Is Ted Wilson Misinformed About Elective Abortions in Adventist Hosp.?

[Overaged]

Besides, you continue to accuse me of deliberate lying. It is time that you provide some evidence in support of your accusation; otherwise this will boomerang against you.

I am not going to participate in your stupid mind games; but when things "boomerang" on me I will post all the details here just for you. In this case; I stand behind everything I said, with 110% confidence. BTW "Patrick" has you right where he wants you. He is a pro.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

This was so well-stated and respectful!!

I fully agree with the thoughts expressed. Although Abortion is horrible, I do not have the right to dictate to my fellow(women) how they are to live, or what they are to do with their bodies.

Does that mean you support a woman's right to: employ her body for prostitution or pornography,fornication and adultry,smoking while pregnant,or drug or alcohol addiction? Do you also reject Paul's claim in I Cor. 6:18-20?

Did you stop to think about what you are saying, Doug? Are you asking me if I feel I have the right to "force" someone to live the way I believe the bible says they should live?

Are you saying the SDA church should also use the government to force others to live according to our beliefs as the papacy did for centuries?

[doug yowell]

Your math is weird. Abortions being done in some Adventist Hospitals does not translate into Adventists official approval of same. How you can continue to believe Nics Catholic lies is beyond me.

My math is not weird. That guy in the picture in your post is weird. Yikes!!

PS. Ambivalence is technically not the same as approval.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

Having been a single parent, I would suggest a much longer commitment!

It's easy to bring a child into the world, much harder to raise them as God would have us raise them!

I so agree. It is easy to sit back, behind a keyboard, but what counts is what you said.

I'm not sure how this relates to aborting an unborn child. Help me out here.

[Stan]

the comment before that was something similar to this...

If you are against abortion are you also active in helping out with the upbringing of that child for the first few years? and she added not only the first few years.

[doug yowell]

Did you stop to think about what you are saying, Doug? Are you asking me if I feel I have the right to "force" someone to live the way I believe the bible says they should live?

Are you saying the SDA church should also use the government to force others to live according to our beliefs as the papacy did for centuries?

Your original post included nothing about secular government involvment in the question at hand. I assumed that we were still speaking,uh, writing about the SDA church government's right (or not) to require obedience of it's membership to live the way the Bible says they should live. That's been the title and focus,so far, of this thread. Were you intending to change course?

[teresaq]

#447823

You asked me questions and I responded to those questions.

Does that mean you support a woman's right to: employ her body for prostitution or pornography,fornication and adultry,smoking while pregnant,or drug or alcohol addiction? Do you also reject Paul's claim in I Cor. 6:18-20?

Your question leads me to believe you want to force "her" to stop doing any of those things.

I do not know how else to take it.

[doug yowell]

the comment before that was something similar to this...

If you are against abortion are you also active in helping out with the upbringing of that child for the first few years? and she added not only the first few years.

I understood the question I don't understand how being active in the upbringing of that child is relevant to the right or wrong of killing it in utero. If I'm not personally active in supporting someone else's (or even my own)child for X number of years does that mean that abortion is a morally acceptable option? Is that what is being alluded to? Please explain.

[doug yowell]

[quote name="teresaq(sda)

You asked me questions and I responded to those questions.

Does that mean you support a woman's right to: employ her body for prostitution or pornography' date='fornication and adultry,smoking while pregnant,or drug or alcohol addiction? Do you also reject Paul's claim in I Cor. 6:18-20? [/quote'] You responded to my questions but failed to answer any of them. You did, however, respond by asking me a question which did not clarify what you meant by your original comments. Those statements did not include any connection between the SDA church prohibiting abortion in it's own institutions and using the secular government to force that behavior. My question in response to your statement was an attempt to clarify the parameters (if any)of YOUR support for the freedoms of a woman's bodily use. You may still answer that inquiry if you wish. I don't want to jump to any unfounded conclusions about where you're coming from.

[doug yowell]

Your question leads me to believe you want to force "her" to stop doing any of those things.

If that was true would you find that offensively wrong? Does the proper Christian approach to law or morality require the abolition of law and it's enforcement in order to avoid any perception that force was being used to insure the stability and protection of society?

