# Is Abortion Ever Allowable?



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

In the case of danger to the mother if it can be proved?  I'm thinking about this 10-year-old child is now 4 months pregnant.  10!  She could be in serious danger but will have the child.  Even in the cases of women who used protection along with their husbands either through combined prophylactics and surgery, but became pregnant anyway or have found out that they shouldn't carry the child to full-term due to risks of death, is abortion ever viable in christianity when the mother's life is endangered?  

What say you?  Should they risk both mother and child?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

I kinda see the abortion issue like this sometimes...It's like we want to attack sin with sin...

...Have a little fornication, which may seem pleasurable and harmless at the moment, then bam! get pregnant...

"I'm not ready to have a child!" or "I'm too young!" or "I can't afford to take care of it!" and so on so forth...

....Then the decision to abort the developing child comes to mind.

Why aren't more Christians addressing the issues of fornication, rape, adultery, and other sexually immoral actions in our community? Then we wouldn't have to worry about abortion _as much_.


But to be back on topic at hand, I would say abortion should not ever be allowable according to the Christian faith.  It's going against the commandment of "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Abortions kill babies, terminates their life.

Questions: What dangers are there for this 10-year-old mother?  Wouldn't these dangers be consequences of her actions?


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

The 10 y/o was raped, so I don't think that she should be held responsible for having sex. 

If there is a high-level of risk to the mothers life, whose life is more valuable? Hers, or the unborn childs? Or is it just put into God's hands, to handle as He sees fit?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> The 10 y/o was raped, so I don't think that she should be held responsible for having sex.
> 
> If there is a high-level of risk to the mothers life, whose life is more valuable? Hers, or the unborn childs? Or is it just put into God's hands, to handle as He sees fit?


Thanks for letting me know about the girl being raped.

There are some Christians that say if a girl was raped, she should have the child. They'll say even though the girl was raped, she shouldn't sin by taking the life of the child. 

There are some Christians that say if a girl was raped, she shouldn't have the child because of the fact she was raped.

And see, most people would say "put into God's hands to handle as He sees fit" without even realizing how cliche' and commonplace it is to say something like that.  The mother with the unborn child has to make a tough decision.  The thing is, this 10-year-old could die from complications of giving birth AND complications of aborting her unborn child. 

Plus, is death really all that bad if you're a Christian and supposed to go to Heaven?

See, that's why I see so many problems with religion and some beliefs.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> I kinda see the abortion issue like this sometimes...It's like we want to attack sin with sin...
> 
> ...Have a little fornication, which may seem pleasurable and harmless at the moment, then bam! get pregnant...
> 
> ...



10-year old child was raped by her stepfather!!!!  I'm talking about is abortion ever wrong to save the life of a mother in danger medically?   Women die in child birth all the time.  Some women die in the gestational period from complications.  Her body is too young to have a baby.


----------



## jdvzmommy (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> 10-year old child was raped by her stepfather!!!! I'm talking about* is abortion ever wrong to save the life of a mother in danger medicall*?


 IMO, no it isn't.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> The 10 y/o was raped, so I don't think that she should be held responsible for having sex.
> 
> If there is a high-level of risk to the mothers life, whose life is more valuable? Hers, or the unborn childs? Or is it just put into God's hands, to handle as He sees fit?




I know, right?  I've heard of cases of christians who opted to abort and got the "ok" from their spiritual leaders because they were in a medically dangerous situation.  Sometimes, you don't know how your body will react with a pregnancy.  These are the ones I'm talking about.

Or do you just give your life/death into the hands of God with no prevention as the "christian" thing to do?  I've known those cases as well.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Thanks for letting me know about the girl being raped.
> 
> There are some Christians that say if a girl was raped, she should have the child. They'll say even though the girl was raped, she shouldn't sin by taking the life of the child.
> 
> ...



 That is exactly what I was saying - to me, putting it in God's hands means allowing the pregnancy to continue (you aren't killing anyone) and if mother, child, or both, dies - well, they are in Heaven (at least the baby is!), and it was God's choice to take them.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

Is any sin ever *allowable*? 

No, but I believe God is in the business of grace and mercy. I seriously doubt God would punish this 10 year old child for having an abortion, since she is obviously a victim herself.

There were so many situations in the bible where the sin was not "allowable" but God was still merciful. Since God is our creator, I know HE doesn't view this thing called life in a black & white, sometimes narrow fashion as us humans do.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> The thing is, this 10-year-old could die from complications of giving birth AND *complications* of aborting her unborn child.
> 
> Plus, is death really all that bad if you're a Christian and supposed to go to Heaven?
> 
> See, that's why I see so many problems with religion and some beliefs.



That is the focus of the discussion.  Not religion in general, not sinning and conceiving a child but medical complications of pregnancy and whether or not it is ever permissible.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> That is the focus of the discussion. Not religion in general, *not sinning* and conceiving a child but medical complications of pregnancy and whether or not it is ever permissible.


 

But how can you view one sin differently than another? You were asking if abortion is ever allowable because it is a sin, right?


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 21, 2010)

I think the bigger question is whether abortion is really sin.  And that gets into when life begins: at conception or once the fetus is viable.  

I don't know about whether it is allowable.  It is an issue I just normally don't even think about.  Don't know why though.  We had a huge discussion about it in con law and I just tuned out.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

nathansgirl1908 said:


> I think the bigger question is whether abortion is really sin. And that gets into when life begins: at conception or once the fetus is viable.
> 
> I don't know about whether it is allowable. It is an issue I just normally don't even think about. Don't know why though. We had a huge discussion about it in con law and I just tuned out.


 
Although I am prochoice (not pro-abortion, but prochoice; each woman has to do what's right for her) I think it begins at conception. 

When you plant a seed and it begins to grow, it may not have blossomed yet, but does that mean it's not a plant?  

Only living things grow and if you stop a living thing from growing, you have in fact killed it.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> But how can you view one sin differently than another? You were asking if abortion is ever allowable because it is a sin, right?




I'm talking about medical complications. It might not be sinning to save the life of the mother.  That's why I'm not focusing on people who just don't want their child.  It's usually people who do want their children who lose them to save their own lives and that those people get a dispensation to abort whereas other would never.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> *I'm talking about medical complications. It might not be sinning to save the life of the mother.* That's why I'm not focusing on people who just don't want their child. It's usually people who do want their children who lose them to save their own lives.


 

I understand that. It would still be sinning, but I think it would be judged differently. Even if you kill someone in self defense, it doesn't change the fact that you murdered someone. Is it judged differently?  Absolutely.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> I understand that. It would still be sinning, but I think it would be judged differently. Even if you kill someone in self defense, it doesn't change the fact that you murdered someone. Is it judged differently?  Absolutely.



That's a good point - one could view abortion to save the life of the mother _*as*_ self-defense.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> *10-year old child was raped by her stepfather!!!!* I'm talking about is abortion ever wrong to save the life of a mother in danger medically?  Women die in child birth all the time. Some women die in the gestational period from complications. Her body is too young to have a baby.


I think you should have mentioned this in your original post because I did not know at all until Justkiya said something.  A 10-year-old getting raped and pregnant is a different issue than a 10-year-old having pre-marital sex and getting pregnant.


According to the Bible, abortion (terminating a life) would be wrong no matter what.  Period.

As far as what I think, I seriously don't know anymore because I've taken both stances before.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

nathansgirl1908 said:


> I think the bigger question is whether abortion is really sin. And that gets into when life begins: at conception or once the fetus is viable.
> 
> I don't know about whether it is allowable. It is an issue I just normally don't even think about. Don't know why though. We had a huge discussion about it in con law and I just tuned out.


Yeah because the actual word "abortion" is no where to be found in the Bible. Abortion is usually defined as termination of a life...then termination of a life is considered killing or murder...We see killing and murder as sins against God in the Bible, so then we have this on-going debate. I just think it's somewhat ironic how a Christian-based country legalizes abortion.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> That is the focus of the discussion. Not religion in general, not sinning and conceiving a child but medical complications of pregnancy and whether or not it is ever permissible.


Now come on! How can religion or sinning NOT be the focus when you posted this in the Christian Fellowship forum? 

