Abortion: an assault on the defenseless

[robocop (actually)]

Abortion: An Assault on the Defenseless

This is an article from the leader of my Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is a world-renowned surgeon and if I'm not mistaken he even invented open-heart surgery.

So rather than present my own views, I just wanted to see if any of you were interested in this.

Since he is a world-renowned surgeon and a religious leader of 15 million or so, I was just wondering how your views compare to him.

Hopefully we can have discussion.

 

[ecco]

One sentence that quickly caught my eye:

Man-made rules have now legalized that which has been forbidden by God from the dawn of time!​

I don't know if LDS uses the Christian Bible, but it is quite clear in there that God commands the young boys of fallen enemies to be killed.

Furthermore, God, according to scripture, flooded the entire world. Thereby killing not only all young children, but all the fetuses as well.

Most important, we do not live in a theocracy. You and your leader should be glad of that. It was other Christians that kicked LDS followers out of one town after another. If America was a Christian Theocracy at the time, perhaps all LDS proponents would have been executed for heresy.

Since we are not a theocracy, we look at things other than the beliefs of some theists when making our laws. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court did look at religious, and especially Christian, history when making their decision. Perhaps you should read the ruling some time.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Abortion: An Assault on the Defenseless

This is an article from the leader of my Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is a world-renowned surgeon and if I'm not mistaken he even invented open-heart surgery.

So rather than present my own views, I just wanted to see if any of you were interested in this.

Since he is a world-renowned surgeon and a religious leader of 15 million or so, I was just wondering how your views compare to him.

Hopefully we can have discussion.

Hopefully he's good enough at compartmentalization that his cruel views on the issue of abortion don't translate into cruelty on other issues.

 

[ChristineM]

I'm not mistaken he even invented open-heart surgery.

I think you are mistaken, the first successful open heart surgery was performed by Daniel Hale Williams in the 1890s, he was also the first African American cardiologist.

 

[robocop (actually)]

I think you are mistaken, the first successful open heart surgery was performed by Daniel Hale Williams in the 1890s, he was also the first African American cardiologist.

He figured out how to add Sodium I think to pause the heart beat.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Hopefully he's good enough at compartmentalization that his cruel views on the issue of abortion don't translate into cruelty on other issues.

I recognize that it can be expensive to carry the baby, you don't want to raise it, and many other reasons.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Hopefully he's good enough at compartmentalization that his cruel views on the issue of abortion don't translate into cruelty on other issues.

I am sorry if you think he is mean.

 

[Kenny]

Abortion: An Assault on the Defenseless

This is an article from the leader of my Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is a world-renowned surgeon and if I'm not mistaken he even invented open-heart surgery.

So rather than present my own views, I just wanted to see if any of you were interested in this.

Since he is a world-renowned surgeon and a religious leader of 15 million or so, I was just wondering how your views compare to him.

Hopefully we can have discussion.

More than just the view of a leader of 15 million or so, it is the view of billions. We also love mothers who have, (through difficulties, pressures, emotions et al), have gone through the process of an abortion. Their babies are in Heaven and mercy is lovingly sent to each mother.

(Of course, if either life is in peril (mom and baby - sometimes we have to make hard decisions... but God knows that)

 

[Subduction Zone]

One sentence that quickly caught my eye:

Man-made rules have now legalized that which has been forbidden by God from the dawn of time!​

I don't know if LDS uses the Christian Bible, but it is quite clear in there that God commands the young boys of fallen enemies to be killed.

Furthermore, God, according to scripture, flooded the entire world. Thereby killing not only all young children, but all the fetuses as well.

Most important, we do not live in a theocracy. You and your leader should be glad of that. It was other Christians that kicked LDS followers out of one town after another. If America was a Christian Theocracy at the time, perhaps all LDS proponents would have been executed for heresy.

Since we are not a theocracy, we look at things other than the beliefs of some theists when making our laws. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court did look at religious, and especially Christian, history when making their decision. Perhaps you should read the ruling some time.

The Bible also allows abortions under specific situations.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am sorry if you think he is mean.

I didn't say mean; I said cruel.

 

[robocop (actually)]

I didn't say mean; I said cruel.

Then maybe God can be cruel.

As for compartmentalization, my Church seeks expert opinion on every issue.

 

[epronovost]

One sentence that quickly caught my eye:

Man-made rules have now legalized that which has been forbidden by God from the dawn of time!​

Note that the OT doesn't consider abortion a murder. Killing a women's foetus is considered assault not murder and the victim is the mother. In Jewish scripture, a child gains their soul in their first breath and surrender it on their last one. That's what makes you truly alive vs dead.

Amongst the Greek and Romans, it was when a feotus first gives signs of life through movement which is generally between 16 and 25 weeks. That period was called the quickening, when a child became animated was when it was granted the properly alive status.

Today, higher brain activity and viability outside the uterus is generally favored to establish when a fetus has achieved a level of development considered worthy enough to claim personhood of some sort which places it pretty much around 20-28 weeks of gestation.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Note that the OT doesn't consider abortion a murder. Killing a women's foetus is considered assault not murder and the victim is the mother. In Jewish scripture, a child gains their soul in their first breath and surrender it on their last one. That's what makes you truly alive vs dead.

Amongst the Greek and Romans, it was when a feotus first gives signs of life through movement which is generally between 16 and 25 weeks. That period was called the quickening, when a child became animated was when it was granted the properly alive status.

Today, higher brain activity and viability outside the uterus is generally favored to establish when a fetus has achieved a level of development considered worthy enough to claim personhood of some sort which places it pretty much around 20-28 weeks of gestation.

I agree that abortion isn't murder actually.

 

[epronovost]

I agree that abortion isn't murder actually.