[Nic Samojluk]

Stan wrote:

“Is anyone here involved with providing a way that those who are in an unwanted pregnancy can have help to bring her to term? and to help them through the first few years?” And

“I so agree. It is easy to sit back, behind a keyboard, but what counts is what you said.”

*********

Have you heard about George Lawson, or Teresa and Arthur Beem? They founded the original “Adventist for Life” organization located in Loma Linda and a chapter in Keene, TX. Their objective was precisely to assist women who wanted to keep their babies but needed help. In order to survive, they needed moral and financial support. Instead of getting what they needed to survive, they were faced with fierce opposition to the point that Lawson was forced to close shop, move to Hemet, leave the Adventist Church, and join the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Riverside, California.

The Beems had a similar experience, closed their shop in Texas, left the church and joined the Catholic faith communion. Inspired by their example, I attempted to do something about this, but had no assets to try something similar, so I sent all the money I could afford at the time to the General Conference and asked that said money be used to promote the pro-life program of the church. My check was sent back with the following note: “The Adventist Church does not have a pro-life program.” I repeated this on two separate occasions with the same result. I tried my local church, and got the same response.

I am old now, and my real estate business failed and left me with a huge financial debt. The only think I can do now is to write on behalf of those who cannot do anything in their own defense. You claim that sitting behind a computer is easy. Not so, my friend. More than once, the Lord has kept me awake in the middle of the night and prompted me to get up and do the “easy” task of sitting behind my computer in order to keep the pro-life dream burning in the hearts of the few pro-life Adventists I know.

In the last two decades, I must have invested several thousands of hours doing what you describe as “easy” work. I feel like Peter who said “I do have neither gold nor silver, but what I have I give you.” All I can do, given my age and my financial indebtedness, is write, and I will continue doing the task the Lord has lain on my shoulders despite opposition and criticism.

[Jeannieb43]

Dear Brother Nic,

With all due respect, I'm not so sure it is the Lord who has lain this burden upon your shoulders. It appears to me that you have become obsessed with somehow trying to prove that an embryo is equal to a living, breathing human being. Your obsession is sending you into a tailspin because you can't get the world to agree with your interpretation of when life begins.

I'm old enough to remember, back many years ago, before the time when all the current neonatal machines were developed, to assist premature infants in growing to viability in an incubator, that it was common knowledge among obstetricians and obstetrical nurses that if an aborted fetus could not survive on its own outside the womb, it was not given a name, a birth certificate, or a death certificate. It was not considered a person if it could not survive. Now, however, with the assistance of the modern-day technology, some fetuses are surviving which never would have survived before. So this is the reason for the "When does life begin?" question which has now arisen.

I choose to follow the law which was always in effect previously: If a fetus cannot survive on its own outside the womb, it has thus not reached the status of a "person."

I do not choose to elevate an embryo [which can neither see nor hear nor breathe] to the status of equality with a person. Therefore, it is not something on which I wish to spend my time and energies, to try to "save" something that has no possible use to society.

Perhaps you might wish to redirect your energies to making a home for the many abandoned children who are forced to live in poverty and deprivation when their mothers have no means to support them after their birth. That's a wide-open field for mission work right now.

[Overaged]

Perhaps you might wish to redirect your energies to making a home for the many abandoned children who are forced to live in poverty and deprivation when their mothers have no means to support them after their birth. That's a wide-open field for mission work right now.

Well said; but Nic is not likely to do this because he has another agenda.

[Tammy]

I choose to follow the law which was always in effect previously: If a fetus cannot survive on its own outside the womb, it has thus not reached the status of a "person."

I don't read anywhere where God makes that distinction -

[Nic Samojluk]

Jeannieb43 wrote:

“I'm not so sure it is the Lord who has laid this burden upon your shoulders. It appears to me that you have become obsessed with somehow trying to prove that an embryo is equal to a living, breathing human being. Your obsession is sending you into a tailspin because you can't get the world to agree with your interpretation of when life begins.”

*********

It seems to me that you are missing something here. If I am obsessed with an erroneous view of the unborn, then the church is also in error. Are you arguing that the church has chosen a position that is erroneous? Notice what the Adventist “Guidelines on Abortion” state:

“Prenatal human life is a magnificent gift of God. God's ideal for human beings affirms the sanctity of human life, in God's image, and requires respect for prenatal life.”