The Bible doesn't say abortion is allowable. God didn't say "abort a developing child if you were pregnant from rape and are subject to medical complications" ...did He?


----------



## cutiebe2 (Apr 21, 2010)

My thinking is that for any christian woman, it would be a hard pill to swallow for someone to look you in the eye and tell you that while continuing with this pregnancy is fatal, its what you have to do because abortion in a sin. Some women know before that they should't have children because of their medical condition, others develop conditions during pregnancy that are life threatening. 

I further don't understand because while the fetus is a life, especially after a certain point in the pregnancy, its still dependent on the mother. If the mother's body cannot sustain the pregnancy past, for example, the 7th month, both mother and child will die. And so essentially two lives will be lost, all so we can say no one sinned.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Yeah because the actual word "abortion" is no where to be found in the Bible. Abortion is usually defined as termination of a life...then termination of a life is considered killing or murder...We see killing and murder as sins against God in the Bible, so then we have this on-going debate. *I just think it's somewhat ironic how a Christian-based country legalizes abortion.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> I think the fact that this country is comprised of immigrants removes the irony, because each group of people that migrates to America (*from around the world*) brings a different set of values and beliefs.
> 
> I think it's unrealistic for everyone in America to share Christian values.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

cutiebe2 said:


> My thinking is that for any christian woman, it would be a hard pill to swallow for someone to look you in the eye and tell you that while continuing with this pregnancy is fatal, its what you have to do because abortion in a sin. Some women know before that they should't have children because of their medical condition, others develop conditions during pregnancy that are life threatening.
> 
> I further don't understand because while the fetus is a life, especially after a certain point in the pregnancy, its still dependent on the mother. If the mother's body cannot sustain the pregnancy past, for example, the 7th month, *both mother and child will die. And so essentially two lives will be lost, all so we can say no one sinned*.


 But the thing is.... abortion DOES NOT ALWAYS save the mother's life either... she can be in danger both ways...giving birth or getting an abortion...they are both risk.

Besides wondering, "Can you imagine a pregnant 10-year-old having a baby?"

Why don't many people wonder, "Can you imagine a pregnant 10-year-old having an abortion!?"


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> I think the fact that this country is comprised of immigrants removes the irony, because each group of people that migrates to America (*from around the world*) brings a different set of values and beliefs.
> 
> *I think it's unrealistic for everyone in America to share Christian values*.


I agree. I think it's unrealistic too. But so many people claim that America is based on Christian values and beliefs when it really isn't.


----------



## cutiebe2 (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> But the thing is.... abortion DOES NOT ALWAYS save the mother's life either... she can be in danger both ways...giving birth or getting an abortion...they are both risk.
> 
> Besides wondering, "Can you imagine a pregnant 10-year-old having a baby?"
> 
> Why don't many people wonder, "Can you imagine a pregnant 10-year-old having an abortion!?"



The abortion in this case is being thought of as a medical procedure (for the mother, of course more than that for the child) that is in the best interest of her life. I have never heard of a procedure, medical or not, that would guarentee a perfect outcome. But as will anything that pertains to health, you have to try and make the best decision you can based on your current knowledge. If you current knowledge is that pregnancy is fatal or extremely life threatening, then you have to go off of that information.

In terms of the 10 year old, I agree that its hard to imagine her having an abortion. But I think most people weigh more heavily the impact of pregnancy becuase of its long duration, subsequent prodcution of a child that will have to be raised etc.. As someone said in the other thread abortions can be done under anesthsia with little pain...dont know much about that just going off of what was said


----------



## Reminiscing (Apr 21, 2010)

I just want to share that my mother experienced this situation of having to choose to save her own life or save her baby's life.  She was very sick with my older sister throughout her pregnancy and her doctor begged her to have an abortion.  He told her that she may live to deliver the baby but she would die shortly after.  My mother is very strong in her Christian beliefs and she chose not to abort my sister.  She told God that if he is powerful enough to take her through the pregnancy then he is powerful enough to take her safely through the delivery and if for some reason He saw fit that she should die and not live to raise her baby, then she trusts that he will provide a good home for her and a good life on earth without her mother.

The delivery was difficult and my sister's heartbeat did stop but my mother never stopped praying.  Today my sister is about to turn 31 and my mother is almost 60.  My sister is my very best friend and I am very thankful that my mother chose to have her.  I'm also grateful to God that he heard her prayer and fulfilled his promise of protection because if he didn't my mother would've passed and I wouldn't be here today.  

Rather than focusing on right and wrong, sometimes we should just have faith that prayer changes thing.  I know there's a risk in doing that but isn't that what faith is all about?  I once read somewhere that "Faith is the daring of the soul to go further for something it cannot see."  Faith is not supposed to be easy, but the outcome can certainly be a blessing!


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> I understand that. It would still be sinning, but I think it would be judged differently. Even if you kill someone in self defense, it doesn't change the fact that you* murdered* someone. Is it judged differently?  Absolutely.




Murder differs from killing concerning intent. I can see your point.  But if it does become self-defense, then it's no longer a sin.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> I think you should have mentioned this in your original post because I did not know at all until Justkiya said something.  A 10-year-old getting raped and pregnant is a different issue than a 10-year-old having pre-marital sex and getting pregnant.
> 
> 
> According to the Bible, abortion (terminating a life) would be wrong no matter what.  Period.
> ...




It's all over the international news.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Now come on! How can religion or sinning NOT be the focus when you posted this in the Christian Fellowship forum?
> 
> The Bible doesn't say abortion is allowable. God didn't say "abort a developing child if you were pregnant from rape and are subject to medical complications" ...did He?




Quadruple sigh and please stop trying to hijack this thread.    It's a serious issue.  Granted, you weren't aware of this blowup story on international news that's being talked about.  I give you that.  However, can we get back to the point of it?  I'm not talking about people who abort out of inconvenience, I'm talking about self-defense medical prevention.  It's not concerning any supposed sin of how one conceived, simply whether ABORTION ITSELF is allowable under the umbrella of christian theology in those circumstances.  You understand the question, we all understand the question.  Can you please allow me the courtesy of discussing this topic in the manner presented?  Please.  But feel free to start another thread concerning those other issues that are related, just not the topic in this thread.  I hope you understand.  I'm not mad at you.

Now, concerning this and quite a few other issues, the bible is surprisingly silent about them and I believe that God allowed this for interpretation for all the generations.  We come to conclusions and further down the road, change our perceptions and beliefs of what the scriptures are saying.  This particular issue is not presented in scripture cut and dry.  I can think of a few others as well.  So, what are you saying?  Abortion is allowable in THIS circumstance or not?


----------



## Aviah (Apr 21, 2010)

The answer as far as I know is:
I don't know.
I don't think it's okay in God's eyes but I believe forgiveness is available.
Tough cookie.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

Does the Bible touch on self-defense, at all? Outside of the context of war, that is, which the Bible seems to have no reservations about. 
Hrm. Could you present it in a manner that it is a bodily war between two individuals? 

Because killing isn't _*always*_ a sin, is it? I know in the Quran, it sure as heck isn't, and unless the Crusades were totally based in politics and not in Faith, it seems the Bible might hold some of the same feelings. 

So, if killing isn't a sin - under certain circumstances - would aborting for the sake of the mothers life fall into one of those buckets?


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

I know that it does in the interpretation of it in tradition.  It was required to attempt to preserve your life.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

cutiebe2 said:


> The abortion in this case is being thought of as a medical procedure (for the mother, of course more than that for the child) that is in the best interest of her life. I have never heard of a procedure, medical or not, that would guarentee a perfect outcome. But as will anything that pertains to health, you have to try and make the best decision you can based on your current knowledge. *If you current knowledge is that pregnancy is fatal or extremely life threatening, then you have to go off of that information.*
> 
> In terms of the 10 year old, I agree that its hard to imagine her having an abortion. But I think most people weigh more heavily the impact of pregnancy becuase of its long duration, subsequent prodcution of a child that will have to be raised etc.. As someone said in the other thread abortions can be done under anesthsia with little pain...dont know much about that just going off of what was said


But how come current knowledge isn't abortion is fatal and extremely life threatening too!?

Why is abortion always seen as the "best interest" decision rather than giving birth?

