Is the Adventist Church Really Pro-life?

[Guest]

There's always adoption.

[Woody]

First off Nic, I said I was against abortion. But having said that, its still a choice that God allows us to make, and than we will have to answer to God. Not to you or me or anyone else. Unless you think that we are the judge and jury. Right now from what I understand it is not a crime in this country to have an abortion, or am I wrong??? As far as those other things you mentioned, are they not crimes in this country or am I wrong about this too? And as far as I know they are also a choice! We can choose to kill, drink and drive, etc. but we have to be willing to pay the consequence's for our actions, here and the final judgement.

pk

Excellent pk. Well said.

[Nic Samojluk]

I'm pro-life. Pro-The MOTHER'S life. She has the right to CHOOSE, after consultation with her doctor, whether or not to end the pregnancy. And that choice is never made frivolously; the agonizing thought which goes into it is something which nobody else will ever understand.

For you MEN to try to arbitrarily decide a woman's fate is abysmally abhorrent. Almost obscene.

Jeannie,

Jesus did also have the right to choose, and he chose to die that we might have life. Women who decide to take the life of their unborn babies choose convenience over the life of an innocent baby. Nine months of inconvenience can never be compared with the total and permanent deprivation of life. Jesus said: “I have come that you may have life, and have it more abundantly.” Women who choose abortion say: I must have my freedom from responsibility even if it means dismembering the baby and tearing it to pieces. Abortion is the work of the one who has been a “murderer from the beginning.”

Do you think that the agony women go through when choosing to kill their own baby is lessened by making the wrong choice? Do you know why some men use their influence to end the legal killing of unborn children? Simply because nine unelected Justices of the Court made the wrong choice of legalizing the mass genocide of the unborn. Do you think that it is wrong to right the wrong decision of others?

[Woody]

There happens to be a disagreement with the way some people interpret when life begins. ONly die hard ultra judgmental people would insist that all others see it the way THEY see it. I am opposed to abortion. But I am not about to impose my way on people who do not see it that way. Where there is not agreement ... we should not be so high and mighty to impose our way. When does the breathe of life begin? Good minds can disagree. This is not something clear cut like a law against murder or rape. Where there is a 50-50 disagreement ... neither side should attempt to impose their way on the other. No good can possibly come from that.

[Guest]

I'm pro-life. Pro-The MOTHER'S life. She has the right to CHOOSE, after consultation with her doctor, whether or not to end the pregnancy. And that choice is never made frivolously; the agonizing thought which goes into it is something which nobody else will ever understand.

[Nic Samojluk]

well, thank God for some of these posts!

my sister above, unfortunately there are just as many women who are quite vocal on taking away their fellow womans right to choose.

each person has to answer to God for the decisions we make and i would just as soon leave it that way.

my bible emphasizes taking care of what is here, the poor, the orphan, the widow, the oppressed.

i have yet to read where it says to force people to bring more children into this world.

sorry!! but i would probably be more impressed with the pro-lifers if they had supplied every child sitting in orphanages, the street, and wherever they might be, with loving homes and food and care, before trying to force more into this world.

Teresa,

If women have the moral right to choose to kill, then I would say that men have the moral right to rape, steal, and sexually abuse little children. Take a moment to contrast the long -term results of rape and abortion. The woman who is a victim of rape can eventually heal and lead almost a normal life. I know that this is true because we have seen this take place in the life of someone very close to us. In contrast, the victim of an abortion has no way or hope for healing or life. The effects of abortion are irreversible. I hope you can see the moral difference between those two morally criminal acts.

It is true that the Bible commands us to take care of the orphans and the destitute; nevertheless, it has the strongest condemnation for those who shed innocent blood. I would suggest that you read the Old Testament one more time. If you do, you will also discover that another abomination described in the sacred pages of the Holy Book was the sacrifice of children in honor of the pagan god Moloch.

That was the old method of population control. The unwanted children were burned to death in a pagan religious ceremony. Today we burn them through a saline abortion. Occasionally, some babies survive the ordeal, and they have to be treated for burns to their tiny body. How can you justify the women’s moral right to burn their babies to death or to pull their arms and legs from their bodies and to crush their heads with forceps and without anesthesia?

[Woody]

What gives you the right to impose your definition of killing on the rest of us and the 50% of the US citizens that disagree with you?

I have to wonder ... would you also impose a National Sabbath keeping law?