The church states here that prenatal life is a gift of God, that human life is holy, that it is in God’s image and that it deserves respect. Now I ask: Is destroying God’s gift, which is holy and made in God’s image the proper way to show the respect the church states said life deserves? If someone who loves you gives you a gift, would you throw it into the thrash?

“Abortions for reasons of birth control, gender selection, or convenience are not condoned by the Church.”

This statement found in the Adventist guidelines affirm that the church does not approve elective abortions. Ted Wilson, the president of the General Conference, alluded to this passage from said guidelines in response to my question and publicly declared that the church respects this condemnation of abortions on demand; and then he added that said elective abortion in our Adventist hospitals are almost down to zero.

My investigation shows that the public record of hospital procedures reveals quite the opposite. Not only they are not “almost down to zero,” but they are numbered in the hundreds and thousands. If I am obsessed with sharing what seems to reveal the truth about abortion, then you need to admit that probably the church is obsessed with making us believe what is based on misinformation.

Do you believe that our mission is to hide the true facts about abortion from our membership? Can the True Witness described in the book of Revelation approve self deception? Isn’t it our duty to keep our leaders and members informed about what is really taking place in our institutions? Should not someone sound the trumpet to wake our leaders to what is happening?

“God calls for the protection of human life and holds humanity accountable for its destruction.”

This statement from our Adventist guidelines declares that human life deserves protection and that we will be acountable to God for its destruction. Is poisoning or dismembering a growing human being the proper manner of protecting human life?

I was talking to a dear sister who used to work for the Loma Linda Uiversity Medical Center, and she told me that the physician she was assisting was doing abortions all day long and that he labeled all those procedures as “therapeutic abortions.” Since when has killing through dismemberment become a form of therapy.

Do you know of anyone interested in receiving this kind of therapy? I can show you the testimony of many handicapped individuals who have expressed their gratitude to their mothers for choosing life for them in spite of the fact that they were not physically perfect.

If even defective human being can appreciate life, what can we say about those who are destroyed simply because they are not wanted and in violation of our church policy and in direct contravention of what God has clearly stated in his Holy Law?

“God is especially concerned for the protection of the weak, the defenseless, and the oppressed.”

This statement also taken from our Adventist guidelines state that the weak, the defenseless, and the oppressed deserve to be protected. Is killing a proper way of protecting them?

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/guidelines/main-guide1.html

Allow me to add to the above, a statement made by the alleged architect of the Adventist “Guidelines on Abortion.”

“We take every stage of prenatal life very seriously. It should be protected . . . the prenatal life we’re protecting exists once an ‘established pregnancy’ can be ascertained.”

Bettina Krause. “ANN Feature: Broader Religious Input Needed in Stem Cell Debate, Says Adventist Ethicist” Adventist News network/ Seventh-day Adventist Church (7 Aug. 2001). Accessed from http://news.adventist.org/2001/08/a-feature–broaer-religious-iput-eee-i-stem-cell-ebate-says-avetist-ethicist.html on 15 Oct. 2010.

Notice that speaking on behalf of the church Dr. Gerald Winslow, the man who was in charge of the LLU Ethics Department, clearly stated that the unborn deserves to be protected from the moment of conception and not once the baby can survive outside of the womb as you argue; which means that your argument is in opposition of what the church teaches.

[Nic Samojluk]

Jeannieb43 wrote:

“When does life begin?" … if a fetus cannot survive on its own outside the womb, it has thus not reached the status of a "person."

I do not choose to elevate an embryo [which can neither see nor hear nor breathe] to the status of equality with a person. Therefore, it is not something on which I wish to spend my time and energies, to try to "save" something that has no possible use to society.

Perhaps you might wish to redirect your energies to making a home for the many abandoned children who are forced to live in poverty and deprivation when their mothers have no means to support them after their birth. That's a wide-open field for mission work right now.”

*********

Please, read my previous response to you. If you do, you will discover that you are teaching something that is in direct opposition to what is clearly stated in our Guidelines on Abortion.

Said guidelines specifically affirm that human life needs to be protected from the moment a pregnancy can be ascertained and not from the moment of viability when the unborn can survive outside of the womb. If the church is teaching the truth in this respect, then you are teaching an erroneous doctrine.

