Can the Remnant Church Fail?

[ClubV12]

PK, did ya notice getting a straight answer from these guys is like nailing jello to the wall?

You guys make a lot of allegations, a shot gun shoots a lot of pellets too, but you offer nothing more than opinions. You bounce from the Church, to the world, to a hospital here and there. Try to stay focused, please.

As your accusing the CHURCH and it's HOSPITALS, I could care less what the world hospitals are doing, it's irrelevant to THIS thread. Will the CHURCH fail.

Just answer the questions, please.

Do you support abortion in the case of the mothers life being in danger, or not?

Yes or No.

The Church supports elective abortion in the case of the mothers life being in danger. Do you agree with that position, or not?

Yes or No.

Many Adventist hospitals have guidelines for elective abortion that EXCEED the guidelines of the G.C. Many Adventist hospitals do not offer abortion at all!!!

Do you agree with these two statements or not?

Yes or No.

Is there a SPECIFIC Adventist hospital you can PROVE or SHOW DATA for that it is in violation of the guidelines of the G.C.?

Yes or No.

If no, all you've shown is a bunch of hot air, accusations and ZERO substance to back up your claims. Since your making a direct attack on the CHURCH guidelines, prove it in some reasonable way. No, I'm not interested in buying somebodys book, going to some biased web site or listening to more allegations without substance.'

Time to put up or shut up.

If I was a betting man, and I'm not, I would bet neither Nic nor Doug can offer any substantial evidence to back up their allegations. Just more of the same old tired rhetoric.

[doug yowell]

At some time in the US abortion was illegal, and many young women who were going to get an abortion one way or another, started going to these so called butcher shops and getting there abortions. And many were dying from this. So from what I've always understood, the reason that abortions became legal was so that women would than be able to get an abortion at a clinic, hospital, etc., and not have to deal with the so called butcher shops!!!

What you're probably unaware of is that much of the information you've just alluded to is part of the lie that pro-abortion advocates intentionally disseminated in order to gain public sympathy for their cause. In fact, in 1960 Planned Parenthood reported that "90% of all illegal abortions are presently done by physicians." And the idea that thousands of women died each year as a result of illegal abortions was another lie conveniently proposed by supporters of abortion.In fact, women are still dying today as a result of legally procurred abortion complications so legalizing it's practice does not mean that they are free from it's potentially lethal effects, even if done in an SDA hospital.

[ClubV12]

Planned Parenthood has little or nothing to do with the CHURCH, it's hospitals and the guidelines the two operate under. Roe vs Wade is irrelevant, the world churches are irrelevant to the question THIS thread asks, about the CHURCH.

I completely reject your position that our hospitals operate outside the Church guidelines. Show your proof. I CAN show proof that many are MORE STRINGENT than the G.C. guidelines!!!

Try to stay focused on the topic Doug.

[phkrause]

What you're probably unaware of is that much of the information you've just alluded to is part of the lie that pro-abortion advocates intentionally disseminated in order to gain public sympathy for their cause. In fact, in 1960 Planned Parenthood reported that "90% of all illegal abortions are presently done by physicians." And the idea that thousands of women died each year as a result of illegal abortions was another lie conveniently proposed by supporters of abortion.In fact, women are still dying today as a result of legally procurred abortion complications so legalizing it's practice does not mean that they are free from it's potentially lethal effects, even if done in an SDA hospital.

I totally disagree. Have seen a number of documentaries that have nothing to do with Planned Parenthood!

[doug yowell]

PK, did ya notice getting a straight answer from these guys is like nailing jello to the wall?

You guys make a lot of allegations, a shot gun shoots a lot of pellets too, but you offer nothing more than opinions. You bounce from the Church, to the world, to a hospital here and there. Try to stay focused, please.