It's also a very sound policy to allow abortions as it's an important part of family planning and thus of any economical development, social mobility and measure to reduce criminality, child poverty and abuse.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Abortion: An Assault on the Defenseless

This is an article from the leader of my Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is a world-renowned surgeon and if I'm not mistaken he even invented open-heart surgery.

So rather than present my own views, I just wanted to see if any of you were interested in this.

Since he is a world-renowned surgeon and a religious leader of 15 million or so, I was just wondering how your views compare to him.

Hopefully we can have discussion.

As stated in the article, its a war on the unborn. That is, someone wants to treat the unborn as enemy soldiers.
The implication is that its someone who wants to win a victory through killing fetuses. Whom would that be?

He claims "Abortion has been legalized by governing entities without regard for God and His commandments." That is not conversational language but accusatory. If it were conversational we could argue on basis of scripture whether his opinions were scriptural. How does he claim to know that governing entities did it without regard for God? Because he considers himself an authority on God. Its there in his language. If he's the authority on God there is no discussion to be had with him. You simply have to accept his word or reject his authority.

"When the controversies about abortion are debated, 'individual right of choice' is invoked as though it were the one supreme virtue." -- from the article.

I have to agree its not a great argument. Rights are in my opinion not the way to view this. I view women as governors of their wombs. This seems most natural to me. Rather than rights only they are endowed with authority also. I don't think, however, that a fetus has rights above the mother's authority but rather has privileges granted by the mother or at least through the mother.

Here are some things not addressed in the article that can be deduced perhaps from the typical small protestant canon just going by stories and things: The unborn has value. The unborn is not spiritual until it has breathed. The unborn is a person being made in the womb. The unborn may be stillborn to punish the father (as with David and Bathsheba's first child). The unborn does not inherit. The unborn has no name until it is born.

 

[Brian2]

One sentence that quickly caught my eye:

Man-made rules have now legalized that which has been forbidden by God from the dawn of time!​

I don't know if LDS uses the Christian Bible, but it is quite clear in there that God commands the young boys of fallen enemies to be killed.

Furthermore, God, according to scripture, flooded the entire world. Thereby killing not only all young children, but all the fetuses as well.

Most important, we do not live in a theocracy. You and your leader should be glad of that. It was other Christians that kicked LDS followers out of one town after another. If America was a Christian Theocracy at the time, perhaps all LDS proponents would have been executed for heresy.

Since we are not a theocracy, we look at things other than the beliefs of some theists when making our laws. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court did look at religious, and especially Christian, history when making their decision. Perhaps you should read the ruling some time.

I don't suppose what God did has anything to do with abortion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Note that the OT doesn't consider abortion a murder. Killing a women's foetus is considered assault not murder and the victim is the mother. In Jewish scripture, a child gains their soul in their first breath and surrender it on their last one. That's what makes you truly alive vs dead.

Amongst the Greek and Romans, it was when a feotus first gives signs of life through movement which is generally between 16 and 25 weeks. That period was called the quickening, when a child became animated was when it was granted the properly alive status.

Today, higher brain activity and viability outside the uterus is generally favored to establish when a fetus has achieved a level of development considered worthy enough to claim personhood of some sort which places it pretty much around 20-28 weeks of gestation.

And let's not forget the "Test of an unfaithful wife". The test amounted to a chemical abortion. If the woman cheated on her husband she would lose the baby. The OT is far from anti-abortion.

 

[robocop (actually)]

As stated in the article, its a war on the unborn. That is, someone wants to treat the unborn as enemy soldiers.
The implication is that its someone who wants to win a victory through killing fetuses. Whom would that be?

He claims "Abortion has been legalized by governing entities without regard for God and His commandments." That is not conversational language but accusatory. If it were conversational we could argue on basis of scripture whether his opinions were scriptural. How does he claim to know that governing entities did it without regard for God? Because he considers himself an authority on God. Its there in his language. If he's the authority on God there is no discussion to be had with him. You simply have to accept his word or reject his authority.

"When the controversies about abortion are debated, 'individual right of choice' is invoked as though it were the one supreme virtue." -- from the article.

I have to agree its not a great argument. Rights are in my opinion not the way to view this. I view women as governors of their wombs. This seems most natural to me. Rather than rights only they are endowed with authority also. I don't think, however, that a fetus has rights above the mother's authority but rather has privileges granted by the mother or at least through the mother.

Here are some things not addressed in the article that can be deduced perhaps from the typical small protestant canon just going by stories and things: The unborn has value. The unborn is not spiritual until it has breathed. The unborn is a person being made in the womb. The unborn may be stillborn to punish the father (as with David and Bathsheba's first child). The unborn does not inherit. The unborn has no name until it is born.

Sorry I don't find the time to respond properly to this.

 

[SomeRandom]

Abortion: An Assault on the Defenseless

This is an article from the leader of my Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is a world-renowned surgeon and if I'm not mistaken he even invented open-heart surgery.

So rather than present my own views, I just wanted to see if any of you were interested in this.

Since he is a world-renowned surgeon and a religious leader of 15 million or so, I was just wondering how your views compare to him.

Hopefully we can have discussion.

I would have expected a medical professional to know better than using an appeal to emotion fallacy. And to know better than to use emotionally manipulative rather hyperbolic language. I’m sure in his field he is a respected figure. But I hope he keeps his opinions to himself when actually treating his patients.

 

[robocop (actually)]

I would have expected a medical professional to know better than using an appeal to emotion fallacy. And to know better than to use emotionally manipulative rather hyperbolic language. I’m sure in his field he is a respected figure. But I hope he keeps his opinions to himself when actually treating his patients.

He actually operated on a famous Chinese person so he is famous in China now. He is also a religious leader, remember that.