Dr. Shane Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Pro-choice is about politics, there is nothing moral about it. Most that take the pro-choice position are just as guilty of playing politics as those that take the pro-life position. That is true. However I don't believe that is the case for the vast majority it Adventists that take a pro-choice position. I take a position that abortion should be legal but restricted. I believe in a 24 or 72 hour mandatory waiting period, mandatory pre-abortion counseling provided by an organization unaffiliated with abortion providers, parental consent laws, banning abortions after the first trimester and no public funding for abortion. That puts me at odds with more pro-choice organizations. I want to actually reduce the number of abortions performed, not just force my morality on others. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk Doug, This is to let you know that I did call the social worker. She came when you were out on your business trip, and she placed me in a foster home. The food is great, and so far I have not been punished for anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 No one is saying that you can't do that. Its the way its being said. That if someone is for chose that they are heathen in there thinking. I am against abortion but each has a right to choose. I think this is also what Shane is saying. And I think you critisize our hospitals without really knowing there reason's for doing what they do. Maybe there clinics are setup to help counsel those that come in for an abortion, and if they choose to have it anyway, at least they will be in a clean and steroil invironment. And not out in some butcher shop!!!! That's all I'm saying. Its still there choice no matter how we look at it. pk Pkrause, Yes, each one has the right to choose to steal, to rape, to burglarize, to sexually abuse little children, and to kill unborn children. My point is that there should be consequences. When someone rapes a woman, he may end in jail. What you are saying is that when someone is a serial killer of unborn babies, there should be no consequences. This means that you are defending murder. Perhaps we should also legalize prostitution, drug dealing, and the sexual abuse of children in order to guarantee all participants a “sterile environment.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Originally Posted By: doug yowell What if those who you say would like to think for others are really more interested in trying to persuade others to CHOOSE an alternative view for themselves? This is what we should be doing. Instead of trying to use the civil government to force our view on others, we should seek to persuade others to choose our view. Shane, Yes, and we should perhaps retrain our police force to use persuasion when confronted with crime. We should also retrain our judges to use persuasion to convince criminals to abandon their life of crime instead of putting them in jail or sending them to the electric chair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Originally Posted By: pkrause ...at least they will be in a clean and steroil invironment. And not out in some butcher shop!!!! pk The thing is that most of these girls that choose abortion are not in their right mind. There are in panic mode. They not thinking clearly. In countries where abortion is legal, crisis pregnancy centers can make a real impact. Thousands of girls come to crisis pregnancy centers each year and are persuaded not to have abortions. They don't go to crisis pregnancy centers in Mexico, Kenya and other such countries where abortion is illegal because they are too afraid to tell anyone their secret. Shane, Your argument seems impregnable. Let’s do away with our police force and the criminal system and replace everything with crisis centers staffed with counselors. This way no criminal will be in a panicky mode, except the general population because all criminals will be loose and free to exercise their god-given right to choose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Banning alcohol was quite different. The biggest distinction is that it actually worked. Alcohol consumption dropped dramatically under prohibition. Banning abortion doesn't work. Banning abortion actually increases it because those in crisis pregnancy are afraid to seek the counseling that many times will persuade them not to abort. Shane, The opposite of what you are was documented by the Planned Parenthood Guttmacher institute. They reported 700,000 abortions for 1973, the year the abortion was legalized, a million for 1975, and a million and a half for 1983. They can’t be lying with these statistics, because they are admitting what now they try to deny. The effect of legalizing crime tends to increase criminal activity. If you were to legalize stealing, what do you think would happen, decrease the number of stealing? Replace this with rape, incest, child sexual abuse, and the same will be true. Try to legalize prostitution and drug dealing and observe the results. You seem to be living in wonderland! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 The civil government isn't the solution for every problem. Just because the civil government can solve some problems doesn't mean it can solve all of them. Abortion is a fine example of a social problem civil government cannot solve. The rate of abortion is actually higher in nations where it is banned. That is the opposite of what we want. Shane, Read my previous posting. Planned Parenthoods is trying now to deny what they documented before about the true effect which followed the legalization of abortion. The number of abortions increased overnight to one million and a half in the first decade after Roe v Wade. You cannot deny what Planned Parenthood documented for us. It needs a blind person to fail to see where the truth is regarding this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 The issue there is cause and effect. Was it legalizing abortion that increased