Be careful now. Only legalists would do that. For it is not in the obeying of the law that we are saved. It is what is in the heart that matters. The jews are prime examples of that. They thought the letter of the law was what was important and yet they did not have a relationship with God.

Imposing your idea of the law will not help them.

[Nic Samojluk]

The only terminations of pregnancy I have personally performed have been when the baby

has major abnormalities. I do not have any moral problem with that action, if others do,

then that is their problem.

I am pro-choice, but if women come to me exploring the option of termination then I usually ask

them if they think that they will be comfortable with the decision 5 and 10 years down the track.

There are a number of babies alive today whose mothers were asked that question.

If the women want an abortion, there are readily available places to which they can go. I do not try to make them feel guilty if they choose that path.

This question is one which OBGYN's have to consider for themselves. Jesus did not come into the world

to force anyone to stop sinning. He came so that all who choose can live the abundant life He has opened up for us.

Nan,

You are right. Jesus did not come to force people to stop sinning; nevertheless, he quite often told them: “Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you."

Are you warning your patients the way Jesus did with those who were forgiven for their past sins?

Regarding babies with “major abnormalities,” have you ever seen how individuals without arms or legs have performed in public to the amazement of the watching public? Do you think that the man who played the guitar with his feet for the Pope some years ago in Mexico should have been aborted? Would you have aborted him? How about the man who had neither legs nor arms and preached in the Crystal Cathedral some years ago; would you have aborted him? Would you have aborted Beethoven? Did you read his story? Would you have aborted Jesus? His mother was unmarried and pregnant at a time when society decreed that such women should be stoned.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

well, thank God for some of these posts!

my sister above, unfortunately there are just as many women who are quite vocal on taking away their fellow womans right to choose.

each person has to answer to God for the decisions we make and i would just as soon leave it that way.

my bible emphasizes taking care of what is here, the poor, the orphan, the widow, the oppressed.

i have yet to read where it says to force people to bring more children into this world.

sorry!! but i would probably be more impressed with the pro-lifers if they had supplied every child sitting in orphanages, the street, and wherever they might be, with loving homes and food and care, before trying to force more into this world.

Teresa,

If women have the moral right to choose to kill, then I would say that men have the moral right to rape, steal, and sexually abuse little children. Take a moment to contrast the long -term results of rape and abortion. The woman who is a victim of rape can eventually heal and lead almost a normal life. I know that this is true because we have seen this take place in the life of someone very close to us. In contrast, the victim of an abortion has no way or hope for healing or life. The effects of abortion are irreversible. I hope you can see the moral difference between those two morally criminal acts.

It is true that the Bible commands us to take care of the orphans and the destitute; nevertheless, it has the strongest condemnation for those who shed innocent blood. I would suggest that you read the Old Testament one more time. If you do, you will also discover that another abomination described in the sacred pages of the Holy Book was the sacrifice of children in honor of the pagan god Moloch.

That was the old method of population control. The unwanted children were burned to death in a pagan religious ceremony. Today we burn them through a saline abortion. Occasionally, some babies survive the ordeal, and they have to be treated for burns to their tiny body. How can you justify the women’s moral right to burn their babies to death or to pull their arms and legs from their bodies and to crush their heads with forceps and without anesthesia?

my brother(?), you are entitled to your opinion.

after you have taken care of all the children in the world that need homes, food and care, then you come talk to me about how you feel about abortion.

i will listen then. :smile:

[teresaq]

Would you have aborted Beethoven? Did you read his story? Would you have aborted Jesus?...

let me know when

1. anyone is able to shrink someone back into a cell and stick it back in the womb

2. when we will be able to determine whether someone will be a beethoven, Jesus, manson or hitler when they grow up.

[Tom Wetmore]

...after you have taken care of all the children in the world that need homes, food and care, then you come talk to me about how you feel about abortion.

i will listen then. :smile:

[Nic Samojluk]

If it was from a rape ... was God responsible for that?

Redwood,

I have a question for you: The rapist commits a crime. Society lets the rapist live and executes the innocent baby. Do you think that this type of justice makes the Lord happy? If the girl or woman is not able to raise the unwanted baby, she has a viable alternative: Adoption.

There is a biblical definition of sin which goes like this: “Sin is missing the mark.” Sin is refusing to choose the best option, especially when the life of an innocent human being is at stake. The woman who chooses death for her own baby will have to deal with guilt the rest of her life. Giving her baby for adoption will make an infertile couple happy, and it will tend to ease the pain of the victim of abortion.

