A Different Take On Christianity And Abortion

reply to post by Khaleesi


How about I equate a fertilized egg with an apple seed? Either it's sacred from fertilization or it isn't sacred until birth.

The real reason abortion was pushed was not to do with helping women, but to make fetal cells and tissue available much cheaper than the pharmaceutical companies could get them before legalized abortion. They were buying them from Sweden before Roe v. Wade.

This long study shows why they wanted American women to abort their children.

How much are they paying for babies ears that are less than 8 weeks old? My oh my, what is the value of the aborted baby? It's a cash cow for the sick psychopathic parasites on earth. Any you pro abortion crowd are equally culpable as far as I am concerned by your callous defense of murdering these innocent children.





Warning graphic video description from ex-abortion doctor.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

How about I equate a fertilized egg with an apple seed? Either it's sacred from fertilization or it isn't sacred until birth.

Why are we comparing apples to babies? I do not understand the logic.

reply to post by Khaleesi

Why not choose to be responsible and not have sex? Isn't that just choosing self gratification over responsibility?

Because sex is healthy, fun, entertaining and very important for intimacy and bonding.

Over 50% of abortions are due to birth control failure. That has nothing to do with "not being responsible."

reply to post by Khaleesi

Why are we comparing apples to babies? I do not understand the logic.

Because a fertilized egg is not a baby any more than an apple seed is an apple.

I wonder just what great scientists, healers, teachers, and gifted people we have lost because they were an inconvenience to a lazy woman or selfish man who cared more for their pleasure than the responsibility of their actions.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Do you have a problem with harvesting organs from the dead? I have no problem with the medical community making healing byproducts from something that's already dead.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

Why not choose to be responsible and not have sex? Isn't that just choosing self gratification over responsibility?

Because sex is healthy, fun, entertaining and very important for intimacy and bonding.

Over 50% of abortions are due to birth control failure. That has nothing to do with "not being responsible."

Yes, sex is fun and healthy but society has moved past that stage into the arena of self gratification. Intimacy and bonding? Intimate yes but the bonding , not so much. People don't seem to be staying with their partners very much anymore. I find a true friendship is the basis for a long lasting relationship. Not sex.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

Why not choose to be responsible and not have sex? Isn't that just choosing self gratification over responsibility?

Because sex is healthy, fun, entertaining and very important for intimacy and bonding.

Over 50% of abortions are due to birth control failure. That has nothing to do with "not being responsible."

And the remaining percentage that have nothing to do with birth control failure? Is that okay?

I bet this video will really upset you pro death of babies crowd. Most of you are absolute hypocrites

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

Do you have a problem with harvesting organs from the dead? I have no problem with the medical community making healing byproducts from something that's already dead.

I'll chime in on that one. As long as the dead wasn't killed with the express purpose of harvesting? That's alright I guess. I am listed an organ donor but, I have willfully given my consent. Can a fetus/baby give consent?

reply to post by Khaleesi


Fetal donation is granted by the woman having the abortion. She can choose not to.

At 12 weeks the child has brain waves, is very much developed and you want to question if they are a person?



The moment the child is conceived they are alive. If you do not interfere they will be born and live out their life. At what point do you get to play God and decide who has the right to life? America and the world is sick, and this thread proves it by your cavalier attitude to the sanctity of life.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

Fetal donation is granted by the woman having the abortion. She can choose not to.

And those donations create money for businesses. Businesses making money off of death. You don't find that disturbing?

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Come down off you high horse. Doctors, judges, police and legislators play God everyday. If a woman doesn't have sovereignty over her own body, then she's a slave to it. Slavery was outlawed many years ago.

Originally posted by Khaleesi

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

Fetal donation is granted by the woman having the abortion. She can choose not to.

And those donations create money for businesses. Businesses making money off of death. You don't find that disturbing?

Nope. Medical research cost money.

The three types of cells cultured from those fetal tissues - known to scientists as HEK293, WI-38 and MRC-5 - have revolutionized the prevention and treatment of human disease.

They are used to create the vaccines we inoculate our children with to prevent rubella, mumps, measles, chicken pox, polio, rabies and hepatitis.

Before these vaccines, just one rubella epidemic killed 2,100 newborns, caused 30,000 birth defects and triggered miscarriages in 6,250 women. Polio infected 57,000 and killed 3,000 every year.