Are you suggesting that abortion is more successful than pregnancy overall?

If so, give me the statistics?

The 10 year old has survived 4 months of the pregnancy so far with no problem. Why are people always looking for reasons like the age of the mother to end the pregnancy?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> It's all over the international news.


So. Just because it's all over international news doesn't mean every single person in the world is watching international news or even knows about this 10-year-old girl getting raped. I surely didn't know. Geez.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

Revenons aux moutons....permissible in the case of saving the life of the mother!!!   Pooh, I'm about to come and give you one of dese:gunner7:    Don't go too far off tangent.  I need to know this for a reason, c'mon nah.  

Has anyone known personally of those in this situation? Sidenote:  it would have been very interesting to know what the Duggars thought of this situation because her pregnancy turned dangerous and would have killed her if they had not delivered.  He was so upset and luckily, they were far enough along for a caesarean but I wonder what they would have concluded if not?   I do know of a case that was ectopic and they feared the mother would die but she wouldn't get surgery.  Luckily, she and the baby made it.  She definitely thought aborting in that case was sin.  I've also known of others who got the okay from their ministers to abort to preserve the mothers' lives.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> I know that it does in the interpretation of it in tradition.  It was required to attempt to preserve your life.



 Interesting. So, self-preservation is a valid reason to kill, according to the interpetations? :scratchch Hrm. VERY gray area. 

Pooh - the reason her age matters is largely because of her physical size. I'm assuming she is your standard sized non-American, poverty-raised 10 y/o - which means that she's very petite, and her bones are most likely still forming. At 4 months, she most likely LOOKS like she's about 8 months, because the additional size of her uterus plus the baby has no place to go but out. 
Add to that the fact that pregnancy can put a severe physical and nutritional strain on a woman's body - yes, this pregnancy CAN be life-threatening simply because of the size of her body and her age. I pray that they are planning on an very early C-section (32 weeks, or so).


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Quadruple sigh and please stop trying to hijack this thread.  It's a serious issue. Granted, you weren't aware of this blowup story on international news that's being talked about. I give you that. However, can we get back to the point of it? I'm not talking about people who abort out of inconvenience, I'm talking about self-defense medical prevention. It's not concerning any supposed sin of how one conceived, simply whether ABORTION ITSELF is allowable under the umbrella of christian theology in those circumstances. You understand the question, we all understand the question. Can you please allow me the courtesy of discussing this topic in the manner presented? Please. But feel free to start another thread concerning those other issues that are related, just not the topic in this thread. I hope you understand. I'm not mad at you.
> 
> Now, concerning this and quite a few other issues, the bible is surprisingly silent about them and I believe that God allowed this for interpretation for all the generations. We come to conclusions and further down the road, change our perceptions and beliefs of what the scriptures are saying. This particular issue is not presented in scripture cut and dry. I can think of a few others as well. So, what are you saying? Abortion is allowable in THIS circumstance or not?


It's funny how someone with a different view is considered a thread hijacker.  I am in no way trying to steal, rob, or seize your thread...

And I'm not talking about people who abort out of convenience either. I'm talking about this topic at hand.  

So now you're saying abortion is a self-defense medical prevention procedure? 

Oh wow! What else will people, especially Christians, come up with to validate their actions?

But anyway, you're right about the issue of abortion is not cut and dry in the Bible. I believe that's why there are so many different stances on it.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> Interesting. So, self-preservation is a valid reason to kill, according to the interpetations? :scratchch Hrm. VERY gray area.
> 
> Pooh - the reason her age matters is largely because of her physical size. I'm assuming she is your standard sized non-American, poverty-raised 10 y/o - which means that she's very petite, and her bones are most likely still forming. At 4 months, she most likely LOOKS like she's about 8 months, because the additional size of her uterus plus the baby has no place to go but out.
> Add to that the fact that pregnancy can put a severe physical and nutritional strain on a woman's body - yes, this pregnancy CAN be life-threatening simply because of the size of her body and her age. I pray that they are planning on an very early C-section (32 weeks, or so).



Yes, it is.  http://ohr.edu/yhiy/article.php/3768   Now, I realize that somebody here is going to go, Sanhedrin?    But it's the mother faith of christianity.  I'm thinking this, though, methodists, lutherans, catholics, orthodox, baptists, pentecostals etc., will mostly likely view this issue differently.  I'm most thinking that evangelicals and pentecostals will definitely be against it.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> Interesting. So, self-preservation is a valid reason to kill, according to the interpetations? :scratchch Hrm. VERY gray area.
> 
> *Pooh - the reason her age matters is largely because of her physical size. I'm assuming she is your standard sized non-American, poverty-raised 10 y/o - which means that she's very petite, and her bones are most likely still forming. At 4 months, she most likely LOOKS like she's about 8 months, because the additional size of her uterus plus the baby has no place to go but out. *
> *Add to that the fact that pregnancy can put a severe physical and nutritional strain on a woman's body - yes, this pregnancy CAN be life-threatening simply because of the size of her body and her age. I pray that they are planning on an very early C-section (32 weeks, or so).*


I realize this. I guess most people are suggesting that abortion will do less harm to the girl's body than giving birth?


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> It's funny how someone with a different view is considered a thread hijacker.  I am in no way trying to steal, rob, or seize your thread...
> 
> And I'm not talking about people who abort out of convenience either. I'm talking about this topic at hand.
> 
> ...



NOOOOOO!!!  I just am asking you address the subject itself.  You are going off on a tangent mami!!!  Love you tho 

Well, I think it could be, self-defense.  What do you think???  Under no circumstances?  Then I'm wondering about self-defense itself, is it wrong then???


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

I don't believe killing is not a sin under certain circumstances.  I've never seen such interpretations and I'm interested in learning more about them. 

CreoleNat, are there any scriptures that you can share with us that support that belief? I am not challenging you, but I want to know because it would possibly change my a sin is a sin mentality.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Yes, it is.  http://ohr.edu/yhiy/article.php/3768   Now, I realize that somebody here is going to go, Sanhedrin?    But it's the mother faith of christianity.  I'm thinking this, though, methodists, lutherans, catholics, orthodox, baptists, pentecostals etc., will mostly likely view this issue differently.  I'm most thinking that evangelicals and pentecostals will definitely be against it.



 Interesting. I always find it - interesting - that Christians go back to the OT so often.... but I suspect me understanding that would be another thread. 

But that 'preemptive strike' line would be a perfect match for the idea of abortion to save the life of the mother.  

Hrm. The more 'fundamental' (for lack of a better word) Christians would most likely stick to the 'It's in God's Hands whether the mother and child lived or died' and the less 'orthodox' Christians might consider stepping in. 

Very interesting.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> I don't believe killing is not a sin under certain circumstances.  I've never seen such interpretations and I'm interested in learning more about them.
> 
> CreoleNat, are there any scriptures that you can share with us that support that belief? I am not challenging you, but I want to know because it would possibly change my a sin is a sin mentality.



No, but that's what I'm trying to do next because I was just going to suggest we get some up in here lol.  If anybody knows of some, please post them.

EDIT:


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Revenons aux moutons....*permissible in the case of saving the life of the mother!!! *Pooh, I'm about to come and give you one of dese:gunner7:  Don't go too far off tangent. I need to know this for a reason, c'mon nah.
> 
> Has anyone known personally of those in this situation? Sidenote: it would have been very interesting to know what the Duggars thought of this situation because her pregnancy turned dangerous and would have killed her if they had not delivered. He was so upset and luckily, they were far enough along for a caesarean but I wonder what they would have concluded if not? I do know of a case that was ectopic and they feared the mother would die but she wouldn't get surgery. Luckily, she and the baby made it. She definitely thought aborting in that case was sin. I've also known of others who got the okay from their ministers to abort to preserve the mothers' lives.


Trust me, I'm not trying to go far off tangent. 

About the bolded in your above quote.... permissible by who? 

You ask "Is abortion ever allowable?"  Allowable by who?

Since I saw you posted in the Christian thread, I assumed you were talking about God. Are you talking about being permissible by mothers? Christians? Pro-lifers? Family members? Nature? Who?


