marksman
My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
And that is the figure that is relevant as the USA is not the centre of Christianity and Christianity does not live or die according to what happens in the USA
Christianity requires fear, guilt, and conformity
- Thread starter Romanov2488
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
marksman
My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
FlySwatter
Member
This is quite a poor and uninformed statement to make. There are very significant dangers associated with giving birth and you should really understand those before making this kind of sweeping statements on such a sensitive topic.
Some reading for you:
Maternal Mortality
What could be more tragic than a mother losing her life in the moment that she is giving birth to her newborn? Why are mothers dying and what can be done to prevent these deaths?
ourworldindata.org
"For most of our history, pregnancy and childbirth were dangerous for both baby and mother. If we look at long-term trends in maternal mortality – the likelihood a woman will die from pregnancy-related causes – we see that every 100th to 200th birth led to the mother’s death.
The World Health Organization estimates that almost 300,000 women died from pregnancy-related causes in 2017. That’s 808 women every day.
The average rate in the European Union is 8 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. In some countries such as Poland, Greece, Finland and Sweden, the rate is even lower at 3 to 4 per 100,000.
In Sierra Leone a woman is 300 to 400 times more likely to die with each pregnancy. At an estimated rate of 1360 deaths per 100,000 live births, around 1-in-75 pregnancies ends in the death of the mother."
So there is risk involved to the rape victim in the scenario being discussed. It's preposterous to suggest that we should force that risk on a person (either via law or by psychological shaming etc) in order to preserve what at the outset of a pregnancy is scientifically a bundle of cells that has no brain, no nervous system, no feeling, no sentience.
It's akin to saying we should risk the life of an adult in order to save an appendix.
Clearly much later down the line of the term things change and we do then start dealing with a human being. However that is many many weeks later.
FlySwatter
Member
You surely know what a parasite is?! An organism that feeds off another to survive.
You presumably also know what a fetus is. An organism that is totally dependent on the life (woman) it is physically attached to and which can not survive of its own accord. I guess by "undeveloped" the poster meant that it is a developing organism that has not yet reached completion.
FlySwatter
Member
Christianity is taking a huge hit as a result of the depravity of the state of religion in the USA. It has very much lost its way I think and there are millions of people there calling themselves Christians who are not.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Agreed that not all killing is the same. Aborting a baby is the same as murder in the 1st degree.
In cases of manslaughter, at least one could say the person baited them by their words or deeds. And while the killer did not mean to kill in the heat of the moment, that was the unintended consequence.
Baby killing is mostly done for convince. Obviously, the baby is an innocent victim IF there ever was.
Last edited:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Regarding you supposing I would make my own daughter kill my own grandchild just because it is inconvenient.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
I'm not talking about most of our history. I'm talking about now - in America. Not to say it never happens but to claim that there is equality of danger is absurd. And I'm sure you know that.
You are another who compars ACTUAL as equal to POTENTIAL. An abortion will result in the babies death. A pregnant women may have complicatons that may result in in death. Actual is not the same as potential.
FlySwatter
Member
You would be correct at the point where we do indeed have a "baby" involved.
However that doesn't occur until many many weeks into a pregnancy. For countless weeks before that all you have is an organism, a bundle of cells, without brain, without nervous system, without feeling, without sentience. Clearly talking about murder in this context would be both very silly and legally untrue. The idea that say removing an appendix would be 1st degree murder is of course facile.
And really this is what the whole abortion debate boils down to.
It's about how many weeks into a pregnancy do we have an ACTUAL baby as opposed to a potential, developing, baby.
There is a cut off point at which we go from one to the other. After that point, yes we can legally talk about murder. Before that point, no we can't nor should.
FlySwatter
Member
Where did I claim "equality of danger"?
I truthfully stated there ARE risks whatever their level is and at the point where we don't yet have any kind of actual baby, any level of risk to the existing fully developed human is unacceptable unless the host woman is wanting to take that risk.
Maybe I will be a different kind of Christian than what you are used to. I am not a fire and brimstone Christian. I was raised Catholic (talk about being guilted) and left God when I was a teenager only to find Him again when I was in my thirties. I still tried to live a good life, helped people, not someone that lies for a living, etc. I started attending church again when I met my ex-wife and felt the pull of the Lord. I attended the churches she wanted for a time, but never felt at home. It wasn't until after she divorced me and I met my now fiance and attended her birth church which is the Episcopal church that I started to feel at home.
