Roe v. Wade Soon to be Moot?
From the next issue of Whistle Blower Magazine:
As well they should be. It is an evil practice. It is murder.
Almost 50 million unborn children have been murdered since the United States Supreme Court usurped the authority of individual states, and the right of Americans to decided for themselves via the ballot box. Couple this with Dr. Tiller's recent legal woes, and those of the clinic in Hialeah, FL, and Abortion in this county is in serious trouble.
-----
Woman Dies after being Rushed from George "the Killer" Tiller's Late-Term Abortion Mill
'Tiller the Killer' abortion case goes to Supremes --w/ many more links to other articles at the bottom of the this articles page.
America is turning against abortion:
"Unless drastic changes are made, American women will lose the right to abortion and the [U.S.] Supreme Court won’t be the cause of it ... the reason will be that physicians either can't or won't perform this essential service." – Barbara Radford, former director, National Abortion Federation
"... the greatest threat to abortion rights may no longer be anti-choice judges and politicians, but diminished access to abortion services ..." – Nita Lowey, pro-abortion congresswoman, New York's 18th congressional district
"... the availability of abortions is diminishing because fewer doctors are willing to perform the procedure." – The Washington Post
"Those who run abortion clinics, even in large cities, say that recruiting doctors is now their most serious problem." – The San Francisco Chronicle
"... no doctors want to come and work in abortion clinics. Guess what? No nurses want to come and work in abortion clinics." – Genevieve Grein, manager, Choice Medical Group, Santa Cruz, Calif.
"Abortion is a matter of choice in this country not only for women but for physicians as well. All over the country, most physicians are choosing not to do it …" – American Medical News
A few years ago, America had about 2,000 abortion clinics; today there are fewer than 800. Physicians are forsaking the practice in droves.
Bottom line: Americans, especially the younger generation, are increasingly repulsed by abortion.
As well they should be. It is an evil practice. It is murder.
Almost 50 million unborn children have been murdered since the United States Supreme Court usurped the authority of individual states, and the right of Americans to decided for themselves via the ballot box. Couple this with Dr. Tiller's recent legal woes, and those of the clinic in Hialeah, FL, and Abortion in this county is in serious trouble.
-----
Woman Dies after being Rushed from George "the Killer" Tiller's Late-Term Abortion Mill
'Tiller the Killer' abortion case goes to Supremes --w/ many more links to other articles at the bottom of the this articles page.
from the mind of... Eric | 7:56 AM
21 Comments:
Hey, I can almost agree with you! This comes closer to what I think should happen.
Abortion is a medical procedure, not an "evil practice." BUT, doctors who willingly abort babies for non-medical reasons (and parents who ask for it) are making an unethical decision, a wrong decision, it seems to me.
Now, I don't want to be the one to make calls on what is and isn't a legitimate medical procedure, nor do I want the gov't to do so. But I fully support doctors doing so and educating the parents they deal with why they couldn't do so.
It'd be like outlawing nose jobs.
I don't want the gov't to decide which nose jobs are ethical and which ones aren't, but if a fella walked in to a plastic surgeon's office and requested that the doctor do a nose job and make his nose look like an elephant's trunk, the doctor would rightly refuse to do so for ethical reasons.
There's not a legitimate medical or even psychological reason to make an elephant nose, therefore he wouldn't do so.
Same for non-medical abortions. Seems to me.
Murder is always unethical. Abortion is not simply a medical procedure. It is infanticide. No amount of synonomous terms like "choice", or "women's health", will disguise the fact that abortion is murder. Libs like to say they are for a womans "right to choose". Who gave women anywhere at anytime the right to choose to kill their own babies? The argument is ludicrous.
They say the war in Iraq is wrong because people die. Where is the outrage at the deaths of millions of unborn babies every year? How can they say they are against killing enemies in war and say it's ok to kill innocent babies in the womb?
Prepostorous. Hypocritical. Lies.
By the way, my very first apartment, in my hometown of Wichita Kansas, was a mere two doors down from where George Tiller eventually opened his baby killing house of horrors. If I had known then what I know now, I might have done something to try to stop him.
Not just with abortion, Mark, which kills millions of babies a year, but the selective outrage over 3,000 deaths in 4 years, as oppossed to other shocking figures...
Roughly 7,000 deaths a year because of Physician's lousy penmanship, resulting in patients getting the wrong prescription.
Based on population percentages, the most violent place to live is a metropolitan American city. More people are murdered each year in America than in the entire 4 year history of the War on Terror.
More people die on America's highways in a month than died all of last year in Iraq.
So where's the outrage? Why isn't Cindy Sheehan protesting our unsafe highways? Why isn't Hollywood's elite protesting the physician's poor penmanship? Why aren't politicians demanding answers as to why America's cities run with blood and violence?