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> I realize this. I guess most people are suggesting that abortion will do less harm to the girl's body than giving birth?



 See, the issue is largely about the size of a full term uterus and child, and the stress placed on the body by it. One example is the stress placed on the liver - full grown women have to deal with pre-eclampsia and toxemia because their livers can't handle the additional work of pregnancy - her liver is significantly smaller, which makes her risk even higher. If they took the baby early - whether it could survive outside of the womb or not - all of that stress would be removed from her body. 

At this stage, I suspect it wouldn't even be a 'vaginal' abortion - they might have to more or less give her a section, as the baby might be too big to fit through her pelvis already. 

Surgery is usually less stressful to a childs body than pregnancy is.  

*sigh*


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> Does the Bible touch on self-defense, at all? Outside of the context of war, that is, which the Bible seems to have no reservations about.
> Hrm. Could you present it in a manner that it is a bodily war between two individuals?
> 
> Because killing isn't _*always*_ a sin, is it? I know in the Quran, it sure as heck isn't, and unless the Crusades were totally based in politics and not in Faith, it seems the Bible might hold some of the same feelings.
> ...


 


CreoleNat said:


> I know that it does in the interpretation of it in tradition. It was required to attempt to preserve your life.


 


I couldn't find and that supported the interpretation you mentioned.



Gensis 9:5 
*5*And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man.

Romans 13:9
*9*For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word. "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Exodus 20:13 *13*(A) "You shall not murder








CreoleNat said:


> No, but that's what I'm trying to do next because I was just going to suggest we get some up in here lol. If anybody knows of some, please post them.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> I couldn't find and that supported the interpretation you mentioned.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hrm. I remember reading someplace - and y'all know how varied my reading is, so I don't know if this is an 'accepted' interpretation - that 'murder' did _*not*_ equal killing in the original Hebrew. Murder was basically = killing a man of your tribe.  Men of other tribes were not protected, nor were women and children. Killing a woman or a child was on the same level as killing a cow or a sheep or stealing dates - a crime against _*property*_ of another man in your tribe, not a crime against another 'person'.  

Is this an accepted Christian interpretation/have any of you heard something like this?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> I couldn't find and that supported the interpretation you mentioned.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I couldn't find any either supporting killing is not a sin under certain circumstances...  

Alot of people see self-defense as "it's okay that I killed him because he tried to kill me!" The Bible actually speaks against this:

*Matthew 5:39 (New International Version)*
*39*But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

*Romans 12:17 (New International Version)*
*17*Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> Hrm. I remember reading someplace - and y'all know how varied my reading is, so I don't know if this is an 'accepted' interpretation - that 'murder' did _*not*_ equal killing in the original Hebrew. Murder was basically = killing a man of your tribe.  *Men of other tribes were not protected, nor were women and children. Killing a woman or a child was on the same level as killing a cow or a sheep - a crime against property of another man in your tribe, not a crime against another 'person'.*
> 
> Is this an accepted Christian interpretation/have any of you heard something like this?


 

 It sounds like a very interesting concept. So would the modern day equivalent to that be not murdering anyone outside of your family? 

I hope not.  We would all be fair game. 

I'm just kidding. 

Seriously, wouldn't the baby be considered to be a part of the same tribe as the mother, because I noticed you said murder= killing someone in your own tribe?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> No, but that's what I'm trying to do next because I was just going to suggest we get some up in here lol. If anybody knows of some, please post them.


Oh, wait a min! I think I found a passage supporting your notion:

*Exodus 22:2-3 (New International Version)*

*"If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; but if it happens after sunrise, he is guilty of bloodshed. "A thief must certainly make restitution, but if he has nothing, he must be sold to pay for his theft.*


So as long as you kill the person before sunrise, then it's okay.  Sorry, couldn't help it...


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Oh, wait a min! I think I found a passage supporting your notion:
> 
> *Exodus 22:2-3 (New International Version)*
> 
> ...


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> Hrm. I remember reading someplace - and y'all know how varied my reading is, so I don't know if this is an 'accepted' interpretation - that 'murder' did _*not*_ equal killing in the original Hebrew. Murder was basically = killing a man of your tribe.  Men of other tribes were not protected, nor were women and children. Killing a woman or a child was on the same level as killing a cow or a sheep or stealing dates - a crime against _*property*_ of another man in your tribe, not a crime against another 'person'.
> 
> Is this an accepted Christian interpretation/have any of you heard something like this?


I found this passage from gotquestions.org. It somewhat explains the difference between murder and killing...


*Question: "Why is "You shall not murder" in the Ten Commandments?"

Answer: *Simply stated, the sixth of the Ten Commandments forbids the unjustified taking of a human life. However, the commandment itself has a couple of interesting elements that bear mentioning. First and foremost, different Bible translations give the appearance of different meanings and there is potential for misunderstanding the actual meaning of the verse. Second, man was never created for the act of murdering another and as such there needs to be an explanation for such a violent and final act towards another human being. Third, because of the translational challenge, we need to understand the difference between “murder” and “killing.” And last but not least, how does God view murder? To God, murder is not just physical in nature but also the condition of one’s heart towards another.

There are two different Hebrew words (_ratsakh, mut_) and two Greek words (_phoneuo, apokteino_) for “murder / killing”. One means “to put to death,” and the other means “to murder.” The latter one is the one prohibited by the Ten Commandments, not the former. In fact, _ratsakh_ has a broader definition than the English word “murder.” _Ratsakh_ also covers deaths due to carelessness or neglect but is never used when describing the killing during wartime. That is why most modern translations render the sixth commandment “You shall not murder” rather than “You shall not kill.” However, a very large issue can arise depending on which translation one studies. The ever popular King James Version renders the verse as “Thou shalt not kill,” therefore opening the door to misinterpreting the verse altogether. If the intended meaning of “Thou shalt not kill” was just that—no killing—it would render all of the God-endorsed bloodletting done by nation of Israel as a violation of God’s own commandment (Deuteronomy 20). But God does not break His own commandments, so clearly the verse does not call for a complete moratorium on the taking of another human life.

Why does man murder? We know that we were created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27) and as such we were made to live in harmony with God and with our fellow man. This harmony became impossible once sin entered into the picture (Genesis 3). With sin came the propensity of acting violently against one another. Anger, jealousy, pride and hatred can fuel man’s evil bent towards life-ending aggression. The first recorded act of murder was when Cain killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:8). From that moment on, taking the life of another has been commonplace and in some circles of society, acceptable. However, to God every life is important, and since God knew that man was sinful and evil and had become “lawless,” He enacted guidelines that would seek to modify man’s behavior (1 John 3:4). 

So, is there a difference between murder and killing? First, it is important to note that not all killing is wrong. For instance, the apostle Paul talks about the right of the state to take the lives of evildoers (Romans 13:1-7). This relates to what is commonly referred to as capital punishment. If one breaks a law and commits murder, in most countries there are consequences for that action. In some cases this requires the life of the perpetrator and a suitable means of putting one to death is chosen and administered (Matthew 5:21; Exodus 21:14). Another instance of acceptable “killing” is that which is done during times of war and at the command of superiors. There were quite a few instances in Scripture where God endorsed and allowed the taking of other lives (1 Samuel 11; Judges 6–7). And finally, although far from acceptable, manslaughter is yet another form of killing someone. This unintentional act apparently happened so often in biblical times that cities of refuge were designated for the manslayer to seek refuge in (Exodus 21:13; Joshua 20). Again, it was never God’s intent to have to use such a drastic measure as taking one’s life to rectify a situation. So, God does make exceptions for the taking of another’s life as long as it lines up with His will. However, premeditated murder of an individual is never God’s will. 

What is murder in God’s eyes? From the human perspective, murder is the physical act of taking another’s life. However, we also must consider that God defines murder as _any thought or feeling of deep seated hatred or malice against another person_. In other words it is more than just a physical act that constitutes murder to God who tells us that “Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15 ESV). When we harbor hatred in our hearts for another, we have committed the sin of murder in God’s eyes. The disdain towards another person never has to be demonstrated outwardly because God looks upon the heart for the truth (1 Samuel 16:7; Matthew 15:19). As Christians and as human beings we know that unjustified killing is wrong. God’s Word is very clear on this point: “You shall not murder.” And what God says we must obey or we face the consequences on judgment day.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> It sounds like a very interesting concept. So would the modern day equivalent to that be not murdering anyone outside of your family?
> 
> I hope not.  We would all be fair game.
> 
> ...