How bout you staying focused, club. Do you consider a hospital that carries the SDA name a part of the auspices and gospel mission of the SDA church? If not we're on different pages. If so,nobody has bounced off the church's responsibility but you.A hospital here and there that carries the identity of Seventh-day Adventist represents you and me. If only one SDA hosital is allowed the freedom to abort at will it reflects back on every SDA in the world.The Benjamites were the only Jewish tribe who engaged in open homosexuality but it's effects were experienced by the whole nation.If the remnant church is identical to the SDA organization in this discussion then it will have to be responsible for the actions of the missionaries that it claims represent it.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

What you're probably unaware of is that much of the information you've just alluded to is part of the lie that pro-abortion advocates intentionally disseminated in order to gain public sympathy for their cause. In fact, in 1960 Planned Parenthood reported that "90% of all illegal abortions are presently done by physicians." And the idea that thousands of women died each year as a result of illegal abortions was another lie conveniently proposed by supporters of abortion.In fact, women are still dying today as a result of legally procurred abortion complications so legalizing it's practice does not mean that they are free from it's potentially lethal effects, even if done in an SDA hospital.

I totally disagree. Have seen a number of documentaries that have nothing to do with Planned Parenthood!

Do you then disagree with the report of PP? Or do you disagree with Bernard Nathanson,co-founder of NARAL,who later admitted to falsefying the figures reported to the media? Or do you disagree with the fact that women are still dying as a result of having legal abortions? Do you dismiss the testimonies of those actively involved in the advocacy of abortion rights? How did this documentry differ in facts?

[ClubV12]

Since the accusations concern the CHURCH, we should deal with CHURCH owned, operated Hospitals that fall under the G.C. leadership. As such, they represent the church at large. They are far from perfect in many regards, but the question THIS thread asks is: Do they follow the G.C. guidelines on abortion or not?

Do YOU, Doug, agree with the G.C. guidelines in allowing abortion when the mothers life is at stake? It's a simple question....

[doug yowell]

Planned Parenthood has little or nothing to do with the CHURCH, it's hospitals and the guidelines the two operate under. Roe vs Wade is irrelevant, the world churches are irrelevant to the question THIS thread asks, about the CHURCH.

Try to stay focused on the topic Doug.

PK's question related directly to the alleged reason why SDA hospitals originally offered abortions.I think I'm pretty well focused on the question.

[doug yowell]

I completely reject your position that our hospitals operate outside the Church guidelines. Show your proof. I CAN show proof that many are MORE STRINGENT than the G.C. guidelines!!!

Try to stay focused on the topic Doug.

Use a little reason here,club, if an SDA hospital can operate on a more stringent set of principles (which is what Nic and I are,in fact,fully supportive of) than the G.C.guidelines, then a hospital can also operate on a less stringent set of principles (which we are not supportive of). The guidelines themselves allow for that very difference of interpretation.In fact,in case you missed it, they're called "guidelines" and not "official policy".I,for one, believe that most of our hospitals are in complete agreement with our founders view of unborn life and don't do elective abortions. This is a result of following the spirit of the Law written on the hearts of the staff. But failure to make that belief unanamous sends a mixed message to the world and divides SDA's on the meaning of the sanctity of human life. The need for reform of the previous guidelines was only necessary as a result of some of our institutions violating the spirit of the law while obeying the letter of the previous guidelines. Without a more stringent policy there's no guarantee that our hospitals, staffed and administered by non-SDA's will willingly comply with the intent of any strictly pro-life guidelines. You can reject any assertion that our hospitals don't have to operate by GC suggestions but you'd simply be exchanging your own personal opinion for a fact that few if any church or hospital officials would deny.

[doug yowell]

Since the accusations concern the CHURCH, we should deal with CHURCH owned, operated Hospitals that fall under the G.C. leadership. As such, they represent the church at large. They are far from perfect in many regards, but the question THIS thread asks is: Do they follow the G.C. guidelines on abortion or not?

Do YOU, Doug, agree with the G.C. guidelines in allowing abortion when the mothers life is at stake? It's a simple question....

I think you're so intent on making your point that you've missed my answer to this ? on several occasions. So can we put this behind us once and for all?

YES!!. Yes,yes yes yes yes...both Nic and I (unless he's changed his mind in the past 10 minutes)both support the woman's right to choose whether or not to abort her child when her life is in imminent danger. Yes, we may differ from some who are absolutists, but we do not,I repeat, we do not disagree with this particular GC suggestion. Nor do we stand in judgment on her decision to abort if she so chooses in this impossible situation.Is that clear enough? Should I repeat it?

[ClubV12]

It MAY need to be repeated AGAIN, from time to time to keep the record straight! What with all the inuendos, suggestions and implications of abuse that keep coming up.