I have been doing my share in helping with the feeding of those who are hungry and clothing the naked. In addition to this noble work, I am doing what the church and the Lord state that should be done, which you seem to deny.

[doug yowell]

I'm old enough to remember, back many years ago, before the time when all the current neonatal machines were developed, to assist premature infants in growing to viability in an incubator, that it was common knowledge among obstetricians and obstetrical nurses that if an aborted fetus could not survive on its own outside the womb, it was not given a name, a birth certificate, or a death certificate. It was not considered a person if it could not survive. Now, however, with the assistance of the modern-day technology, some fetuses are surviving which never would have survived before. So this is the reason for the "When does life begin?" question which has now arisen.

No, by your own admission,this is a fabricated question as to when "personhood" begins. For hundreds of years mankind has known when human life begins. You cannot, without resorting to a subjectively arbitrary definition of humanity, redefine human value based on that definition. What is the difference between a human being and a person? If, as you claim,that "personhood" is determined by survivability outside the womb then how is abortion morally justifiable if done before that moment is determined? And why do we spend billions of dollars trying to save the lives of non-persons?

[doug yowell]

I do not choose to elevate an embryo [which can neither see nor hear nor breathe] to the status of equality with a person. Therefore, it is not something on which I wish to spend my time and energies, to try to "save" something that has no possible use to society.

You mean an embryo that has a beating heart,brain waves,growing limbs and organs,and a distinctive human DNA? Or were you referring to the completely developed unborn human embryo (??)that was on the way down the birth canal minutes away from elevation to full personhood status?

[doug yowell]

Perhaps you might wish to redirect your energies to making a home for the many abandoned children who are forced to live in poverty and deprivation when their mothers have no means to support them after their birth. That's a wide-open field for mission work right now.

Why should anyone feel obligated to do that? According to your own definition they are now "persons" and should be able to survive on their own outside the womb? Why waste time and energy on them?

[doug yowell]

it is not something on which I wish to spend my time and energies, to try to "save" something that has no possible use to society.

No possible use?? You mean like yourself at the same stage of development? Apparently you managed to turn the no possible use into a real probable use because someone decided to simply leave you alone. Why not return the favor?

[Nic Samojluk]

Overaged said:

“Too bad you are choosing to continue in your lies.”

“How you can continue to believe Nics Catholic lies is beyond me.”

“I stand behind everything I said, with 110% confidence.”

*********

If you are so confident, how come you refuse to share with us the evidence behind such confidence? You insist that I am lying but are either unable or unwilling to provide the evidence that I am lying. Are you aware that when a blogger decides to smear the character of his opponent it is a sign that he is out of ammunition? A decent forum like this one calls for the respectful exchange of views—not for mud slinging.

Lying is the intentional misrepresentation of facts with the aim of deceiving others. Are you perhaps a clairvoyant who can read my mind and are able to detect the fact that I am intentionally distorting the facts of the case in dispute? If you believe that I am distorting the facts, why is it you are having such a hard time pointing to where I am factually in error?

If you really believe that my facts are not reliable, wouldn’t it be easier for you to show my error instead of trying to prove that I am intentionally twisting the facts, which is almost impossible to prove? I am respectfully inviting you to abide by the rules of decent discourse. In sports those who ignore the rules of the game loose the right to participate. The basic rule of serious forums is respect for the opinion of others. Can we abide by such rules? I hope we can!

[Nic Samojluk]

Doug wrote:

“It must be noted that President Wilson's answer admitted that elective abortions are still being done in SDA medical institutions."...Almost zero" is NOT ZERO it is more than zero (I think that's what almost means)!! Is that his final answer?”

*********

Correct! Now add to what you stated the following: The statistics I secured from an independent repository of hospital procedures for the following years: 2008-2010 indicate that the actual number of abortions performed by two Adventist hospital—Washington Adventist Hospital and Shady Grove Hospital—yield an average of 200 abortions per year after deducting those resulting from rape, incest and malformation.

Can you imagine what would happen if we multiplied this number by the number of Adventist hospitals performing elective abortions? And do not forget that we have a total of over fifty Adventist hospitals in North America. The result would be in the thousands. Isn’t this evidence that our president is very likely misinformed about what is taking place inside some of our Adventist hospitals? How can we rely on his claim that elective abortions in our hospitals are almost down to zero?