 _*Technically*_, it would be to not kill any *male* of your family. erplexed Women and children are the *property* of the man, and if he decided to sacrifice his child (Abraham, anyone?) for the benefit of his family unit, he could.  

If you think about it, this concept (killing a woman/child for the sake of the family) ties directly into the concept of modern day 'honor killings' which is a descendant of the cultures who wrote the Bible.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> _*Technically*_, it would be to not kill any *male* of your family. erplexed Women and children are the *property* of the man, and if he decided to sacrifice his child *(Abraham, anyone?)* for the benefit of his family unit, he could.
> 
> If you think about it, this concept (killing a woman/child for the sake of the family) ties directly into the concept of modern day 'honor killings' which is a descendant of the cultures who wrote the Bible.


 
That's true and a good example, but at that time Jesus had not made the ultimate sacrifice, so there's no excuse for these so called honor killings. 
I SMH every time I hear about one.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> Interesting. I always find it - interesting - t*hat Christians go back to the OT so often*.... but I suspect me understanding that would be another thread.
> 
> But that 'preemptive strike' line would be a perfect match for the idea of abortion to save the life of the mother.
> 
> ...



I know of people who don't comprehend that their faith was first a Jewish sect. erplexed  Jesus said He didn't come to change any punctuation, zilch, nada of the Law revealed at Sinai.  In my opinion, it's not old.


----------



## JustKiya (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> That's true and a good example, but at that time Jesus had not made the ultimate sacrifice, so there's no excuse for these so called honor killings.
> I SMH every time I hear about one.



Okay - this brings that question back up - so I'm gonna ask it, and I'd_* love *_to hear responses in PM's to not take the thread off track, if anyone is willing to explain it to me/talk me through it. 

As I understand it, Jesus came and fulfilled the Law, right? So, the sacrifices, and other things that were required of the Jews are not required of the Christians, right? Because they (the Christians) aren't 'under' that law anymore, right?
So, why do Christians pull 'law' from the Old Testament? Isn't the rules in there more or less null and void because Jesus fulfilled the obligations that made God create those rules? 

ETA: 



CreoleNat said:


> I know of people who don't comprehend that their faith was first a Jewish sect. erplexed  Jesus said He didn't come to change any punctuation, zilch, nada of the Law revealed at Sinai.  In my opinion, it's not old.



 Ahhhhhhhh. I understood it completely different - that his coming 'closed' the book on those Laws, so to speak. Hrm. 

Thank you.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

I got so many responses before I was ready to post and it might be missed in the previous one if I edit it so here it is (and I have to leave for awhile, bummer, but I'll be back!!!!)

I understand the stance represented below to mean that they are protecting and promoting God's kingdom - that there are instances where one would have to defend physically, possibly resulting in death of another.  

Matthew  5:39 Resist not evil. Jesus does not forbid the judicial application of the law, but personal revenge, such as was common among the Jews. Instead of turning upon those who injure us, and becoming a party to personal broils, it is the duty of Christians to suffer meekly.

Turn to him the other. This must be the Christian spirit, the great law of love, which endureth all things (1Co 13:7). This is not a code to be slavishly observed in the letter, but its spirit must always be preserved. For the application, see Joh 18:22 Ac 23:3. http://bible.cc/matthew/5-39.htm

Gen. 14:13-16

13 One who had escaped came and reported this to Abram the Hebrew. Now Abram was living near the great trees of Mamre the Amorite, a brother [a] of Eshcol and Aner, all of whom were allied with Abram. 14 When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the 318 trained men born in his household and went in pursuit as far as Dan. 15 During the night Abram divided his men to attack them and he routed them, pursuing them as far as Hobah, north of Damascus. 16 He recovered all the goods and brought back his relative Lot and his possessions, together with the women and the other people.

 17 After Abram returned from defeating Kedorlaomer and the kings allied with him, the king of Sodom came out to meet him in the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the King's Valley).

 18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem * brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, 19 and he blessed Abram, saying,
       "Blessed be Abram by God Most High,
       Creator [c] of heaven and earth.

 20 And blessed be [d] God Most High,
       who delivered your enemies into your hand."
      Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything.

 21 The king of Sodom said to Abram, "Give me the people and keep the goods for yourself."

 22 But Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I have raised my hand to the LORD, God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth, and have taken an oath 23 that I will accept nothing belonging to you, not even a thread or the thong of a sandal, so that you will never be able to say, 'I made Abram rich.' 24 I will accept nothing but what my men have eaten and the share that belongs to the men who went with me—to Aner, Eshcol and Mamre. Let them have their share."


Ex. 17:8-13  

8 The Amalekites came and attacked the Israelites at Rephidim. 9 Moses said to Joshua, "Choose some of our men and go out to fight the Amalekites. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hands."

 10 So Joshua fought the Amalekites as Moses had ordered, and Moses, Aaron and Hur went to the top of the hill. 11 As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were winning, but whenever he lowered his hands, the Amalekites were winning. 12 When Moses' hands grew tired, they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. Aaron and Hur held his hands up—one on one side, one on the other—so that his hands remained steady till sunset. 13 So Joshua overcame the Amalekite army with the sword.

Romans 12:18  

 If possible, so far  as it depends on you, be at peace with all men. (that there are times when you have to take up arms in defense?)

Jeremiah 6:14  14 

They dress the wound of my people as though it were not serious.
'Peace, peace,' they say,  when there is no peace. ( I understood this one to mean that you have to make situations right)*


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Trust me, I'm not trying to go far off tangent.
> 
> About the bolded in your above quote.... permissible by who?
> 
> ...



Yes, ultimately by God  But if you didn't get a dispensation, would you be considered excommunicated, non-christian, a very bad example or non-observant???  That kind of thing.  Thanks for bringing that up because I realize my own faith differs from the majority of those here.  I hadn't thought of it that way.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> *I couldn't find and that supported the interpretation you mentioned.*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry, it was Jewish law.  Since I quote so many "OT" scriptures, I wanted to include the Talmud and it's elaboration of topics/laws etc.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

I'm running to the doctor and have garlic hummus spilled on my sweater erplexed but I'll come lback in a few and look all this up.  Where did you get it?  Can you provide the url for my collection?  This is what I meant and I've always wondered about war and whether one committed mortal sin or not or whether the stain of murder remains (but another topic, I know).




Poohbear said:


> I found this passage from gotquestions.org. It somewhat explains the difference between murder and killing...
> 
> 
> *Question: "Why is "You shall not murder" in the Ten Commandments?"
> ...


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

What happened to the "thanks?"


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> Okay - this brings that question back up - so I'm gonna ask it, and I'd_* love *_to hear responses in PM's to not take the thread off track, if anyone is willing to explain it to me/talk me through it.
> 
> As I understand it, Jesus came and fulfilled the Law, right? So, the sacrifices, and other things that were required of the Jews are not required of the Christians, right? Because they (the Christians) aren't 'under' that law anymore, right?
> So, why do Christians pull 'law' from the Old Testament? Isn't the rules in there more or less null and void because Jesus fulfilled the obligations that made God create those rules?


Wow JustKiya. These are some of my questions that've been circulating in my head.

After studying the Bible for myself, I feel like the sacrifices and things that were required of the Jews should not be required of Christians today because they are not under the Law anymore. For instance, not eating meat. I believe Jesus came to fulfill the Law.

I wonder why Christians pull Law from the Old Testament as well, especially tithing. But there are some New Testament laws that raise an eyebrow too such as "women should not adorn themselves with jewelry or braided hair" and "women should remain silent and should not teach or preach over the authority of a man."

And I found this passage to be quite interesting too. Jesus says this:

*Matthew 5:21-22*
_*21*Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: _
_ *22*But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire._ 

Is Jesus suggesting that we are no longer in danger of judgment if we kill someone?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> I'm running to the doctor and have garlic hummus spilled on my sweater erplexed but I'll come lback in a few and look all this up. Where did you get it? Can you provide the url for my collection? This is what I meant and I've always wondered about war and whether one committed mortal sin or not or whether the stain of murder remains (but another topic, I know).