I'm glad to see you acknowledge that the majority of Adventist hospitals accept and follow the G.C. guidelines and in fact MOST of them go beyond those guidelines.

Loma Linda and Castle Medical (Hawaii) have been "called out" as in violation of the G.C. guidelines. Yet we have no data that supports those accusations, just "rumor" and "gossip".

As it concerns Castle Medical, I've been both a patient and a contractor to that facility over the years. When I was NOT an Adventist. I was always surprised and impressed with the spiritual atmosphere they presented. For many years it was the ONLY Adventist witness of any kind I ever had. I gained a stronger appreciation and respect for Adventists as a result.

Because the G.C. speaks for the WORLD church it has to tailor it's guidelines to a world audience. I am comfortable with the Churches position. I am NOT comfortable with the G.C. "playing Pope" and "ordering" Doctors and patients to violate their conscience as the case may be.

[doug yowell]

Loma Linda and Castle Medical (Hawaii) have been "called out" as in violation of the G.C. guidelines. Yet we have no data that supports those accusations, just "rumor" and "gossip".

Because the issue has been voided by church leaders it's virtually impossible to determine whether any SDA hospitals continue to perform elective abortions unless they volunteer the information themselves. However, it is an indisputable fact that many SDA hospitals did elective abortions prior to the 1992 Guidelines.Loma Linda, Castle, Washington Adventist, were among those known to perform them.Given their history it's very difficult to assume that a new set of guidelines that still do not expressly prohibit elective abortions would be immediately effective in changing their established policies.What happened before 1992 is a public matter of record. What has happened after the self imposed silence of 1992 is left open to gossip, rumor, and accusations, legitimate or not. John and Millie Youngberg, members of the CVHL, wrote an after the fact analysis of the guidelines entitled "The Myths and Maybes of the Silver Spring CVHL Annual Council's Resolutions" in it they echoed the same apprehensions that Nic and others have mentioned here.Under Maybe #1 they suggest; "Maybe SDA's will take seriously the Council's stand against abortion as birth control. Only time will tell. If a careful accounting is kept in our hospitals and is honestly reported to the church, then we will know." That was 19 years ago. Is there a definitive answer yet? Are you interested in reading more of their first hand observations? Both Youngbergs were teachers at Andrews Univ.Both were supportive of the church.

[doug yowell]

As it concerns Castle Medical, I've been both a patient and a contractor to that facility over the years. When I was NOT an Adventist. I was always surprised and impressed with the spiritual atmosphere they presented. For many years it was the ONLY Adventist witness of any kind I ever had. I gained a stronger appreciation and respect for Adventists as a result.

One of my good friend's dad was a physician there during the 1970's and 80's and never knew about the situation regarding abortion. the same can be said about all our other hospitals that offered abortions freely yet when the practice is uncovered many people's perceptions of SDA's are drastically changed.If we practice abortion on demand then we damage any positive influence our institutions may have had on Catholics,Evangelicals and even many SDA's.I was here in the 1980's when people were demonstrating against LLU because of our abortion policies. Not the best witness.

[doug yowell]

I am NOT comfortable with the G.C. "playing Pope" and "ordering" Doctors and patients to violate their conscience as the case may be.

How is a person's conscience violated by NOT performing an abortion for birth control reasons? Particularly when there are abortion mills readily available, owned by former Adventists,that will kill the baby with no questions asked,and for a lot cheaper than our hospital?

[ClubV12]

I have seen studies that show that 80% or MORE of Adventist hospitals follow the guidelines of the G.C. and a high percentage of them do MORE than the guidelines to limit abortions. I do believe the percentage would be higher except some Adventist hospitals do not offer abortions at all and thus cannot be considered among the 80% that do follow the guidelines. A hospital can only follow the guidelines if they have a position policy statement on record. If they don't offer abortions, they have no such statement for or against. I will not conclude they are "Saints" or "Evil" from that, some just don't have the equipement or staff required to offer abortions.

It is not surprising Adventist hospitals no longer offer specific numbers and detailed information. Patient privacy and all that. As well as the hornets nest that would inevitably result, no matter what the data says. It places the hospital in an impossible position.