Killing the innocent cannot be the best option. God could have aborted the human race when Adam sinned. He didn’t. He chose a redemptive option. Jesus gave his life that we might live. Abortion reverses this Christian principle based on sacrifice for the benefit of others.

[SivartM]

after you have taken care of all the children in the world that need homes, food and care, then you come talk to me about how you feel about abortion.

And after you have saved every dying marriage on earth, then you come talk to me about how you feel about adultery.

And after you have eradicated all dishonesty from our planet, then you come talk to me about how you feel about lying.

And after you have returned every stolen item on earth, then you come talk to me about how you feel about stealing.

And after you have converted everyone to Christianity, then you come talk to me about how you feel about having other gods.

Something is not right or wrong based on how many people do it, or what actions people take based on their belief about it. Something is right or wrong because IT IS.

After you have personally witnessed the possible could-have-been lives of every murdered baby, then you come talk to me about how God didn't have a plan for them.

[oldsailor29]

Salvation is based on child sacrifice.

[Nic Samojluk]

First off Nic, I said I was against abortion. But having said that, its still a choice that God allows us to make, and than we will have to answer to God. Not to you or me or anyone else. Unless you think that we are the judge and jury. Right now from what I understand it is not a crime in this country to have an abortion, or am I wrong??? As far as those other things you mentioned, are they not crimes in this country or am I wrong about this too? And as far as I know they are also a choice! We can choose to kill, drink and drive, etc. but we have to be willing to pay the consequence's for our actions, here and the final judgement.

pk

Pkrause,

You are right. When a woman chooses to kill her own baby we have no power to prevent the moral crime because the state whose responsibility is to protect the lives and property of human beings has decided to shirk its responsibility while a massive genocide is taking place.

Nevertheless, there is something we can do: Resolve to refuse to participate in the slaughter of the innocents. This is where we as a church have failed. You may not know, but our church got into this act motivated by profit. About four decades ago, our Adventist Church decided to build a hospital in Hawaii and solicited donors from the general population and promised to be a full service hospital for the community.

Then, the State of Hawaii legalized abortion in 1970, and a man who had contributed a sizable donation for said medical institution, demanded that the hospital perform an abortion for his daughter. Management refused, and half of the physicians who were non-Adventists, threatened to take their patients elsewhere if management denied them the right to perform abortions. This critical situation was elevated to the North American Division, and the church caved in fearing the loss of revenue this would create.

After careful consultation, the NAD president announced to the constituency that the church was leaning towards abortion because there was too much hunger and too many people in the world. Imagine, our church arguing that killing human beings was the best solution for hunger in the richest country of the world. This is the second time the Adventist Church failed a moral test. The first time it happened in Germany when the Jews were being exterminated. Our Adventist leaders looked the other way and cooperated with the Nazi regime for fear of retribution, and a few years ago our German and Austrian leaders publicly apologized for our moral failure.

This leads me to ask the following question: Are we still the “Remnant” people of God who keep God’s Commandments? One of those Commandments forbids murder. Yes, we can’t prevent abortion from taking place, but we can refuse to participate in the murder of the innocents.

[Woody]

Quote:

Are we still the “Remnant” people of God who keep God’s Commandments?

I wouldn't be so concerned about others in that regard. It is best to get one's own house in order before looking to others.

[Nic Samojluk]

There happens to be a disagreement with the way some people interpret when life begins. ONly die hard ultra judgmental people would insist that all others see it the way THEY see it. I am opposed to abortion. But I am not about to impose my way on people who do not see it that way. Where there is not agreement ... we should not be so high and mighty to impose our way. When does the breathe of life begin? Good minds can disagree. This is not something clear cut like a law against murder or rape. Where there is a 50-50 disagreement ... neither side should attempt to impose their way on the other. No good can possibly come from that.

Redwood,

When people begin to loose a moral argument, they have a tendency to attack the character of their opponents. It seems that you have just done that. According to you, anyone who disagrees with you is a “hard ultra judgmental” individual. Can we discuss the moral validity of our individual position without demeaning the moral character of the opponent?