Here's the link: http://www.gotquestions.org/you-shall-not-murder.html


----------



## Renovating (Apr 21, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Wow JustKiya. These are some of my questions that've been circulating in my head.
> 
> After studying the Bible for myself, I feel like the sacrifices and things that were required of the Jews should not be required of Christians today because they are not under the Law anymore. For instance, not eating meat. I believe Jesus came to fulfill the Law.
> 
> ...


 

I don't think so. I think that scripture is advising against the sin hierarchy by stating some are  putting emphasis on the sin of killing, while ignoring the other ways one can be sentenced to eternity in hell (being angry with your "brother" and not loving your neighbor).


----------



## CoilyFields (Apr 21, 2010)

I believe that abortion is a sin. All pregnancies should be carried out to term until such time as it becomes a life or death issue for child/mother and mom must choose (I do NOT mean that thinking that in the FUTURE it MAY be a life or death issue).

This keeps sounding in my mind...she was developed enough to get pregnant.  I know nowadays we dont condone marriage and pregnancy at young ages but I have to say that our bodies do determine completely on their own when it is physically mature enough to concieve...this cant be discounted.  

So while my heart absolutely goes out to this little girl, and I totally acknowledge that she is a high risk pregnancy...i do believe that a pre-emptive strike is abortion.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 21, 2010)

CoilyFields said:


> I believe that abortion is a sin. All pregnancies should be carried out to term until such time as it becomes a life or death issue for child/mother and mom must choose (I do NOT mean that thinking that in the FUTURE it MAY be a life or death issue).
> 
> This keeps sounding in my mind...she was developed enough to get pregnant.  I know nowadays we dont condone marriage and pregnancy at young ages but I have to say that our bodies do determine completely on their own when it is physically mature enough to concieve...this cant be discounted.
> 
> So while my heart absolutely goes out to this little girl, and I totally acknowledge that she is a high risk pregnancy...i do believe that a pre-emptive strike is abortion.



To conceive because there is menstruation but not mature enough to carry.  There are 7 year old children who menstruate.  Fully mature women do die in giving birth.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 21, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> To conceive because there is menstruation but not mature enough to carry. There are 7 year old children who menstruate. Fully mature women do die in giving birth.


I thought once a girl has their menstrual cycle, that's when their bodies are mature enough to conceive and carry. Isn't menstruation the beginning of puberty? If this is not true, what is the "mature age" for a woman to be able to carry out a full term pregnancy? And who's to say your age is a factor in maturity? If age isn't the factor, then how should a woman's body be built in order to carry a pregnancy? There are some women who are in their 20's who have bodies like preteens, so should they just up and have abortions because of their body composition? Just throwing out questions for thought here...


----------



## NitaChantell (Apr 21, 2010)

To be quite honest, this is all foolery. Killing is a sin. It doesn't matter if you got raped, or if you may die if you decide to have a child. Didn't Jesus die for us? She should have the baby. Regardless. If she dies, that was in God's plan...and by no means is abortion a self defense tactic. We were commanded to turn the other cheek if someone slaps us...that throws self defense out the window. Sin is sin. Yes, God will forgive her, but can't that be said about all sins? "Stealing is a sin, but God will forgive you.", so...just because we'll be forgiven doesn't mean we should sin. & in this case, that's just selfish. Have faith.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 21, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> Although I am prochoice (not pro-abortion, but prochoice; each woman has to do what's right for her) I think it begins at conception.
> 
> When you plant a seed and it begins to grow, it may not have blossomed yet, but does that mean it's not a plant?
> 
> .



No, it isn't a plant in my opinion.

I believe that life begins somewhere between conception and viability. But I definitely don't think it begins at conception.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 21, 2010)

Reminiscing said:


> I just want to share that my mother experienced this situation of having to choose to save her own life or save her baby's life.  She was very sick with my older sister throughout her pregnancy and her doctor begged her to have an abortion.  He told her that she may live to deliver the baby but she would die shortly after.  My mother is very strong in her Christian beliefs and she chose not to abort my sister.  She told God that if he is powerful enough to take her through the pregnancy then he is powerful enough to take her safely through the delivery and if for some reason He saw fit that she should die and not live to raise her baby, then she trusts that he will provide a good home for her and a good life on earth without her mother.
> 
> The delivery was difficult and my sister's heartbeat did stop but my mother never stopped praying.  Today my sister is about to turn 31 and my mother is almost 60.  My sister is my very best friend and I am very thankful that my mother chose to have her.  I'm also grateful to God that he heard her prayer and fulfilled his promise of protection because if he didn't my mother would've passed and I wouldn't be here today.
> 
> Rather than focusing on right and wrong, sometimes we should just have faith that prayer changes thing.  I know there's a risk in doing that but isn't that what faith is all about?  I once read somewhere that "Faith is the daring of the soul to go further for something it cannot see."  Faith is not supposed to be easy, but the outcome can certainly be a blessing!



Yes, prayer changes things, and we should all have faith, but I don't see how it is totally relevant to the topic.  In your mother's situation she WANTED the child.  I think this is more about when people DON'T want to keep the child for various reasons.  If someone wants to keep her baby, whether the doctors say it is dangerous or not, she should.  They aren't going to force her to abort.  Same with rape or being too young .


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 22, 2010)

I have no problem with abortion especially in the case of rape and incest.  No one is free from sin, especially these days as people pick and choose what they want to follow from the Bible.  Plus, the Bible does not clearly state where life begin, so all we can do is interject our own interpretation.  Either way God will make the final decision on judgment day, all we can do is live our life the best way we can.  

So would you all tell a woman with an ectopic pregnancy to keep the child, even though there is an overwhelming chance she will die and only a handful of ectopics that have been carried to term in recorded history?  If so, numerous women who are alive today would be dead.


----------



## Crackers Phinn (Apr 22, 2010)

NitaChantell said:


> To be quite honest, this is all foolery. Killing is a sin. It doesn't matter if you got raped, or if you may die if you decide to have a child. Didn't Jesus die for us? She should have the baby. Regardless. If she dies, that was in God's plan...and by no means is abortion a self defense tactic. We were commanded to turn the other cheek if someone slaps us...that throws self defense out the window. Sin is sin. Yes, God will forgive her, but can't that be said about all sins? "Stealing is a sin, but God will forgive you.", so...just because we'll be forgiven doesn't mean we should sin. & in this case, that's just selfish. Have faith.



Wow @ if you die at 10 yrs old from having your rapists baby, then oh well, musta been G-d's plan, sucks to be you. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm not the right demographic to answer the OP's question, but I hope that this child is able to get the help she needs physically and psychologically.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 22, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> I thought once a girl has their menstrual cycle, that's when their bodies are mature enough to conceive and carry. Isn't menstruation the beginning of puberty? If this is not true, what is the "mature age" for a woman to be able to carry out a full term pregnancy? And who's to say your age is a factor in maturity? If age isn't the factor, then how should a woman's body be built in order to carry a pregnancy? There are some women who are in their 20's who have bodies like preteens, *so should they just up and have abortions because of their body composition? Just throwing out questions for thought here.*..




Even gynecologists will tell you that 15-year-olds have difficulties.  The *TOPIC* is whether abortion is permissible in christianity if there is a serious medical condition that would be fatal to both mother and child.  For Pete's sake.  Please, start another thread.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 22, 2010)

NitaChantell said:


> To be quite honest, this is all foolery. Killing is a sin. It doesn't matter if you got raped, or if you may die if you decide to have a child. Didn't Jesus die for us? She should have the baby. Regardless. If she dies, that was in God's plan...and by no means is abortion a self defense tactic. We were commanded to turn the other cheek if someone slaps us...that throws self defense out the window. Sin is sin. Yes, God will forgive her, but can't that be said about all sins? "Stealing is a sin, but God will forgive you.", so...just because we'll be forgiven doesn't mean we should sin. & in this case, that's just selfish. Have faith.