So what are we to conclude from this missing data? I see it in the same way I see Sister White, at times, refusing to comment on an issue. People would inevitably take that to mean she DID support their view. Others would take it to mean she DIDN'T support that view. The fact is, she had "no comment", period, end of story. It means exactly what it says, "no comment". I think this is what the hospitals are doing. What each of us will decide they are "really doing" from a "no comment" position is up to the individual. No doubt, like a Sister White "no comment", many will ascribe it to mean it supports their position, whatever position they have.

In the end, for Loma Linda, for Castle, for others, we can at best, speculate. Concern is valid, it's OK to keep the heat on, but lets do it in a balanced and fair way.

I cannot support the idea that the G.C. has or should issue a blanket policy that denies abortions under all circumstances. Therefore, the best we can hope for is reasonable "guidelines".

[Nic Samojluk]

skyblue888 wrote:

“It is in the realm of the powers that be to punish incivility, not morality.”

Yes, even the slaves had the freedom to think without interference from their masters. I am free to love or hate; nevertheless, sooner or later my thoughts will find expression through my actions, and then the government can punish me for my actions if they harm others.

Taking the life of another human being is the most extreme expression of incivility. There is no greater harm an individual can do to another than taking his life. Abortion is the greatest offense we can manifest towards the unborn. The role of the government is to protect the life and property of every individual within its jurisdiction.

There was a time when slaves had no rights nor any protection. Their owners had the absolute right to take the life of a slave with impunity. Killing a slave was considered no more evil than killing a dog or a mouse. Society did liberate slaves, but it has now enslaved the unborn by voiding their right to life.

“You ask: "Isn’t the mission of the church to preach against sin and invite sinners to repent and thus to secure God’s forgiveness?" Our mission is to preach the Gospel.”

The central message of the Bible has always been the same: Repent and live; Choose life. Forgiveness has always been available to human beings starting with Adam and Eve. This forgiveness has always been thanks to what Jesus did for us. In the Old Testament people looked forward to the Lamb of God which was slain from the foundation of the world; we look back to what took place two thousand years ago.

The true Gospel does not void God’s Law, since, according to Ellen White the Law is the transcript of God’s character, and we are told that God is love. But God’s love should not be confused with merely a soft feeling towards others. The Bible tells us that those whom God loves, he disciplines them.

This is why the Psalmist did manifest so much love for God’s Law, including the discipline this love had in it as a valued ingredient. Of course, for the Israelites, the Law included all of God’s instructions given to human beings and was not limited to the Ten Commandments.

The Ten Rules for human behavior are summarized by one word: Love. Love is the fulfillment of God’s Law: Love towards God and towards our fellow being. Love and Law are not antagonistic; they rather complement each other. God’s rules were designed for our protection and we should be thankful for them. The sign which reads “Wrong Way” on the freeway was designed to protect us from great danger.

[Nic Samojluk]

doug yowell wrote:

“Smoking in public places is now considered incivility while killing one's unborn child is considered a positive social attribute?”

Excellent question! Adventist have been in the forefront in our effort to help smokers keep the habit. Why? It added four or five years to the life of the smoker. Contrast this with the way the church has dealt with abortion.

Saving the unborn from a sure death is likely to add 80 or 90 years to the victim; yet we have allowed thousands of unborn babies to be slaughtered without mercy and without anesthesia in some of our hospitals. Have we lost our common sense? Isn't it time to repent of this great evil?

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

“The G.C. position IS balanced in that those guidelines allow for abortions in certain cases. It APPEARS that both Doug and Nic also allow for abortions in certain cases.”

I disagree! Our abortion guidelines are not balanced. The only balanced guideline is found in Exodus 20, and it states: “You shall not murder.” Murder is defined as the killing of an innocent human being!

Our Adventist guidelines allow many exceptions: rape, incest, malformations, when a pregnancy interferes with a woman’s professional goal, and even when the unwanted pregnancy affects her mental health.

Rape is a terrible crime, but it does no come close to the ultimate penalty: death. The victim can with God’s help recover from the ordeal and lead almost a normal life; an aborted child does not have such a privilege. Society lets the rapist live, but it imposes the ultimate penalty on one of the innocent victims.

