No Child Unrecruited...

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

So if I were to share that my wife was raped would that make her opinion legitamte in your mind

---

Quite honestly, that is information that is not yours to volenteer nor share. I would be very hesitant about giving any indication that this is something "share-able"...Personally, I think this border along the lines of gossip, even if it is your wife, Shane. You are the husband, the protector of her, and to share this information is to make her vulnerable and to remove some of YOUR protection....

As a husband and a father, I question whether this is your story to be shared in the first place.....If you share this information without your wife's permission, I suspect that this makes you less of a husband, and more of an authoritarian in your home.....And I have some definate opinions of a home that is more authoritarian than Christian.....

[Dr. Shane]

It was a hypothetical question, Brother Neil. One that still hasn't been answered, by the way. Do you still judge and condemn me?

[Neil D]

You judge and condemn yourself, Shane....I don't have to pass judgement on you at all....

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Total freedom is anarchy which is not a pillar of American society.

---

This statement evidences failure to comprehend the nature of freedom. Once again I find it necessary to properly give definition to this most critical of concepts and forever put to rest these vicious lies concerning the most beautiful gift our Creator ever gave us.

[:"purple"]Freedom is a two-edged sword of which one edge is liberty and the other, responsibility, on which both edges are exceedingly sharp; and which is not easily handled by casual, cowardly or treacherous hands. For it has been sharpened by many conflicts, tempered in many fires, quenched by much blood, and although it is always ready for the use of the courageous and high hearted, it will not remain when the spirit that forged it is gone.

Now since all tyrannies are based on dogmas, that is, on fundamental statements of absolute fact, and since all dogmas are based on lies, it behooves us first to seek for truth, and freedom will not be far away.[/] (John 8:32) [:"purple"]And the truth is that we know nothing.

Objectively, we know nothing at all. Any system of intellectual thought, whether it be science, logic, religion, or philosophy, is based on certain fundamental ideas or axioms which are assumed, but which cannot be proven. This is the grave of all positivism.[/] This is the burial mound for all certainty in ourselves.

[:"purple"] We assume, but we do not know, that there is a real and objective world outside our own mind. Ultimately, we do not know what we are, or what the world is. Further, if there is a real world apart from ourselves, we cannot know what that is; all we know is what we perceive it to be.[/]

Yet here is the birthplace and cradle of faith, which is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. For there is another swift and powerful sword: that of the Spirit, the Word of God. Living and active, it is sharper than any two-edged sword, able to discern the thoughts and intentions of the very heart. And it is in the hand and mouth of Him whose eye looked down the Corridor of Time to behold she who was girt with the twin-edged sword of Freedom, and to answer her question of the same by telling her indeed no creature is hidden from His sight. All are laid open and bare before His sight, with Whom we have to do.

And it is she who is telling you this even now. Thus come they together: Truth and Freedom, for you have sought the first, and the second is not far behind, as was promised. (John 8:32).

=========================

Key:

[:"purple"] purple: borrowed words from a special person.[/]

black: my own words in the here & now time.

[Dr. Shane]

I would say the purple author had way too much time on his or her hands. Things just arn't that complicated.

Total liberty allows everyone to do anything. It is the abstence of laws. It affords no protection for the weak or the poor.

Democracy is a form of government where the people are governed by the people, normally in a republic by elected representatives. Such democracies normally have a constitution which guarentees its citizens certain rights. Liberty is thus defined by those rights.

[Nicodema]

There is nothing complicated in the above. It is very simple to understand that our entire experience through the perceptions of our senses is faith-based one way or another. You yourself, Shane, have stated on numerous occasions the exact same thing but using different words when you state that "everyone has a bias." It's the same principle to say that "objectively we know nothing."

Total freedom is far from anarchy because its totality is measured in the balance of liberty with responsibility. The more complete freedom becomes, the more immanent and necessary becomes this balance as well as the more self-evident.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

There is nothing complicated in the above.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I bet you like crossword puzzles too <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

[Rosie]

What your wife says she would do and what she actually would do are probably two different things. How can we say for certain what we would do in a given situation?