Although I 100% disagree with your reasoning, I'm thanking you for providing an answer according to your comprehension of the  introduced topic.  I appreciate your actually responding to the question.  I should have put up a poll, darn it.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 22, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Even gynecologists will tell you that 15-year-olds have difficulties. The *TOPIC* is whether abortion is permissible in christianity if there is a serious medical condition that would be fatal to both mother and child. For Pete's sake. Please, start another thread.


Huh? I don't need to start another thread. I don't see how my last post was off topic. erplexed I was asking about when is a woman mature enough to carry a baby after you mentioned a 10-year-old's body isn't mature enough to carry a baby. Gynecologists will also say women over 20, 30, etc. can have difficulties too, not just 15 and under.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 22, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Huh? I don't need to start another thread. I don't see how my last post was off topic. erplexed I was asking about when is a woman mature enough to carry a baby after you mentioned a 10-year-old's body isn't mature enough to carry a baby. Gynecologists will also say women over 20, 30, etc. can have difficulties too, not just 15 and under.



Abortion is never cut and dry.  Neither is pregnancy.  Girls also have breasts but they will not produce milk until there has been a birth of a child.  We develop teeth early in age but those are not permanent and mature teeth.  We don't fully mature mentally until the early 20's yet, we all have brains.  

The younger a child, the more deadly a pregnancy because she has not fully developed.  Evidence of menstruation doesn't mean that her birth canal is mature enough nor that her abdomen is large enough to accommodate a growing fetus, without complicating her other internal organs.  There are a myriad of other problems that a 20-year-old would not likely have.  

So, simply, if a medical EXPERT determines that a medical condition with the *pregnancy will be fatal* (not necessarily based upon age but that age could be a factor), *if abortion as self-defense is permissible in christianity* according to the authorities in your own corner of the faith.


*My revised question is what is your church's stance, not your own personal interpretation, but your church leaders and doctrine?*  If you had such, would you be excluded or excommunicated if you had one under stated circumstances?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 22, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> *My revised question is what is your church's stance, not your own personal interpretation, but your church leaders and doctrine?* If you had such, would you be excluded or excommunicated if you had one under stated circumstances?


To answer your revised question, my church's stance would vary per person. By the way, my church is multi-cultural and non-denominational but holds closest to Southern Baptist doctrine. But anyway, I know the pastor (who happens to be my dad) would say absolutely no to this girl having an abortion and that the girl should go through with the pregnancy and attempt to give birth to child. However, other church leaders and members in my church might say yes to abortion since the girl was raped and she is young.  And no, no one would be excommunicated at my church if they had an abortion. If the church sees abortion as a sin, it's just as forgivable as any other sin committed by other people. Hope that answers your question and sticks to the topic you have presented.


----------



## CoilyFields (Apr 22, 2010)

spelmanlocks said:


> I have no problem with abortion especially in the case of rape and incest. No one is free from sin, especially these days as people pick and choose what they want to follow from the Bible. *Plus, the Bible does not clearly state where life begin, so all we can do is interject our own interpretation.* Either way God will make the final decision on judgment day, all we can do is live our life the best way we can.
> 
> So would you all tell a woman with an ectopic pregnancy to keep the child, even though there is an overwhelming chance she will die and only a handful of ectopics that have been carried to term in recorded history? If so, numerous women who are alive today would be dead.


 
There are a lot of modern topics that the Bible does not directly address...it obviously would be a neverending book if it addressed all topics for all times.  But what it does give is basic principles that can be applied to ALL topics.  We just have to take out our desires/opinions when looking for the answers.

Basic principles we know from the word of God: 

We know that God values life.  

We know that only God can create...so regardless of the circumstances under which a pregnancy occur...it can only be attributed to an act of God.

We know that God has said that children are a blessing and favor from Himself.

We know that in OT times there were severe consequences for causing a woman to miscarry her child...i.e. taking the life of an unborn child, even by accident.  

We have people in the Bible that were products of rape or incest, not only living but having fulfilled great things in their lives.

We also have a few circumstances where God refers to certain people while they were in their mothers womb (recognizing their humanity and validiting their personhood); Jeremiah, John the Baptist, and Jesus. 

What it doesnt specify is specific stages of pregnancy when referring to the aforementioned examples.

So when looking for whether abortion is right or wrong inthe bible...we have plenty of examples/principles that point us toward it being wrong...but I have yet to find ANY examples/principles pointing toward it being right. And I dont think its a good idea to try to find an in-between by saying something like this is permissible/allowable rather than right or wrong. We like to create gray areas but God doesnt have any.


----------



## topsyturvy86 (Apr 22, 2010)

I personally think abortion is allowable when the mothers life is in danger. If the mother dies, the fetus dies too, whearas if the fetus is taken out, the mother can live.
There is this scripture in the bible, Exodus 21:22-23

 "22If men contend with each other, and a pregnant woman [interfering] is hurt so that she has a miscarriage, yet no further damage follows, [the one who hurt her] shall surely be punished with a fine [paid] to the woman's husband, as much as the judges determine.

23But if any damage follows, then you shall give life for life"

This makes me think the life of a feutus is valuable, yes, but not as valuable as the life of the mother. When the life of the mother is taken, it's life for life but for the fetus, not necessarily so.


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 22, 2010)

CoilyFields said:


> There are a lot of modern topics that the Bible does not directly address...it obviously would be a neverending book if it addressed all topics for all times.  But what it does give is basic principles that can be applied to ALL topics.  We just have to take out our desires/opinions when looking for the answers.
> 
> Basic principles we know from the word of God:
> 
> ...



Again, this is just YOUR interpretation of the Bible and obviously you desire to read that the Bible says abortion is wrong, because it does not say whether it is wrong or right.  The Bible does not clearly say anything on abortion so all you can do is interject your opinion and interpretation of the Bible.  You say that God values life, well then if a mother is at risk of dying over pregnancy, is her life not also valued?  

I highly disagree with this also "*We know that only God can create...so regardless of the circumstances under which a pregnancy occur...it can only be attributed to an act of God*"   I'm sure rape and incest are not acts of God.  They are acts of the Devil.  And there are gray areas all throughout the Bible, that is why people come up with their own interpretations of the Bible.  I'm known to church hop and I've heard so many interpretations of things in the Bible.  I choose to follow what my heart tells me as you choose to follow what you think is right.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 22, 2010)

Here's a good article to read about Abortion and God's Word:

*Abortion and God's Word: **What Does The Bible Say about Abortion? *​ 
Jun 2, 2008 
*Francine Morrissette*​ 
_At the heart of the pro-life pro-choice debate lies this crucial question: What is the value of a human life and when does that life begin? The Bible's got answers. _
_













_
​
Worldwide, approximately 42 million abortions are performed each year; that's an astounding 115,000 abortions every day. According to the The Alan Guttmacher Institute, 22% of unborn children are aborted. Of those *42 million terminated pregnancies*, only 1% of abortions are due to rape or incest, 6% are performed because the pregnancy is a danger to the mother, and 93% of abortions are performed because having a baby is inconvenient for the mother or father.
Pro-choice supporters assert that abortion is about the mother's personal convenience and private rights. But to pro-life advocates abortion is a violation of the unborn child's right to live. On both sides the questions fly: Does life begin at conception? Is a fetus really a human being? Is all human life sacred or are some lives disposable? What value should be placed on a human life? Believe it or not, a 1,000+ year old book holds some answers to these modern questions.​ 
*When Does Life Begin?*​ 
According to Psalm 51:5 life begins at conception: “Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me” the psalmist laments. If one can be a sinner as soon as they are conceived, then they must be "alive" and possess a complete human nature at the time of conception. The psalmist continues: “...you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.” (Psalm 139:13-16) The image of being “knit together” suggests the intricate weaving together of body and soul; and a body plus a soul equals a life.​ 
*What Is the Value of an Unborn Person?*​ 
God plans for and cares about each person before He creates them: “I am your creator. You were in my care even before you were born” declares Isaiah 44:2. God creates every life with a plan: “You saw me before I was born and scheduled each day of my life before I began to breathe.”(Psalm 139:16)
God also promises to care for every life from conception to death: “I have carried you since before you were born; I have taken care of you from your birth. Even when you are old, I will be the same. I will take care of you. I made you and will take care of you.” (Isaiah 46:3-4) God gives every baby a plan, a purpose, and a promise to care for them from conception to death. What is the value of a human life? To God, every unborn person is priceless.​ 
*Abortion and Women's Rights*​ 
But don't people have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies? According to the Bible, just because abortion is available doesn't mean it is good. “Just because something is technically legal doesn't mean that it's spiritually appropriate,” Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6:12. Abortion isn’t good for one’s spiritual health, as it violates the Sixth Commandment, "Thou shall not kill." (Exodus 20:13)
There is currently no medical evidence to suggest that abortion is good for one’s physical health, either. In fact, medical evidence indicates that abortion is in fact harmful to the mother’s body, mind, and emotional state. Scientific evidence suggests that the *long-term effects of terminating* a child are worse than carrying it to term.
God's Word says: “Don’t fail to rescue those who are doomed to die.“ (Proverbs 24:11-12) With these words, God calls every Christian to support the causes which support the unborn and be a voice for the voiceless.​ 
Read more at Suite101: *Abortion and God's Word: What Does The Bible Say about Abortion?* *http://catholicism.suite101.com/article.cfm/god_on_the_value_of_a_human_life#ixzz0lr3f0RNA*​