A mental depression resulting from an unwanted pregnancy is a temporary condition—an inconvenience which affects the woman’s lifestyle; an abortion is a permanent condition which takes the life of the victim. I hope you can see the contrast.

The only exception Nic--and society prior to Roe v Wade—allows is when both the pregnant woman and her unborn child are doomed to a certain death. It would be foolish to allow both of them to die!

The task of a physician is to save lives. If the doctor can save only one life instead of two, he is still fulfilling his pro-life duty. This is what physicians do in time of war: Saving as many lives as they can.

“This issue is incorrectly pointed at the Church and it's guidelines. IF there is a problem, it should be addressed at a particular hospital. Castle Medical in Hawaii (Oahu) was mentioned specifically as allowing for elective abortions WITH counseling and under specific conditions.”

The church is guilty on two counts: It issued guidelines which redefined the Sixth Commandment written by God’s finger on tablets of stone. This sin is comparable to the sin of Rome which altered the Fourth Commandment. We have no right to add to what the Bible says nor to water down what the Lord has commanded.

Neither the Southern Baptists nor Catholics have any abortion guidelines. They have the Bible. If we are willing to obey God, we do not need any guidelines designed by humans. Guidelines were invented in order to redefine the will of God and to avoid complying with what the Lord ordered for our good.

The church is also guilty for condemning elective abortions while allowing our own hospitals to offer abortion on demand to their patients. This is reminiscent of what Pilate did. He declared Jesus to be innocent of any crime, but granted his enemies the power to take his life. It also reminds us of the story of King David. He did not kill Uriah the Hittite, but the Lord accused him of arranging for his death.

“Yet the accusation is that Castle Medical is committing murder. What proof do you have against THIS institution?”

I did not say that Castle Memorial is committing murder now. Following the articles written by Georg Gainer in “Ministry” and “Spectrum” the church has become mum about releasing any information about abortion. There is no way to find out what is taking place there today.

All we know is what happened in the past and it is recorded in the pages of our Adventist and non-Adventist publications. I have it in the book I recently published. Go to http://lulu.com and type my name in the blank Search space. I gave a copy of my book to Doug and he can verify that the information is there.

I have also given over 80 copies of my book to other individuals free of charge, and I am not rich. I live on a fixed social security budget, and I still have a mortgage to take care of. Besides, I have dedicated half of my working hours for this cause for the last 15 years without any hope of recovering my investment of time and money.

“What proof do you have against Loma Linda Hospital?”

Loma Linda was named as one of the Adventist hospitals offering abortions services to their patients by George Gainer, and he got this from a publicly reliable source, and it was published by our “Ministry” magazine. I posted the list already, but I can post it again if you so desire.

“Or any other Adventist Hospital that they are an "abortion mill"?”

The “abortion mill” phrase is not mine! It belongs to a General Conference official.

“Doug, Nick, do you or do you not, allow for abortion in the case of a mothers potential for dyeing if it is not done?”

Yes, as I stated before on several occasions: the duty of a physician is to save as many lives as he can. If he can save only one life, he is still fulfilling his pro-life duty!

“Where DO you stand on this and HOW does that differ from where the Church stands on it?”

Read what I posted above. The difference is enormous. The church allows abortion when the pregnancy is the result of rape, malformation, and even when the unwanted pregnancy is the affects the mental health of the woman.

The woman says to her doctor: “I feel depressed and I cannot sleep nor study or concentrate on my work,” and bingo, another innocent baby is butchered for the sake of the lifestyle of the woman. In other words, for the church lifestyle is sacred, but the life of the innocent baby is not.

[Stan]

please keep the abortion topic to one thread.

[Nic Samojluk]

pkrause wrote:

“Why has the church decided to go this route? Were there reasons in society that made them say we had better do this otherwise such in such will happen? And if you answer because of the money! I'll tell you my answer to that is, I don't buy it for one minute!”

The answer is in several articles written by George Gainer which were published by “ministry” and “Spectrum.” You need to read my book. It’s all there well documented. Go to http://lulu.com and type my name in the blank Search space.

When our "Castle Memorial Hospital" was built, a rich man donated $25,000 dollars for the construction and promised to offer full services to their patients. When the State of Hawaii legalized abortion, the man demanded that the hospital perform an elective abortion for his daughter.