How many women can carry a child (let's not forget-HER CHILD) for 9 months, give birth and just give him/her away?

Will the child be told "your daddy raped your mommy and your mommy didn't want you either"?

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

What your wife says she would do and what she actually would do are probably two different things.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

This from someone who doesn't even know my wife.

It is hard for some pro-abortion folks to understand how horendous many pro-life people actually view abortion. That is why they cannot comprehend a woman carrying a rapest's child. Yet many pro-life women see the child inside them as a real-live human. For them to kill the child would be to lower themselves to the level of their rapist. I can respect that view.

Now others don't see it that way. They feel that to carry the baby is to drag the victemization out for nine months. To them an abortion brings a type of closure to the rape. I can respect that too.

If a woman has the pro-life mindset, it is insulting for me to say she would change her mind if she was to get raped and become pregnant.

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

There is nothing complicated in the above.

---

I bet you like crossword puzzles too

---

I'm serious, Shane. It is the same principle you have stated yourself when you have said no one can be totally 100% objective; everyone has a bias. How can you say that, and then turn around and say this is too complicated? Clearly you already understand it. Is it only because you don't want to consider the implications of comprehension, that total freedom is no more anarchy than total light equals darkness?

[Dr. Shane]

I understand it. However it sounds like my old philosophy professor is explaining it. Too John Lockeish <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> I like simple stuff.

BTW, I was never much for crossword puzzles. Those and business statistics I can do without.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Will the child be told "your daddy raped your mommy and your mommy didn't want you either"?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Rape victems' children given up for adoption are closed adoptions so the children never find out who their daddies are nor why the biological mothers gave them up for adoption.

Moreover, many women that give their children up for adoption don't do it because they don't want the child. Anyone suggesting such should be corrected. In many cases, it takes more love for a woman to give her child up for adoption than to keep it. These women are heros. In today's world, any woman doing such will want to meet and approve of the couple first.

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

I understand it. However it sounds like my old philosophy professor is explaining it. Too John Lockeish

I like simple stuff.

---

Quote:

---

BTW, I was never much for crossword puzzles. Those and business statistics I can do without.

---

I used to do x-word puzzles when I was a kid but they've sorely lost their charm over the past couple of decades since all the clues refer to silly cultural fluff I don't care about instead of meaty vocabulary or literary associations. So no, I'm not big on x-word puzz either. Business statistics? *Zzzzzzzzzz*

[Rosie]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Will the child be told "your daddy raped your mommy and your mommy didn't want you either"?

---

Rape victems' children given up for adoption are closed adoptions so the children never find out who their daddies are nor why the biological mothers gave them up for adoption.

Moreover, many women that give their children up for adoption don't do it because they don't want the child. Anyone suggesting such should be corrected. In many cases, it takes more love for a woman to give her child up for adoption than to keep it. These women are heros. In today's world, any woman doing such will want to meet and approve of the couple first.

---

They may not be told about "daddy", but that doesn't mean they won't figure out "momma" didn't want them. It's a pretty logical conclusion.

I'm not so sure about "closed" adoptions, either. What if the adopted needs a bone marrow transfusion? Or some other medical condition arises? Are you saying those records can't be obtained?

[Dr. Shane]

There are ways an adult child of a closed adoption can find their biological mother. However she does not have to tell them anything and the court will grant her a restraining order if requested. So there is no way the child could ever find out about their biological father unless the biological mother told them.

In today's society more and more adopted children are aware that their mother gave them up as an act of love and not of abandonement. The face of adoption has changed significantly over the past 20 years. My wife was adopted and says she is very grateful that her birth mother didn't abort her. That may be one of the reasons she feels so strongly about abortion.

[Rosie]

And there is nothing wrong at all with your wife's strong convictions. But they are hers and hers alone.

But if I was raped, I might not be able to carry a product of that rape for 9 months and give birth and give the baby up.

And I don't feel it's my place to judge either the woman who can give up 9 months of her life so a child can live, or the woman who can not tolerate the thought, and decides to get an abortion.

The husband must also have a say in the matter of his wife incubating a rapists child.

We can't make our personal convictions the base for everyone else's.