[doug yowell]

Doug wrote:

“It must be noted that President Wilson's answer admitted that elective abortions are still being done in SDA medical institutions."...Almost zero" is NOT ZERO it is more than zero (I think that's what almost means)!! Is that his final answer?”

*********

Correct! Now add to what you stated the following: The statistics I secured from an independent repository of hospital procedures for the following years: 2008-2010 indicate that the actual number of abortions performed by two Adventist hospital—Washington Adventist Hospital and Shady Grove Hospital—yield an average of 200 abortions per year after deducting those resulting from rape, incest and malformation.

Can you imagine what would happen if we multiplied this number by the number of Adventist hospitals performing elective abortions? And do not forget that we have a total of over fifty Adventist hospitals in North America. The result would be in the thousands. Isn’t this evidence that our president is very likely misinformed about what is taking place inside some of our Adventist hospitals? How can we rely on his claim that elective abortions in our hospitals are almost down to zero?

I don't think it's necessary to overstate the possibilities in order to establish the fact that more than zero elective abortions done in the name of Seventh-day Adventism is too many.President Wilson should be encouraged to put forth efforts to get rid of the almost.I personally don't believe (I could be wrong)that every SDA hospital in No. America offers elective abortions. I've been told that the Florida hospitals absolutely don't. Too bad we can't be as up front and transparent about this as we demand the RC be about their child molesting priests.

[Overaged]

Correct! Now add to what you stated the following: The statistics I secured from an independent repository of hospital procedures for the following years: 2008-2010

What is this "independant repository?"

[Nic Samojluk]

doug yowell wrote:

“I don't think it's necessary to overstate the possibilities in order to establish the fact that more than zero elective abortions done in the name of Seventh-day Adventism is too many. President Wilson should be encouraged to put forth efforts to get rid of the almost. I personally don't believe (I could be wrong)that every SDA hospital in No. America offers elective abortions. I've been told that the Florida hospitals absolutely don't. Too bad we can't be as up front and transparent about this as we demand the RC be about their child molesting priests.”

*********

There is a way of finding out how many Adventist hospitals followed the example set by Castle Memorial Hospital in Hawaii—later renamed as Castle Memorial Medical Center—and the two hospitals in Maryland I got statistics for—Washington Adventist Hospital and Shady Grove Hospital, but it might be too expensive and time consuming.

Nevertheless, we do know that the survey conducted by Loma Linda University in 1988 revealed that five Adventist hospitals indicated that they were performing elective abortions. Out of 51 hospitals, 26 responded to the inquiry. Had all of them responded, logic leads me to believe that instead of five that number might have been ten. Besides, if the initial number of Adventist hospitals performing abortions was one back in 1970, and by 1988 had grown to ten, then by 2010 said number might have grown to twenty.

Of course, these numbers are hypothetical, and we cannot rely on them. The only thing we know for sure is that the two hospitals I have statistics for seem to provide strong evidence that our president is very likely misinformed about what is taking place in our Adventist hospitals. There is a way, though, to find the truth about the rest of the Adventist hospitals, but this would be time consuming and perhaps financially expensive.

The price for the statistics I received is $750 dollars. At this rate, if we wanted reliable statistics for all the Adventist hospitals in North America, the price could be almost $20,000. If I had the money for such an investigation, I would gladly invest it to find the truth about what is happening in our hospitals.

Perhaps I should add that a former leader of the LLU Ethics Department confided with me that the White Memorial Hospital in Los Angeles was involved in abortions on demand, and the wife of a very well known Adventist retiree related to me how, when she was working as an LLU medical secretary, the physician in charge in her department was doing abortions all day long and labeling all of them as “therapeutic” cases, which suggests that the pregnancies had resulted from rape, incest and malformation, which is hard to believe.

The information I have from Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortions in the world, is that 98 percent of abortions are the elective type, and only two percent of the therapeutic kind. Of course, some abortionists have been watering down the meaning of this type of abortions and were including among them those resulting from cases where the mental health of pregnant women had been affected.

This means that if a woman claimed that she was mentally depressed and terribly worried about her unwanted pregnancy and unable to function in a healthy manner, the abortionist would be tempted to consider such an abortion as belonging to the therapeutic kind.