At the same time the non-Adventist physicians at the CMH threatened to take their patients to other hospitals in the event they were denied the right to offer abortions on demand. The issue was elevated to the North American Division, and Neal Wilson publicly declared in 1970—three years before Roe v Wade--that our church was leaning towards abortion because there were too many people and too much hunger in the world.

The fear of loosing revenues led the CMH and the NAD to compromise on a moral issue. The fear of financial failure replaced the fear of God. Can you still question the main motivation for this moral failure? If it wasn’t money, what was it? You need to read the story behind these developments. If you do, I think that you will agree with us on this.

“But I would rather see a girl that's gonna have one anyway no matter what, go somewhere that she will get one that's performed cleanly than to visit a so called butcher shop to get one!”

Yes! You have just given us a good reason for lowering society standards for the sale of drugs, for legalizing prostitution, and for doing away with all legal restriction on rape, theft, and the sexual abuse of children. Many murders have been committed for the fear of being discovered and punished for those crimes.

By the way, a safe abortion may save some women’s lives, but it does not save the lives of the aborted babies. So far safe abortions have decimated our population—55 million of them-- and the diminished number of workers are unable to provide for our retirees. Our social security system is broke and we need to borrow from China in order to avoid the collapse of our financial system.

“I am not for abortion, but if it means that women are going to do it anyway, than they need a place that they can have a clean abortion done, period. And than that will be between them and God as to how he judges not anyone of us!!!!!”

Wrong! God has given us the government for the protection of life, liberty, and our property. Abortion is murder, and this is not something privy between us and God, but rather between all those involved and the governments duty to protect us all from harm—but especially from the ultimate harm: death.

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

“Just answer the questions, please. Do you support abortion in the case of the mothers life being in danger, or not? Yes or No.”

Yes, provided there is no way to save the life of both the mother and her baby.

“The Church supports elective abortion in the case of the mothers life being in danger. Do you agree with that position, or not? Yes or No.”

Same answer as above!

“Many Adventist hospitals have guidelines for elective abortion that EXCEED the guidelines of the G.C. Many Adventist hospitals do not offer abortion at all!!!

Do you agree with these two statements or not? Yes or No.”

Yes!

“Is there a SPECIFIC Adventist hospital you can PROVE or SHOW DATA for that it is in violation of the guidelines of the G.C.? Yes or No.”

The evidence is in my book and in the pages of “Ministry” and “Spectrum.” Some years ago the LLU Ethics department conducted a survey which revealed that five of our hospitals were offering elective abortions to their patients. You need to read my book!

Doug has a copy! You need one! An influential LLU retired ethics professor stated to me that my book should be in every Adventist library. Another Adventist retired professor told me that every Adventist should read my book. The evidence is there.

Following the two articles written by Adventist historian George Gainer, the church went silent on abortion and there is no way to discover what our hospitals are doing today. I have written to several of them and to the General Conference, and I am still waiting for a response. Almost a year has gone by, but there is no answer.

Ted Wilson told me I could get this information from Dr. Handysides; I have written to him more than once. He will not respond to my plea. All we know is what took place in the past and what has been documented in our own publications and by the Washington Post.

“If no, all you've shown is a bunch of hot air, accusations and ZERO substance to back up your claims. Since your making a direct attack on the CHURCH guidelines, prove it in some reasonable way.”

If what I am saying is simply hot air, then our publications are full of hot air. The sources I used are almost exclusively from Adventist publications.

“No, I'm not interested in buying somebody’s book, going to some biased web site or listening to more allegations without substance.'”

I am offering to order a copy of my book for you as a gift provided you give me your mailing address. If you reject the Adventist publications as a reliable source then there is no way to satisfy your unreasonable demands.

“If I was a betting man, and I'm not, I would bet neither Nic nor Doug can offer any substantial evidence to back up their allegations. Just more of the same old tired rhetoric.”

You sound like Jewish leaders who imposed impossible demands on Jesus and killed him after he complied with all their demands. By the miracles he performed and by bringing the death from the tomb he gave more than they could expect, but that was not enough for them.

You are totally unreasonable! You demand more than any human can provide. I have exceeded all scholarly demands and my book is documented like no other book, yet you complain.

[Stan]

please keep the abortion topic to one thread.

