The right to abort. The right to ask for the aborted to be adopted instead. These are the same thing!
- Thread starter Gottservant
- 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!
TinMan
Well-Known Member
Behold
Well-Known Member
All abortions happen subsequent to intercourse.
Its actually 100%
How is this "contraception'?
Because abortion denies the completion of the pregnancy., exactly as a condom, or a BCP.
The radical difference is that an abortion stops a heartbeat, every single time.
TinMan
Well-Known Member
Behold
Well-Known Member
Its perfect evidence.
No Sex, no Abortion.
The issue with abortion "rights" is that this is based on the false presumption/declaration..... that what is living in the womb, "isn't a baby".
So, based on that deception, that misrepresentation of reality.... women are given the right to have the "mass of cells with a beating heart", destroyed, by the Abortion Industry.
You know what you are ?
A mass of cells with a beating heart., that wasn't murdered in your mother's womb.
In the USA alone, over 50 million have been, so far...
TinMan
Well-Known Member
Which has nothing to do with your claim "99.999 use abortion as after sex contraception."
A fetus doesn't have a heartbeat until between 6 to 8 weeks depending on what source you look at. You brought up the Guttmacher Institute as a source a few posts back. this same source details that the vast majority of abortions occur before there is a heartbeat.
I am also a functioning brain, something a fetus doesn't have until late in the pregnancy.
Behold
Well-Known Member
I didnt bring up the Guttmacher Institute. That's another member.
Also, its more likely the heart beat is detected at the 5th week.
And contraception, denies pregnacy.....and that is also abortion.
And ive worked in the "pre-term" dept and i can promise you that 4 month old "premature babies' are not just "high functioning" on a brain stem.
TinMan
Well-Known Member
but you still sighted their research in posts #91 and #100
As I said the time frame varies depending on what source you use
No, it's contraception
That is amazing considering the youngest surviving preemie is weeks older than that.
Sporadic neural activity can be observed at 16 weeks but recognizable brain activity doesn't get going until 18 weeks
You guys need to focus on the fact that adoption is a right, the Church should be standing up to adopt those that have no alternative.
But nearly everybody knows the Liberals are busy doing what they accuse others of doing. Why murder babies?
Behold
Well-Known Member
I said i worked in the pre-term dept. This is where complications that will produce a early term baby usually start.
Its always about the 4th month.
The earliest baby, is less than 5, and it is a baby. Make no mistake. Exactly as you find with a 2 month old, ect.
TinMan, ive not read where you draw the cut-off line, regarding the abortion industry ripping a baby apart in the womb.
Do you have any aversion to this procedure, or do you just feel that as long as the "thing" isnt' outside the womb its ok to kill it in the womb no matter the month of development?
BarneyFife
Well-Known Member
Do you really think I believe otherwise?
I'm not surprised that Guttmacher gives out contradictory info.
Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives
Public discussion about abortion in the United States has generally focused on policy: who should be allowed to have abortions, and under what circumstances. Receiving less attention are the women behind the statistics—the 1.3 million women who obtain abortions each year1—and their reasons for...
Jim B
Well-Known Member
Of course adoption is a right. I don't understand what "the Church should be standing up to adopt those that have no alternative". Standing up, meaning opposed? And who has "no alternative"?
I just mean people should not be able to abort, without considering adoption first.
BarneyFife
Well-Known Member
How would you propose we go about verifying that "considering adoption first" has been properly done. You just don't seem to be offering a practical policy/solution so much as a mere suggestion. I really don't get it. But what do I know?
:I am establishing the principle! Without the principle, the work can't be done.How would you propose we go about verifying that "considering adoption first" has been properly done. You just don't seem to be offering a practical policy/solution so much as a mere suggestion. I really don't get it. But what do I know?
The principle is "the right to abort, is the same right as the right to adopt".
The Law should reflect this!
Jim B
Well-Known Member
It is up to the person assessing the abortion, to verify that adoption is impossible.
Stan B
Well-Known Member
They avoid the word baby because the speak English! In the English language the dictionary defined a baby as:
1. an infant or very young child
2. a newborn or very young animal.
When you use the word ‘baby’ to describe a fetus you portray yourself as being illiterate and incapable of rational thought.
To the OP, does this poll take into account situations where there is no chance for the fetus to live and either it or the pregnancy is killing the mother? I'm talking about medical abortions to save the life of the mother.
I am all for adoption, but the fetus needs to be part the point of viability for there to be an adoption.
I am all for adoption, but the fetus needs to be part the point of viability for there to be an adoption.
Similar threads
