Is the Adventist Church Really Pro-life?

[Dr. Shane]

Not sure if your being serious or not...

pk

Well, my brother did say that to his wife. That is true. But he was joking with her. Although she was not amused.

[Dr. Shane]

A Statement I would like to make is this, anyone who has had an abortion is more than welcome on ClubAdventist.com without any condemnation or judgement.

One thing I think is very true is that a lot of people, both men and women, that have never been in a crisis pregnancy situation do not have a clue what the girl is going through. That is a big reason I favor keeping abortion legal - at least for the first 12 weeks. When abortion is banned these girls panic and go to a black-market abortionist. When it is legal, we (as Christians) have the opportunity to intervene through crisis pregnancy centers. Mandated pre-abortion counseling (not provided by the abortion provider) can also give girls options so they don't abort.

I know I have done things I later regretted when I was in a panic situation. The vast majority of abortions are performed on girls in panic situations that are not thinking clearly. Certainly we should not be judgmental toward them. Crisis pregnancy centers provide post-abortion counseling for these girls in a non-judgmental way.

[there buster]

Quote:

i am also trying to bring out, for consideration, what ellen white has to say about bringing children into this world. since she does not state specifically that such children should be aborted, neither will i.

Then it is essentially irrelevant to the discussion of abortion.

[teresaq]

Once the child has been conceived and growing inside the woman, the child is already "in the world". I mean, let's think about it. The child is not on the moon. The child is not on Mars. The child is inside the woman on planet Earth. That is where the child is. The question then becomes, 'how do we deal with this child?' Does this child have any rights? If the child has no rights, when does the child gain rights? After 12 weeks? After 24 weeks? After birth? After two years of age?

[teresaq]

Quote:

i am also trying to bring out, for consideration, what ellen white has to say about bringing children into this world. since she does not state specifically that such children should be aborted, neither will i.

Then it is essentially irrelevant to the discussion of abortion.

[Overaged]

A Statement I would like to make is this, anyone who has had an abortion is more than welcome on ClubAdventist.com without any condemnation or judgement.

[there buster]

Quote:

that would be a matter of personal judgment, wouldnt it?

Actually, no. If abortion is an acceptable remedy for the problem, then it would be relevant. If abortion is not an acceptable remedy, then it is not relevant.

It's a logical question, not a judgment question.

For example, we no longer have debtor's prisons. Prison is not an acceptable remedy for debt. Therefore, discussing prison and prison conditions, no matter how worthwhile for its own sake, is irrelevant to the discussion of the crime of going into debt.

Sending people to Mars for the 'crime' of bringing some children into the world is not practical or feasible. So it is also irrelevant to this discussion.

Using a quote from EGW in a discussion implies that it has some relevance to the discussion. But since neither you nor she claims abortion to be an acceptable remedy for the problem she mentions, it is irrelevant to the discussion.

Most likely, her remedy would have been abstinence. Certainly, it would have been in line with the reasoning she's using. But to use it to justify abortion is to do violence to the text, and to logic.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: there buster

Quote:

i am also trying to bring out, for consideration, what ellen white has to say about bringing children into this world. since she does not state specifically that such children should be aborted, neither will i.

Then it is essentially irrelevant to the discussion of abortion.

that would be a matter of personal judgment, wouldnt it?

abortion vs "so great a crime as to bring into being children"

Quote:

In the first place, B should not have committed so great a crime as to bring into being children children that reason must teach him would be diseased because they must receive a miserable legacy from their parents. They must have a bad inheritance transmitted to them. Their blood must be filled with scrofulous humors from both parents, especially the father, whose habits have been such as to corrupt the blood and enervate his whole system. Not only must these poor children receive a scrofulous tendency in a double sense, but what is worse, they will bear the mental and moral deficiencies of the father, and the lack of noble independence, moral courage, and force in the mother. The world is already cursed by the increase of persons of this stamp, who must fall lower in the scale of physical, mental, and moral strength than their parents; for their condition and surroundings are not even as favorable as were those of their parents. {2T 379.2}

it would appear i see it as relevant to any discussion concerning abortion

and you do not.

