Should Adventists Get Out of the Abortion Business?

[Nic Samojluk]

It is a well known fact that our Adventist pioneers condemned the practice of abortion in the strongest terms and labeled it as plain murder. This attitude took a dramatic turn four decades ago when the then president of the North American Division made the following public declaration:

“SDAs lean towards abortion rather than against it. Because we realize we are confronted with big problems of hunger and over-population” [George Gainer, The Wisdom of Solomon? Spectrum 19/4 (May 1989): 38-46. Accessed on 15 Jan. 2011 from http://old.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive16-20/19-4gainer.pdf ]

Do you think that these were valid reasons for embracing the practice of abortion? Does overpopulation justify the killing of innocent unborn babies? How about hunger? And let us keep in mind that this pronouncement was made in the richest country of the world. Were these the real reasons we Adventists moved from a strictly pro-life attitude to a pro-choice/pro-abortion one? What were the true reasons for our dramatic shift in our attitude towards the killing of innocent human beings?

George Gainer described in detail how this happened. When the State of Hawaii legalized abortion back in 1970, the management of our Castle Memorial Hospital [CMH] was faced with a serious dilemma. Half of the physicians employed by said medical facility were non-Adventists, and they demanded the right to offer abortion services to their patients. A man who had donated $25,000 for the building of the hospital requested an abortion for his young daughter and reminded the hospital employees that Adventists had promised to offer full medical services to the community.

Those physicians interested in participating in the lucrative abortion business made it clear that in the event their request was denied, they would take their patients elsewhere. The hospital managers felt that the loss of this potential business could threaten the financial stability of the institution and sought the advice of the Pacific Union Conference. The dilemma reached the offices of the North American Division and prompted the then NAD president to issue the above quoted public declaration which moved our church into the abortion business.

Soon after, other Adventist hospitals decided to follow the example of our CMH and some years ago, our “Ministry” magazine reported that five of our Adventist hospitals were offering ELECTIVE abortion services to their patients. Of course, an elective abortion means that there is nothing wrong with the developing baby. The pregnant woman requests that her unborn baby be killed because the birth of the baby would interfere with her lifestyle.

These types of abortions were sometimes described as therapeutic, but the truth is that abortion is never a therapy for the doomed baby, neither is it a therapy for the pregnant woman. She will always remember the fact that she was an accomplice in the killing of her own baby. [Gerald R. Winslow, “Abortion Policies in Adventist Hospitals,” Spectrum 19/4 (May 1989): 47-50. Accessed from http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/issue/vol_19_no_4_may_1989 on 18 Oct. 2010.]

What do you think? Do you agree with me that our Adventist Church adopted the pro-choice/pro-abortion policy for the wrong reasons and that it should get out of it ASAP?

[doug yowell]

Yes.

[Woody]

No.

[doug yowell]

No.

No???

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Woody

No.

No???

No

[Nic Samojluk]

No.

Should I conclude that you agree with Neal Wilson's doctrine that it is morally acceptable for the Adventist Church to engage in the killing of innocent unborn human beings because there is too much hunger and to many people in the world?

[Woody]

Quote:

....Neal Wilson's doctrine that it is morally acceptable for the Adventist Church to engage in the killing of innocent unborn human beings because there is too much hunger and to many people in the world?

Do you believe it is morally acceptable to lie for support of your viewpoint?

Excellent point CoA. It is mine also.

[phkrause]

GP, here's an interesting article about abortion:

http://www.aish.com/f/mom/Reality_of_Abortion.html

[doug yowell]

No. No??? No

So should we become more involved, or are we just about where we should be?

[doug yowell]

GP, here's an interesting article about abortion:

http://www.aish.com/f/mom/Reality_of_Abortion.html

Thanks for the article,pk. Yes,very interesting. Seems like some are reverting back to common sense.

[Nic Samojluk]

CoAspen asked: “Do you believe it is morally acceptable to lie for support of your viewpoint?”

My answer: Who do you thing is lying? Is it me, George Gainer, or Spectrum? I did not hear Wilson utter the statement I quoted. I am relying on what George Gainer wrote and Spectrum published. What makes you believe that this report is based on a lie? Did you read the article written by Gainer? Did you write to Spectrum asking them why they published a lie? Here is the quotation in question and the link to the article in the event you missed it!

“SDAs lean towards abortion rather than against it. Because we realize we are confronted with big problems of hunger and over-population” [George Gainer, The Wisdom of Solomon? Spectrum 19/4 (May 1989): 38-46. Accessed on 15 Jan. 2011 from http://old.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive16-20/19-4gainer.pdf ]

[Nic Samojluk]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

Do you believe it is morally acceptable to lie for support of your viewpoint?

Excellent point CoA. It is mine also.

Read my response to CoAspen.

[Nic Samojluk]

GP, here's an interesting article about abortion:

http://www.aish.com/f/mom/Reality_of_Abortion.html

Excellnt article. Thanks for the link!

[doug yowell]

Still waiting for your answer to my question.......yes or no?

Did you expect anyone to view your question as anything but a rhetorical one? Is there any need to answer it?

[doug yowell]

Yep...credibility!!

So you were expecting Nic to answer yes to your question??

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

Yep...credibility!!

So you were expecting Nic to answer yes to your question??

I say let the chips fall where they may and if the shoe fits ... wear it.

[John317]

A little honesty has never gone very far. The Devil himself is a little honest. What's needed is the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[MariaS]

Let the bible speaks its truth and not to justify it. I agree with you John317

[phkrause]

A little honesty goes a long way.

Absolutely CoAspen, I agree. We might feel or believe that something is wrong but need to not spin it a certain way to show it the way we want it to look.

[Nic Samojluk]

Still waiting for your answer to my question.......yes or no?

No! The Bible condemns lying. Now is your turn to answer the questions I asked you.

[doug yowell]

A little honesty goes a long way.

Neil Wilson is on record as having been an open supporter of elective abortions,even supporting their use in the SDA medical institutions. What exactly was dishonest about Nic's post?If there is but a shred of evidence that Neil Wilson subsequently changed his mind or later advocated anything contrary to his public statements then Nic's portrayal of his views would be open to interpretation and his conclusions would be suspect. But lies??? (like "Bush lied,people died")A lie is an intentional attempt to deceive when one knows that the opposite is true.So whatdya think,CoA, is Nic trying to lie about something here?

[doug yowell]

A little honesty has never gone very far. The Devil himself is a little honest. What's needed is the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

A very important point.Isn't that what a half truth is?

[John317]

Yes, it is. And no honest Judge or court of law accepts half- truths. People can be jailed for knowingly telling partial truths. If I tell the judge that I mostly told the truth and that he shouldn't be too upset at a few lies, he is not likely to be persuaded to see things from my point of view.

[Gerr]

If you mean totally and without exceptions, then, NO!

[Woody]

If you mean totally and without exceptions, then, NO!

Finally Gerry and I agree. My NO was loudly condemned. I wonder how your NO will be received.