[Neil D]

Rosie,

I want to express something that I was thinking about last night. Would you mind telling me if I am on the right track or not?

I am coming to the conclusion that abortion is totally a woman's issue, and before you tell me why I am off the wall...let me explain.

Abortion is about whether a woman wants to carry a child to term or not. Since women are the only gender who are nuturing, it occurs to me that women have to make the decision to abort or not with each child they conceive. It is inhertent upon them to be pro-choice because of that very decision. Only a pro-choice woman can be truely a God-fearing nurturing woman, because of her God given ability to decide to be nurturing. A pro-life woman is NOT allowing the God-like decision making process to abort or to nurture as she is a machine and avoiding the idea of entertaining the aborting of the child. She is, in essence, following the dictates of her machine gender and not truely a God-choosing human female.

Men are not capable of bearing children [uh, DUH!] and can only be pro-choice in thier God given decision making processes...They are only able to support thier wives so thier decision hsa to be based upon whatever [a choice decision] decision that the woman makes.

If they disagree and override thier wife's decision, they obviously think that a woman is property/sub-human/don't think thier female has a God'given right to decide, and fall into the catagory of anti-God.

Now I know that this was something that came to me out of the blue, and I put it out there to be shot down...but there are elements that are worth keeping and I thought you [et al] might want a shot at tearing it apart...from a woman perspective...

Oh, and attempt to be some what gentle as you tear the idea limb from limb...

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

The husband must also have a say in the matter of his wife incubating a rapists child.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

You do know the Supreme Court disagrees with you? In my marriage, I would support my wife which ever way she wanted to go with it. Not all husbands would do that. I can't really say what is right or wrong for a husband to do in such a case.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I am coming to the conclusion that abortion is totally a woman's issue, and before you tell me why I am off the wall...let me explain.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Your explanation is way off the wall. BTW, you forgot God. Abortion is not totally a woman's issue. Killing your child involves violating a commandment of God. So it involves the woman, God, the devil (the temptor) and of course, the baby. Doesn't really seem like it is totally a woman's issue.

[Rosie]

Quote:

---

Rosie,

I want to express something that I was thinking about last night. Would you mind telling me if I am on the right track or not?

I am coming to the conclusion that abortion is totally a woman's issue, and before you tell me why I am off the wall...let me explain.

...

Men are not capable of bearing children [uh, DUH!] and can only be pro-choice in thier God given decision making processes...They are only able to support thier wives so thier decision hsa to be based upon whatever [a choice decision] decision that the woman makes.

---

I agree, the ultimate, final decision is in the womans hands. The strong verbal input from a husband (for abortion) if the child is not wanted by him, could put the marriage at stake if she really want's the baby, (as could the husband wanting the child and the wife not wanting it could put the marriage (or family) at rist.

Yet the decision is ultimately hers.

Quote:

---

If they disagree and override thier wife's decision, they obviously think that a woman is property/sub-human/don't think thier female has a God'given right to decide, and fall into the catagory of anti-God.

---

I don't know is a man can truly override her decision, unless he puts her under lock and key for 9 months. If she want's an abortion, she'll get one. If she want's the baby, he can't really force her to the abortion clinic. Coerce, yes, force? I guess maybe in some instances.

[Rosie]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The husband must also have a say in the matter of his wife incubating a rapists child.

---

You do know the Supreme Court disagrees with you? In my marriage, I would support my wife which ever way she wanted to go with it. Not all husbands would do that. I can't really say what is right or wrong for a husband to do in such a case.

---

I didn't know that, Shane. So men have no say?

The family is a unit. In the case of rape, the husband's feelings should be taken into consideration, surely? At least by the wife.

It's cases like this, however, I believe that the choice should be there, and it should be made by the people intimately involved. Not the courts. And not the moral majority.

[Dr. Shane]

Sister Rosie, There are extreames on both sides of the issue. However most Americans and politicians are in the middle. If Row v. Wade is ever overturned the issue of abortion will become one for the individual states to decide. The votes are just not there to outlaw abortion in cases of rape, incest or danger to the mother's life. In very few states would abortion even be banned for known birth defects or medical treatments (cancer treatment, etc.)