Are you suggesting that the unborn is not a human being simply because it has not taken the first breath? Are fish non living because they do not take oxygen the way we do? Are we free to harm a patient who is temporarily connected to a lung machine? Are you saying that it would have been morally acceptable to provide an abortion for Mary the mother of Jesus because the unborn baby had not taken the first breath yet?

For two millennia the Christian West considered that abortion was morally wrong and physicians had to take an oath which included a promise not to engage in the killing of the unborn. Suddenly, society decides that there are too many unwanted babies and our church says, “Sure, killing the innocent is morally justified.” Is this the kind of moral fiber we expect from the “Remnant” who keep God’s Commandments? We used to criticize the Catholic Church for compromising on the Fourth Commandment. Now we have compromised on the Sixth One and you are trying to say that we have done nothing wrong!

Catholic hospitals refuse to perform abortion, while we, the alleged “Remnant” of God see no moral problem with sharing the profit generated by the murder of the unborn. A large number of abortion clinics are owned and operated by Adventists and millions of dollars are pouring into their bank accounts and we defend their right to engage in this kind of business. Of course, their generous donations to our institutions are welcome. Can the Lord bless such behavior?

[Woody]

Not sure what the Remnant theology has to do with anything.

[Nic Samojluk]

What gives you the right to impose your definition of killing on the rest of us and the 50% of the US citizens that disagree with you?

I have to wonder ... would you also impose a National Sabbath keeping law?

Be careful now. Only legalists would do that. For it is not in the obeying of the law that we are saved. It is what is in the heart that matters. The jews are prime examples of that. They thought the letter of the law was what was important and yet they did not have a relationship with God.

Imposing your idea of the law will not help them.

Redwood,

What is your definition of killing? Have you ever seen what happens when an abortion is performed? Most abortions are performed by either a saline injection or else by dismemberment. The effect of a saline injection is death by burning. The unborn living and kicking baby is burned to death. There have been several cases where the baby survives the ordeal and it has to be treated the way burn patients are cared for. In the case of dismemberment, the limbs are pulled from the body and the head is crushed. Would you insist that this is not killing?

Regarding you Sabbath argument, my answer is: The government’s business is to protect the lives and property of the human beings under its jurisdiction. What right would have the government to force people to worship God on the correct day of the week? How many lives have been lost as a result of worshipping the Lord on the wrong day of the week? How does this compare with the fifty million unborn babies who have been executed for the crime of not having taken their first breath?

And since you mentioned what the Jews did, let me remind you what they actually did. They killed an innocent victim, the Author of life, and rushed to keep the Sabbath. We allow our hospitals to kill the innocents, and make sure to be in church on the correct day of the week. We are repeating the moral mistake of the Jews.

Then, we lament that our Adventist Church is not growing in North America. How can it grow, if we are killing our own children, the future generation of Adventists? The Adventist is growing by leaps and bounds in some of the countries where abortion is still illegal.

[Woody]

My definition of killing has nothing to do with the discussion. You continue to miss the point. The point is that I am not going to impose upon others ... my belief that abortion is killing. You apparently want to. But this would only cause trouble and division. There is not a concensus on this issue. As a Christian ... I refuse to impose my personal belief on others.

[Nic Samojluk]

[Woody]

Interesting that the founding 'fathers' of our church never attempted to impose their beliefs on abortion through forced legislation. In fact ... the founding fathers never officially mentioned abortion to my knowledge.

[phkrause]

You make some good points Richard. I too know a few young girls, probably they were around 15 or 16, and got themselves pregnant, and never considered the child at all. There only concern was that no one would find out they had sex with some one. But even though Jeannie made a generalazation (sp) she stills makes some good points.

pk

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

after you have taken care of all the children in the world that need homes, food and care, then you come talk to me about how you feel about abortion.

And after you have saved every dying marriage on earth, then you come talk to me about how you feel about adultery.

And after you have eradicated all dishonesty from our planet, then you come talk to me about how you feel about lying.

And after you have returned every stolen item on earth, then you come talk to me about how you feel about stealing.

And after you have converted everyone to Christianity, then you come talk to me about how you feel about having other gods.

Something is not right or wrong based on how many people do it, or what actions people take based on their belief about it. Something is right or wrong because IT IS.

After you have personally witnessed the possible could-have-been lives of every murdered baby, then you come talk to me about how God didn't have a plan for them.

Excellent point SivartM

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Until you are in someone else's shoes regarding abortion, you don't have a right to tell that person what to do. IMHO