[Guest]

Quote:

that would be a matter of personal judgment, wouldnt it?

Actually, no. If abortion is an acceptable remedy for the problem, then it would be relevant. If abortion is not an acceptable remedy, then it is not relevant.

It's a logical question, not a judgment question.

For example, we no longer have debtor's prisons. Prison is not an acceptable remedy for debt. Therefore, discussing prison and prison conditions, no matter how worthwhile for its own sake, is irrelevant to the discussion of the crime of going into debt.

Sending people to Mars for the 'crime' of bringing some children into the world is not practical or feasible. So it is also irrelevant to this discussion.

Using a quote from EGW in a discussion implies that it has some relevance to the discussion. But since neither you nor she claims abortion to be an acceptable remedy for the problem she mentions, it is irrelevant to the discussion.

Most likely, her remedy would have been abstinence. Certainly, it would have been in line with the reasoning she's using. But to use it to justify abortion is to do violence to the text, and to logic.

Amen brother

[there buster]

Quote:

this is neither what i, nor she, said. she didnt say abortion was an "acceptable" solution, neither did she say it wasnt an "acceptable" solution. it would appear, at least it does to me, that a woman finding herself pregnant would have to decide based on the counsel given from the Lord.

Any responsible exegete would have to inquire whether the person actually writing "the counsel given from the Lord," gave any indication that abortion would be an appropriate response. Without that information, using that counsel to justify that action would be doing violence to the source.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen

A Statement I would like to make is this, anyone who has had an abortion is more than welcome on ClubAdventist.com without any condemnation or judgement.

Definitely! I think the following exerpt from the Conference guidelines says it well:

Quote:

5) Christians acknowledge as first and foremost their accountability to God. They seek balance between the exercise of individual liberty and their accountability to the faith community and the larger society and its laws. They make their choices according to scripture and the laws of God rather than the norms of society. Therefore, any attempts to coerce women either to remain pregnant or to terminate pregnancy should be rejected as infringements of personal freedom.

I have to wonder now though; and I include myself as I say this. Maybe a woman who has had an abortion would be kind of scared to come here considering the way some of us have spoken "against" abortion...we come perilously close to condemning the person, or the Church; rather than the action...it goes against everything we are trying to prevent. It's kind of like "the war." I cannot support war. Neither can I hide how hideous some of it is. Yet, I can and do support our troops. I have a very good friend in the army.

I can't hide how graphic abortions may be...but how can I hide the woman's need for caring and support, and practical help and TLC with graphic ilustrations of the "wrong" when she has made such a difficult decision? Will I attack the Church because of it? Will I condemn the woman because of it? Or, will I put aside my different opinion in the interest of the above quoted guideline? Would the priority be to oppose abortion (to one that has already done it) or would it be to support and help the woman?

I can say that in nursing one learns pretty quick what you need to do; but we who have the truth seem pretty slow with it.

I believe the Church has provided some pretty good guidelines; and that we would all do well to follow them more closely.

i do appreciate your posts on this subject as well points and do agree!!

i remember when abortion first became legal. i had no sympathy for any woman who would have one, none whatsoever. but after 1. coming across the statements of ellen white regarding the seriousness of bringing children into the world, 2. my own experience from childhood til now multiplied by many others with similar experiences, 3. watching the evolution of those who were against abortion and the tactics they would use to manipulate, coerce, and bully any who disagreed with them and 4. knowing women who have had, or are, contemplating abortion, i have done a 180.

[Guest]

Quote:

this is neither what i, nor she, said. she didnt say abortion was an "acceptable" solution, neither did she say it wasnt an "acceptable" solution. it would appear, at least it does to me, that a woman finding herself pregnant would have to decide based on the counsel given from the Lord.

Any responsible exegete would have to inquire whether the person actually writing "the counsel given from the Lord," gave any indication that abortion would be an appropriate response. Without that information, using that counsel to justify that action would be doing violence to the source.