Perhaps this comment was missed.

[ClubV12]

I have no intention of reading a book filled with gossip and rumor by an author who is clearly so biased on the subject there is no hope of reason.

[Nic Samojluk]

doug yowell wrote:

“Or do you disagree with the fact that women are still dying as a result of having legal abortions?”

I have a book entitled “Lime 5” in which the author documents hundreds of botched abortions resulting from the so called “legal and safe abortions;” many of those women have died as result of complications connected with the procedure. If you are interested, I will provide the author's name and date of publication.

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

“Loma Linda and Castle Medical (Hawaii) have been "called out" as in violation of the G.C. guidelines. Yet we have no data that supports those accusations, just "rumor" and "gossip".”

What Castle Memorial Hospital did is well documented. They did participate with other four Adventist hospital in the provision of "elective" abortions. Regarding Loma Linda, the only thing that can be documented is that they did participate with a list of 12 Adventist hospitals in the provision of abortions.

In addition, I have the testimony of a former medical secretary who told me that ehe docgor she worked for used to do abortions all day long and labeled all of them as "therapeutic." She told me that there was no way for so many abortion being of the therapeutic kind.

She doesn't want to go public on this for personal reasons, but I know that she would not fabricate this kind of report. She is the wife of a very well known retired leader in our church. I don't expect you to accept this report as solid evidence--it is solid for me, but not for others, because I cannot attach the namne of the individual to this information.

If you label what our official “Ministry” and “Spectrum” published as “rumor” and “gossip” then there is no point in continuing discussing this issue with you anymore. Adventist historian George Gainer documented this in two articles which were published in our Adventist magazines.

The “Washington Post” published two articles reporting the abortions performed at our Washington Adventist Hospital [WAH]; and the Chairman of the LLU Ethics department published a report stating that five of our Adventist hospitals were offering elective abortions to their patients.

I have also secured statistics from public independent sources detailing the number of abortions performed at our WAH covering several years. This is all in my book, but you have stated that you are not interested in reading my book. I don’t understand your position!

You want me to provide solid evidence for what I am talking, and I have also offered to order a copy of my book as a gift for you, but you say you have no interest in my book. I have 700 footnotes in it with all the documentation and all the references.

Do you expect me to post all this information here on this blog? If you identify two or three specific references you are interested in, I will be happy to provide the references for you, and my offer to order a copy of my book as a gift to you still stands. Can you ask for more?

My book is 374 pages long, and I realize that some people do not have the time to read that much, but the articles by George Gainer are much shorter. You can read them probably in less than a half hour. Can you spare that much time? If you are really interested in solid evidence, you should read them.

“As it concerns Castle Medical, I've been both a patient and a contractor to that facility over the years. When I was NOT an Adventist. I was always surprised and impressed with the spiritual atmosphere they presented. For many years it was the ONLY Adventist witness of any kind I ever had. I gained a stronger appreciation and respect for Adventists as a result.”

I have a friend of mine who is one of the strongest defenders of the Adventist Fundamental Beliefs, yet he disagrees with me on abortion. He believe that unborn babies have no right to life until their brain develops; which, according to him, takes place after 20 or 22 weeks of gestation. I live in Loma Linda, which means that most of my friends are pro-choice regarding abortion. They behave like saints on all other issues.

King David was a saint, but in a moment of moral weakness he arranged for the murder of his most loyal soldier. He repented of his sin, and this is what we Adventist need to do. Unless we publicly admit our past wrong, we will very likely continue ignoring God’s Sixth Commandment.

This is what our German and Austrian Adventist leaders did some years ago. They publicly acknowledged the church’s moral failure dealing with the Sabbath observance and killing in time of war when the Nazi regime was in power.

“Because the G.C. speaks for the WORLD church it has to tailor it's guidelines to a world audience. I am comfortable with the Churches position. I am NOT comfortable with the G.C. "playing Pope" and "ordering" Doctors and patients to violate their conscience as the case may be.”

I am not comfortable with my church allowing elective abortions in our Adventist hospitals and I reject our guidelines on abortion, because by teaching and by example we have condoned the killing of innocent human beings, which is a violation of the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue. As long as we keep pushing this terrible sin under the rug, we do not deserve to claim to be God’s Remnant on earth!