All the while demanding the right to kill an innocent unborn child?
Why?
Because 9 unelected kings saw in the 'right to privacy', a woman's right to commit murder.
"It'd be like outlawing nose jobs. "
You truly are a sick puppy, Dan.
I guess it's not important for a loser mom to turn the other cheek, eh?
And face her responsibiliy?
Gee, even when I halfway agree with you, you fellas feel it necessary to snipe and bitch.
I'd have thought that we could agree that sometimes, a mother's life is in danger because of a pregnancy and in that circumstance, sometimes people might want a medical procedure be available, but no. There is no medical procedure, only murder of babies.
And killing babies must be outlawed.
So I'm sure you smirking hypocrites will join me in outlawing the killing of babies in Iraq by war? What? Killing Iraqi babies is acceptable. There ARE exceptions to when it is okay and not to kill babies?
God have pity on your sad self-righteous souls. You wear me out.
I'm sure I'll apologize later for being mean-spirited here, but your small-minded, smug "MY WAY OR YOU'RE HELLBOUND" answers to everything just wear people out sometimes.
Blind guides.
I have neither sniped nor bitched. I'm pleased that we half-way agree on something.
Abortion, however, is more than a 'medical procedure'. As the intent is to kill. That, in my estimation, makes it evil. The fact that many see it as a good thing further blackens it. To compare cosmetic surgery, however bizarre, to a procedure that ends life is comparing apples and oranges. Both procedures require the cutting of flesh, but only one sends a soul back to the one who gave it, its divine purpose unfulfilled.
It is, in fact, a medical procedure. A medical procedure is when a certified doctor conducts a legal operation or other action.
That some doctors do so unethically means that a medical procedure has been used to kill a child wrongfully in your and maybe my opinion. But not the opinion of the law.
Just as it is not legally murder to kill in war. I think it wrong to kill innocents thusly, yet y'all defend it. Does that mean I must need say that you are defending murder?
I would turn Mark's question back upon the war supporters:
"How can they say they are against killing babies in the womb and yet say it's ok to kill innocent babies in the Iraq?"
To the agreement side of things: I fully support more doctors taking an ethical stand against frivolous abortions and refusing to perform them.
These sorts of rabid exhortations against abortion and homosexuality are not biblical. If you read the bible there's far more violence and sex in there than even the worst horror flick. Yet modern Christians have latched on to these two issues as the defining struggle against a godless country.
The bible doesn't mention abortion at all. All this condemnation hangs only upon the ten commandment "Thou shalt not kill." But Christians feel its okay to ignore this commandment all the time otherwise. Few very few Christians stand outside prisons claiming capital punishment is wrong. No one is using this as a protest against the war in Iraq. But when it comes to a blastocyst that may be less than the sizer of pencil point, "STOP THAT"S MURDER!!!!!"
Calling it a blastocyst, doesn't alter the truth of what it will become given 9 months of gestation. It is a child. Given the right to exit the birth canal in due time, there will be a living breathing human child full of God-given potential and destiny. It will not be an eraser tip, a peanut, a panda, or even a toad. It will be a human child.
And while Abortion is not mentioned specifically in the Bible, it should nonetheless be understood as evil for the simple reason that God knows each one by name, at conception. He has plans for each and every child born. And the idea of killing what God has set aside for a specific purpose demonstrates a lack of fear that is, at the very least, astounding.
It is pure sophistry to argue that criminals who are condemned to die deserve life despite the sins that brought them to deathrow, while the unborn who have committed NO crimes worthy of death do not.
Perhaps you would care to explain to us why the unborn do not deserve the same consideration as the condemned prisoner.
Finally, much of the sex spoken of in the Bible is in the context of marriage. "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived... And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived... And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son"
Perhaps you can explain why fervent christians fight so hard for things that might become people, but hardly at all for real people. Why do you defend the existence of a blastocyst, but ignore condemned criminals and muslim iraqis. After all you're pretty positive that criminals and muslims go to hell.
Then we come to this issue of man playing god. We do it all the time. When an infertile couple get in vitro fertilization aren't they fighting God to seed life where he made barren ground. And if you build an earthquake/hurricane proof dwelling aren't you denying HIS right to kill who he chooses.
First Christianity must find consistency before it can speak with moral authority about life and death issues.
"And Cain knew his wife... Who was Cain's wife? Either God made more than 1 female in Genesis or else the entirety of the human race is based on what you would call deviant sex. Or perhaps the Bible is allegory and not to be taken literally.
Isn't it obvious? Cain married one of his sisters. How else were they to be 'fruitful, and multiply'?
"First Christianity must find consistency before it can speak with moral authority about life and death issues."