Amen

[there buster]

Concerning pregnancy, EGW wrote:

Quote:

Women who possess principle and who are well instructed will not depart from simplicity of diet at this time [pregnancy] of all others. They will consider that another life is dependent upon them and will be careful in all their habits, and especially in diet.--2T 382

So, we have this interesting situation:

Pregnant women should consider that "another life is dependent upon them," and should be "careful in all their habits," while at the same time considering whether abortion would be appropriate.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

God's judgement trumps EGW's writings. And I still maintain the choice is between a woman and God. And we aren't privy to the private life between God and a person. Neither was Ellen White.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

A Statement I would like to make is this, anyone who has had an abortion is more than welcome on ClubAdventist.com without any condemnation or judgement.

Thank you for saying that, Stan.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Most likely, her remedy would have been abstinence. Certainly, it would have been in line with the reasoning she's using. But to use it to justify abortion is to do violence to the text, and to logic.

"abstinence" for married couples would be going against the bible injunction. but she is just as stringent in the requirements for marriage as she is for bringing children into the world...

Quote:

These should not have married; at least, they should not have brought innocent children into existence to share their misery, and hand down their own deficiencies, with accumulating wretchedness, from generation to generation, which is one great cause of the degeneracy of the race. {RH, June 27, 1899 par. 6}

so 1. they should not have married, but since they did...

2. they should not have brought children into existence,

unless they get pregnant, then its ok?

Perhaps she promoted coitus interruptus.

[Overaged]

Originally Posted By: Overaged

Definitely! I think the following exerpt from the Conference guidelines says it well:

Quote:

5) Christians acknowledge as first and foremost their accountability to God. They seek balance between the exercise of individual liberty and their accountability to the faith community and the larger society and its laws. They make their choices according to scripture and the laws of God rather than the norms of society. Therefore, any attempts to coerce women either to remain pregnant or to terminate pregnancy should be rejected as infringements of personal freedom.

I have to wonder now though; and I include myself as I say this. Maybe a woman who has had an abortion would be kind of scared to come here considering the way some of us have spoken "against" abortion...we come perilously close to condemning the person, or the Church; rather than the action...it goes against everything we are trying to prevent. It's kind of like "the war." I cannot support war. Neither can I hide how hideous some of it is. Yet, I can and do support our troops. I have a very good friend in the army.

I can't hide how graphic abortions may be...but how can I hide the woman's need for caring and support, and practical help and TLC with graphic ilustrations of the "wrong" when she has made such a difficult decision? Will I attack the Church because of it? Will I condemn the woman because of it? Or, will I put aside my different opinion in the interest of the above quoted guideline? Would the priority be to oppose abortion (to one that has already done it) or would it be to support and help the woman?

I can say that in nursing one learns pretty quick what you need to do; but we who have the truth seem pretty slow with it.

I believe the Church has provided some pretty good guidelines; and that we would all do well to follow them more closely. [/quote']i do appreciate your posts on this subject as well points and do agree!!

i remember when abortion first became legal. i had no sympathy for any woman who would have one, none whatsoever. but after 1. coming across the statements of ellen white regarding the seriousness of bringing children into the world, 2. my own experience from childhood til now multiplied by many others with similar experiences, 3. watching the evolution of those who were against abortion and the tactics they would use to manipulate, coerce, and bully any who disagreed with them and 4. knowing women who have had, or are, contemplating abortion, i have done a 180.

Well; I have done a "90" or so I think. Sometimes when I write something out; I "see" it better for what it is. I would be horrified to have to say some of what I have said here to women who are caught in such a predicament; as true as it might be.

All the what ifs mean nothing to those facing the decision. The only thing that means something to the women concerned is how to do what is right; and that is something we may not really have a way of knowing in most situations. And that would be true, independantly from our gender. Being a woman would not necessarily qualify one to really know what is right in a given situation.

The more I think about it; the more I appreciate the Church's position on this. It does not really come right out and support abortion; our leaders are, I am sure, acutely aware of all the pros and cons. But it does come out heavily in favor of supporting the women on either side of the fence. That is something that many have used against the Church; but for very different reasons than "abortion."