My fiance doesn't claim to be a Christian (she was extremely hurt by her old church members growing up in how they treated a priest) but does claim to believe in God. She will go to church with me when I go, which isn't often because of my ex-wife. She has the final say per our divorce decree and she doesn't want them going to the Episcopal church. So, after talking with my priest, he said that it is better to keep that peace than to fight that battle and he said God understands. So, I watch online sermons from the Episcopal church. I don't push my fiance to become a Christian and pray for her on the daily. I do believe that God put us together as a couple and to get married because this has been the best relationship I ever had, and that included having dated other Christians and married my Christian ex-wife.
I don't preach at people, I will not tell them they are going to hell. If they ask me about my faith, I will tell them then. I am a pretty solitary Christian.
I know other Christians will come down on me for what I wrote above and to be honest, I just let it fall off my shoulders. I am who God made me to be.
Oh and it was the love of God that drew me to him, not the fear of hell.
My fiance doesn't claim to be a Christian (she was extremely hurt by her old church members growing up in how they treated a priest) but does claim to believe in God. She will go to church with me when I go, which isn't often because of my ex-wife. She has the final say per our divorce decree and she doesn't want them going to the Episcopal church. So, after talking with my priest, he said that it is better to keep that peace than to fight that battle and he said God understands. So, I watch online sermons from the Episcopal church. I don't push my fiance to become a Christian and pray for her on the daily. I do believe that God put us together as a couple and to get married because this has been the best relationship I ever had, and that included having dated other Christians and married my Christian ex-wife.
I don't preach at people, I will not tell them they are going to hell. If they ask me about my faith, I will tell them then. I am a pretty solitary Christian.
I know other Christians will come down on me for what I wrote above and to be honest, I just let it fall off my shoulders. I am who God made me to be.
Oh and it was the love of God that drew me to him, not the fear of hell.
Last edited:
A fetus has a parasitic relationship with the mother. It does not deserve anywhere near the rights of an already born, developed human being.
Just because it is inconvenient for your Bible-thumping view, does not mean that a rape victim (your daughter hypothetically), has to keep the baby. I am very pro life-I support the lives of rape victims.
America aside, Christianity and Islam have many, many commonalities. You’re not that different from the Taliban, after all.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Countless weeks?
Also, you are using some unstated criteria of the baby to dehumanize it as a life form. Fact is, it is human from the moment of conception - and not any other species.
Saying it is not human in ‘a’ sense does not make it non-human in ‘a’ sense. Just another example of atheists attempting to define their way out of the problem of being human.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Again, you are using an undefined criteria for "baby" that allows time from conception to this undefined point of development. It is an actual human from the moment of conception.
"Baby" is normally a term used from conception to the toddler stage of development. Language usage: When an expecting mother announces she's "going to have a baby" she means she's on schedule to deliver a baby at full term. So, the term "baby" is used to describe the human before the toddler stage of development.
You want to create further divisions, such as fetus or embryo. However, science and morality are not on your side. The baby has a fully intact unique DNA from the moment of conception.
A fully developed human may not occur for years and even decades after birth. Let's face it. It would be more convenient to murder many people. Totalitarian regimes have been doing it all along.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Yea, right! Not too many Christians these days use force to advance the cause of Christiantiy.
Having said that, I can understand your implicit call for another round of Crusades. As is always the case, the greater threat to any society is always from within. This time, the primary focus should be eliminating secular humanism from the face of the Earth as it is, for now, the greater threat to Western Civilization.
Because they’re quickly getting phased out, no power. But the Taliban-like mindset is still there. Someone came along at a gathering and figured out how to control the masses…and so religion came about.
FlySwatter
Member
No I'm not. Calling a fertilised egg a baby is both ridiculous and divisive and science would definitely not be on your side. It's simply an appeal to emotion which all anti-abortion supporters do in the absence of any tangible sound argument. A zygote, fetus or other barely developed organism is not a baby nor a human being. It may eventually become one but at that point it is definitely not one.
The question of species is irrelevant here.
Where did I say it was not human? At no point. That's twice now you have claimed I said things that I did not in order to state something you want to say. A poor debating style.
The organism is patently human by which is meant of the species Homo (esp Homo Sapiens). It has the DNA associated with Homo Sapiens. But then so does an appendix, liver or kidney. None of them are actual human beings. They are all organisms with human DNA.
Anti-abortion supporters have a desperate need to refer to a fertilised egg as a human being because they have no sound argument and thus need to use emotional content to try and dupe people.
A zygote is not a baby. It is not a human being. It is an organism, indeed a parasitic organism as another poster here pointed out, which has human DNA but lacks everything that would be needed for it to be a human being.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