HEK293 cells have been used to synthesize human proteins such as insulin and blood-clotting factors. They allow researchers to coax adult human stem cells into becoming nerve, heart, liver and pancreatic cells. Most recently, HEK293 cells have been used to produce gene-delivery viruses that could help generate the cells that many believe hold the cures to Parkinson's, Lou Gehrig's and Huntington's disease - diseases for which there are no cures and very little offered in the way of treatment. There is also great hope to develop treatments for diseases that affect millions of people, such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
www.jsonline.com...

Originally posted by windword

Nope. Medical research cost money.

www.nrlc.org...

"Because the sale of human tissue or body parts is prohibited by federal law, the traffickers have worked out an arrangement to expedite the process from which they all benefit and still remain within current interpretations of the law. For instance, the harvesters receive the fetal material as a " donation" from the abortion clinic. In return, the clinic is paid a "site fee" for rental of lab space where technicians, employed by the harvesters, perform as many dissections as necessary to fill researcher manifests. The harvesters then "donate" the body parts to the researchers and, rather than pay the harvesters for the actual body parts, "donate" the cost of the retrieval (a service) via a formal price list."

" AGF charges a flat fee of as much as $280 per specimen or individual body part."

" The consulting firm of Frost and Sullivan recently reported that "the worldwide market for cell lines and tissue cultures brought in nearly $428 million in corporate revenues in 1996. It further predicts that between now and 2003, the market will grow at an average annual rate of 13.5 percent and, by 2002, will be worth nearly $1 billion." That does not include profits from patents and products that come from tissue research."

reply to post by windword

Dear windword,

Come down off you high horse. Doctors, judges, police and legislators play God everyday. If a woman doesn't have sovereignty over her own body, then she's a slave to it. Slavery was outlawed many years ago.

And that brings us back to the most basic question.

If what is inside the mother is a living organism of the human species, with an independent DNA, and whose body is obviously not the mother's body, and in an early stage of development, does Christianity allow us to kill it? As far as I can see, only under the principle of self-defense.

If we are not sure about it, we can't kill it, under the same reasoning that a hunter is not allowed to shot a movement in the bushes until he's sure of what is shaking the leaves.

When the question next arises, if we are absolutely sure it is none of those things, the answers become very strained. "We can kill it because the law says we can." But surely it would be a bad law if it allowed the killing of a person.

"Well, it can't survive on it's own." Neither can born children until they're, what, in their teens? Or if they have a serious illness. Or if they're very old.

"Well, it's part of the Mother's body." It's attached to the Mother, it's inside the mother, right enough. But we've already seen the ridiculous results that gives, including the result that half of pregnant women would have a penis.

"Well, I don't want to be a slave." But the mother wasn't a slave when she chose to have sex, when she didn't insist on a condom, when she didn't take birth control, when she didn't use a morning after pill. After all those choices, and their very predictable result, she claims to thenbe a slave? A slave she chose to be? Further, even assuming that she is a slave for nine months, is that temporary loss of freedom worth killing the innocent over?

So, if it's scientifically shown to be a unique member of the human race in an early stage of development, which it is, we kill it because, why again?

With respect,
Charles1952

Yeah it's all used for medical research right? Riiiiight.

govtslaves.info...

First pepsico denied then said they would stop using aborted fetuses.

www.change.org...

Pepsi and Kraft yeah those flavor enhancers just reek of medical research.

Fetal donation is granted by the woman having the abortion. She can choose not to.

Ultimately windword although the choice may appear to lay upon the woman the true choice terminated with inception upon pregnancy because that which is created here comes from somewhere else. The life force breathed into the body is the soul/Spirit and that is not an inanimate object that belongs to the mother or to the physical world of men, their laws, politics, philosophies and/or their science.

The fundamental reality of a 'life' created makes it no longer her choice in actuality. The concept may be difficult to comprehend because we tend to automatically believe that the carrier has the right to judge whether to terminate that life or not, however her life is no more important than the life she is carrying. Both are distinct in spirit, soul and destiny from one another as created beings. One life does not have the right over the other to extinguish Life and thus Soul.

This actuality I speak of is inherent to the spirit and the true realm of eternity where we will all be judged for every choice we make and transgression we commit. Taking the life of another is still a 'life killed" no matter how you would like to semantically put that whether donated or not. You cannot ease the reality of murder using terminology or any political or philosophical argument. That which is murder, no matter how politically correct you think you are being is still murder.

Once a life begins to form in that divine creation then at that point you have relinquished and forfeited your right to extinguish it. The truth about our reality does not lie in this realm but rather in the second death where we will meet our Creator in judgement and truth. This cannot and will not be evaded. There are no political correct terms to save you in that eternal place where we all have an appointment with destiny and what is more our place of Origin, Creator and Judge in the ultimate accountability.