Catholics, and some of their "ministries" for "Pro-Life," have a veritable "field day" with all this, of course, and they have thoroughly publicized their opinions and statements: "Adventists dare to presume to tell us to obey the commandments when they themselves murder the unborn! How can this be God's 'remnant,'" they say.

To me; it is very disturbing to see professing Adventists follow suit, using slightly different pet theories; yet with the exact same results. Almost every anti-abortion source one could name has become fanaticism or worse.

When I was more graphic above regarding the abortion process; it was more some nasty memories I had from my nursing days. it wasn't even intended to really judge anyone in particular; I just can't imagine what women go through who actually have it done. I do agree, people should know what they are getting into if they want an abortion; but in some cases; it may not be for the best to be so graphic. Especially if it was known the woman's life was in danger if she had a baby.

There is one thing in the Conference Guidelines that I would like to see discussed and reviewed by the Conference; but I am scared to say it here. I might get a small taste of what women would go through in the church by fanatical or malcontented members.

[doug yowell]

Quote:

Ground control to Major Tom.How can anyone resist this logic? First you say a person HAS to be a WOMAN in this position then you say that those women who disagree with you who HAVE BEEN IN THAT POSITION are irrelevent because they don't agree with your position!!!! Hard to reason with that. Heads you win tails I lose. Got it! Wait a minute here. How do YOU KNOW that God cannot and does not reveal His mind on this matter to others? Why is this the only important moral issue that He neglected to check in on? Since you seem pretty confident that your pro-choice view is also God's view please explain why God lets so many of us react wrongfully? Why doesn't he take that pro-choice approach on things like smoking weed, dropping LSD,throwing plastic bottles into the ocean,or even suicide(ala Karl)?You have agreed that abortion was a sin so why is it the only sin that is accountable only between God and the sinner?

God allows individuals to choose. So do I.

God reveals which choice is right and which choice is wrong so that we can choose the right choice. He then alerts us to the inevitable consequence of making the wrong choice while at the same time guaranteeing us the power to carry thru on the right choice. Do you?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

God reveals which choice is right and which choice is wrong so that we can choose the right choice. He then alerts us to the inevitable consequence of making the wrong choice while at the same time guaranteeing us the power to carry thru on the right choice.

I agree with your statement.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Ok Doug, but I'm afraid if I don't at least say something to warn you, then your blood may be on my hands.

Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me.

When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Eze 3:17,18

That sounds rather suspiciously judgmental, Richard.Suggesting that my choice may exclude me from heaven? My church believes in choice. And until you've been in my position you have no right to tell me that it's wrong to smoke cigarettes!! The church supports me on that,doesn't it?

P.S. Doesn't an intervention violate the principles of choice? Don't the abortion guidelines forbid "coercion"?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: Doug Y

God reveals which choice is right and which choice is wrong so that we can choose the right choice. He then alerts us to the inevitable consequence of making the wrong choice while at the same time guaranteeing us the power to carry thru on the right choice.

I agree with your statement.

Poor Doug. You're comparing apples and oranges with your cigarette smoking ruse.. Go by what you wrote above.

[doug yowell]

A Statement I would like to make is this, anyone who has had an abortion is more than welcome on ClubAdventist.com without any condemnation or judgement.

Stan, what exactly do you mean by "condemnation or judgment"? Has that even been an issue here? Are you trying to suggest that if someone here calls abortion a sin they are being condemning or judgmental? Or is this more of a preventative strike? I just don't see ANYONE on this thread who opposes abortion who does not long for the redemption and healing of every one who has been responsible for an abortion.

[doug yowell]

I liked the way Nan put it in the beginning of this thread. I believe she is a doctor, and she seems to understand the Church's position on this very well.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

I agree with your statement.

Poor Doug. You're comparing apples and oranges with your cigarette smoking ruse.. Go by what you wrote above.

Can't slip anything by you can I?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

God reveals which choice is right and which choice is wrong so that we can choose the right choice. He then alerts us to the inevitable consequence of making the wrong choice while at the same time guaranteeing us the power to carry thru on the right choice.

I still agree with your statement here.