Outta Here]

Numbers.

That math, up above, doesn't really work that way. Using such reasoning, at some point in time, condoms would be 0% effective. But they're not. They're always 99% effective--no matter how many years have gone by. The chance of them failing is always 1%.

[Bravus]

On contraception:

a. there's no substitute for being in a loving, monogamous marriage, where an unplanned pregnancy is at worst a surprise and most often a blessing but

b. belt and braces all the way: the pill plus condoms and spermicide Maybe an IUD as well...