its use or was it the sexual revolution that took place in the 1970s and 1980s? The rate of teen pregnancy was actually less which resulted in less abortions. Obviously less pregnancies is going to mean less abortions. We can only get an accurate picture by comparing today's statistics with today's statistics. Mexico is actually a more conservative country sexually. That is, more girls wait to have sex until they are married per capita than in the US. Although that has changed a lot in the past 20 years. Mexico is also a more religious nation than the US. Since more wait until marriage and since more are religious per captia than in the US, that alone should lead us to suspect that their abortion rate would be less. Now add to that abortion being banned in Mexico and conventional wisdom would certainly conclude that there must be less abortions in Mexico per capita than in the US. But there is not. Banning abortion doesn't work. It actually increases the number of abortions because it gives girls less options. If we really want to decrease the number of abortions we will support legal abortion with restrictions. If we just want to force our morality on others we will support a ban on abortion. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Quote: Banning abortion actually increases it because those in crisis pregnancy are afraid to seek the counseling that many times will persuade them not to abort. First of all, there is no evidence at all for this fatuous argument. Indeed, one would have to deduce from the number of abortions annually that there must have been many more abortions when it was in fact illegal. The year for which there is most recent data indicates that about 23% of U.S. pregnancies end in abortion. Within a decade or Roe v. Wade, this rate was 30% So, pace Shane's reasoning, that means that an even higher percentage of pregnancies must have been terminated by abortion before 1973. Since Shane would have us believe that abortion rates declined after it was legalized, we are asked to believe that it must have been greater than 30% before. Apparently, we are to believe that one in every three pregnancies (or more) routinely ended in abortion in the period before 1973. When one considers that more than 3 million live births occurred in 1970, there must have been about more than a million abortions that year. Absurd on its face. Second, the same logic can be applied to absolutely any crime. It must be that more people commit murder because there is no counseling center to persuade them not to. More theft must occur because, when people are considering stealing, there are no theft counseling services available to dissuade them. Oh, and since these counseling services would be offered instead of making theft illegal, this would decrease theft. So, there's the solution for the crime problem. Make everything legal, and there is no crime. While we're at it, repeal every law that people break, or want to. There Buster, Great reasoning. I am glad you can look at the facts and draw the only logical conclusion. I can’t understand how so many Adventist have developed a blind spot on this issue. It is tragic beyond belief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Dear management, I wonder whether perhaps, by moving this blog from where it was before, you might have actually killed it. It took me a whole week to find it in the new location. Every time I attempted to access the blog, I got an "ACCESS DENIED" response. Doug Youwell had the same experience, and my guess is that all the other participants were experiencing the same. It might be a good idea to have posted a message in the old location warning blog participants that the blog would be moved in the futurre and provided a link to the new location. Another way to prevent this kind of problem would be to provide the new link to the new location instead of the mysterious "access denied" response to those trying to reach the blog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Happy Sabbath Nic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Stan posted a thread in the World Affairs forum telling people about the US Politics forum when he moved this thread into here. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Does Doug Youwell have or want access to this forum? Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 He probably dosn't know he can have access. He's new here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 He spells it: doug yowell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Dear management, I wonder whether perhaps, by moving this blog from where it was before, you might have actually killed it. It took me a whole week to find it in the new location. Every time I attempted to access the blog, I got an "ACCESS DENIED" response. Doug Youwell had the same experience, and my guess is that all the other participants were experiencing the same. It might be a good idea to have posted a message in the old location warning blog participants that the blog would be moved in the futurre and provided a link to the new location. Another way to prevent this kind of problem would be to provide the new link to the new location instead of the mysterious "access denied" response to those trying to reach the blog. I guess my prediction became a self fulfilling proophecy. Moving this post seems to have inflicted a moral blow on this blog. Please, prove me wrong. If you would like to visit a newly created pro-life web site where there are no plans to move blogs from their original location, do so by clicking on http://letsfocusonlife.lcom . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Nic, you misprinted the link to your website. Instead of .com you've got .lcom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Samojluk Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Richard, Thanks for noticing. Here is the corrected link: http://letsfocusonlife.com God bless, and Merry Christmass to all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.