Biblical Christianity is quite consistent, and set in stone. Your confusion in all this stems from a lack of understanding. For example... the prohibition against incest was not in place prior to the flood. In fact, 'incest', as it is referred to today, was not prohibited until after the exodus.
Abraham, after all, was married to his half-sister. Yet calls this man a great man of faith, the father of our faith. Isaac and Rebekah were second cousins, Jacob was wed to the daughters of Laban, his mother’s brother, hence, to his first cousins, but the incestuous acts as that engaged in by Lot and his daughters were strongly condemned.
Like I said-- a lack of understanding. Which, it can reasonably be argued, stems from a lack of biblical study. That's not a jab, just a reasonable observation.
So things that are now sins weren't always. Is the reverse true? Could things that were once sins now be allowed? This is certainly an interesting discussion, but its an off-shoot of my original comment.
1. Why do you defend the existence of a blastocyst, but ignore condemned criminals and muslim iraqis?
2. When an infertile couple get in vitro fertilization aren't they fighting God to seed life where he made barren ground?
If you want to know what is and is not a sin now, I suggest you read and earnestly study the bible. As to:
1-- I do not ignore condemned criminals or Iraqi muslims... or ANY muslim. God loves Osama bin Laden, so who am I to hate him?
This nation's legal system provides for the execution of convicted criminals. Whether I approve or not, no matter how many people protest outside the state prison. If the law demands death as payment for guilt, then nothing can stop that execution other than a commutation or pardon, and I have no other choice but to obey the law. I can't stop any man or woman's execution. What I CAN do is pray and petition the Governor. As a Christian I have to respect the laws of this nation and its leaders. Jesus said in Matthew 22:21 and Luke 20:25,
"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." ...To mean, the laws instituted by government are to be obeyed, but worship and Godly service is due to God alone. Why are Christians to obey the laws of the land and show respect to our leaders?
Romans 13:1-7 says,
"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour."
Now, as to:
2. Advancement in technology is not a bad thing. If the people of Jesus' day had the medical expertise of the 21st century, Leprosy would have been curable WITHOUT Jesus' ability to heal. In some cases it MAY WELL BE against God's will for couples to seek IVF. Perhaps His will is that they wait upon Him and His perfect timing. It's only when technology get's used for evil purposes...... like ripping an unborn child from its mother's womb, when technology becomes an "bad" thing.
"Just as it is not legally murder to kill in war."
Warped...just plain warped, Dan.
You are, however, notorious for making idiotic comparisons. So...no surprise.
"1. Why do you defend the existence of a blastocyst, but ignore condemned criminals and muslim iraqis?
2. When an infertile couple get in vitro fertilization aren't they fighting God to seed life where he made barren ground?"
1a. Why do you hide the rael, horrible truth by referring to a child in the womb...at any stege of developement (you made no distinction) as a blastocyst rather than what it really is...a human life?
1b. How do you know that the plight of condemned criminals is ignored by any with whom you are currently debating?
1c. What the heck does "muslim Iraqis" have to do with anything?
2. How do you know those with whom you debate actually agree that invitro is moral?
You are basing your argument aon an awful lot of assumptions about your debate opponents, BenT.
I will address the "muslim Iraqis" fallacy, though.
Just who is killing "muslim Iraqis"?
There...that ought to do it.
"And Cain knew his wife... Who was Cain's wife? Either God made more than 1 female in Genesis or else the entirety of the human race is based on what you would call deviant sex. Or perhaps the Bible is allegory and not to be taken literally."
Gawd...what a juvenile attempt at truth using silly, cliche' fallacy!
Perhaps, BenT, God has a better understanding of science than you and modern "scientist" have, ya' think?
Maybe God is REALLY in the know about human genetics and such...ya' think?
Maybe the introduction of sin into man's existence and satan's corrupt presence in creation really DID affect it in a way that modern shmuck "scientists" just can't grasp...ya' think?
Personally...on the invitro thingy...and the death sentence thingy...I do believe those who believe in the sanctity of life need to objectively rethink their positions on both.
Several major issues of divisiveness in our country could be put to rest with an objective rethink, IMHO. But...cynic that I am...I don't think its possible for leftists to give up one inch of ground to common-sense.
To the guy who said the Bible doesn't cover abortion. . .
This was 2000 years ago, and obviously there was no technology for abortion. Thus, there was no reason to mention what didn't exist. The Mosaic Law said that if a man murdered a pregnant woman, that man should be punished for two murders. I should hope Christians are smart enough to see what is ethical based on the Bible, even if the practice is not specifically mentioned in the Bible. Incidentally, I've never understood why many Jews support abortion. They have more reason to be pro-life than we Christians do.
Post a Comment
<< Home