----------



## Laela (Apr 22, 2010)

Yes, it does. 


"_The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘*Before I formed you in the womb* I     knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the     nations_’" (*Jeremiah 1:4-5*). 

"_For you created my inmost being; *you knit me together in my mother's womb*. I     praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know     that fully well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. *    When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed bod*y. All     the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be"_ *(Psalm 139:13-16*). 

I know what the gist of this thread is, but I wanted to address this: Because a pregnancy is _unwanted - no matter the circumstances - it _doesn't mean God didn't have a purpose for that seed. However, man does possess the power of Life and Death by his very tongue - Prov. 18:21. 

As for Ectopic pregnancies and other "high-risk" conditions, I believe that's a personal matter between a woman and God -- not the church, not anyone else. I've heard way too many testimonies from women at my church who were considered "too old" or had other medical complications and was told by doctors to abort but didn't and resulted in pregnancies. We cannot discount the Biblical examples of Faith concerning children via Sarah, Rachel, Leah, etc. There are lots of stories online that also underline that FAITH in God goes a long way in those situations. Here's such an article:

*My faith got me through my ectopic pregnancy, maybe this will reach others*


Shannon 
              3 Mar. 2009, 9:45 pm               
                  (1 mom has responded)                                        

                                I have a 3.5 yr. old son and a 9 mo. old daughter and still nursing my daughter. I had no idea I was pregnant again. I was spotting and had some cramping, but thought it was hypothyroidism (my mom and 2 sisters have it and besides the spotting I had all the symptoms). My husband and I were excited, but one day after I found out about the pregnancy I had such bad cramping I was crying. That was Thursday, February 19, 2009.
Later that night I was in the ER going through a laparoscopy surgery. My fallopian tube actually ruptured about 2 weeks prior but started adhering to my belly. It could have been more life threatening than it was, but I thank the good Lord that everything came out alright. 
I have a very strong faith and I believe that everything happens for a reason. I did not or will not ever question "why" or "why me" to the Lord. Sometimes we do not get answers to events that happen in our life and sometimes we get them down the road. I believe events like this make us a stronger, better person.
I lost my fallopian tube. I still have my other one and I am taking 1 day at a time! I have a husband, 2 kids, dogs and a house that need me. The Lord gives me my strength every day to get up and face the new day. I am very thankful for that. Would I like to see my family grew? Of course, but if all my husband and I have are Zach and Emma, I am happy with that too.
Oh by the way, I have been pregnant 4 times and only have 2 kids. I had a early, early miscarriage between Zach and Emma (maybe 4-5 weeks along). All of this has made me trust in the Lord completely. 
I am not writing one thing and feeling another. I would love to get pregnant again and hopefully with the Lord's help I will. My heart goes out to every woman who has lost a pregnancy or child. My thoughts and prayers are with you all.
God bless.








spelmanlocks said:


> I have no problem with abortion especially in the case of rape and incest.  No one is free from sin, especially these days as people pick and choose what they want to follow from the Bible.* Plus, the Bible does not clearly state where life begin,* so all we can do is interject our own interpretation.  Either way God will make the final decision on judgment day, all we can do is live our life the best way we can.
> 
> So would you all tell a woman with an ectopic pregnancy to keep the child, even though there is an overwhelming chance she will die and only a handful of ectopics that have been carried to term in recorded history?  If so, numerous women who are alive today would be dead.


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 22, 2010)

None of those things state getting rid of a fetus is wrong.  Again you have interpreted them to say that.  

The woman in that article had a laproscopic surgery which means the doctors REMOVED the fetus.  Had she not had the surgery to remove it she would have died.  It is nearly impossible to survive an ectopic pregnancy without getting rid of the fetus.  In some cases doctors give women medicine to take which dissolves the fetus, in other cases they remove it surgically.

ETA:  I'm sure someone has mentioned this but many argue that the Bible also condones slavery, but I doubt any of you would agree to going back to being a slave.


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 22, 2010)

spelmanlocks said:


> None of those things state getting rid of a fetus is wrong.  Again you have interpreted them to say that.
> 
> The woman in that article had a laproscopic surgery which means the doctors REMOVED the fetus.  Had she not had the surgery to remove it she would have died.


Can I share something?

An etopic pregnancy is far different than someone having an abortion.

As a woman who had an etopic pregnancy, I know I would have died because the baby can't live in the fallopian tube, that's why they rupture.  Once the rupture happens, if the baby stays, the mother dies.  However, that is still a baby growing, even though he/she will never get a chance to live in the world.

An abortion on the other hand, is done by decision.  Whether its for saving the mother's life or because the person makes a choice not to have the child.

It doesn't say many things in the bible about what we may know about 'life', but it doesn't negate the fact that God has created our lives and we shouldn't take it for granted.

Ok, I'm done here...I just wanted to share my thoughts on this post.

Have a great day!


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 22, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> Can I share something?
> 
> An etopic pregnancy is far different than someone having an abortion.
> 
> ...



But on many pregnancy boards some women argue that it is abortion because it is a living fetus.  This was actually a huge debate on another board I visit. An ectopic removal is done to save the mother's life, so what's wrong with removing the fetus for health related reasons if it is going to risk the mother's life.  For example, my roomate in college got pregnant.  She has ONE lung.  Had she chosen to keep her child there was a strong possibility she would die.  She chose to abort the child. So how is it different?  You had an ectopic unfortunately and she had only one lung, which could not provide sufficient oxygen for her and her child?


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 22, 2010)

spelmanlocks said:


> But on many pregnancy boards some women argue that it is abortion because it is a living fetus.  This was actually a huge debate on another board I visit. An ectopic removal is done to save the mother's life, so what's wrong with removing the fetus for health related reasons if it is going to risk the mother's life.  For example, my roomate in college got pregnant.  She has ONE lung.  Had she chosen to keep her child there was a strong possibility she would die.  She chose to abort the child. So how is it different?  You had an ectopic unfortunately and she had only one lung, which could not provide sufficient oxygen for her and her child?


BUT, the baby was in your friends womb, where the etopic pregnancy is not....that's the difference.

Again, your friend made a CHOICE, where with an etopic pregancy you don't have a CHOICE...you can't live if a baby is in your abdomen....eta: and neither can the baby....there is nourishment in the womb, the baby is connected to the mother via the cord...there's no cord in the abdomen.


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 22, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> BUT, the baby was in your friends womb, where the etopic pregnancy is not....that's the difference.
> 
> Again, your friend made a CHOICE, where with an etopic pregancy you don't have a CHOICE...you can't live if a baby is in your abdomen.



And she might not have lived if that baby stayed in her uterus, because neither could get the oxygen they needed and you also cannot live without oxygen just as you cannot live with a baby growing in your tube or your ovary. I'm not trying to make you feel guilty but I just don't see the difference and people who argue against abortion that will save a person's life just boggle my mind.


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 22, 2010)

spelmanlocks said:


> *And she might not have lived if that baby stayed in her uterus, because neither could get the oxygen they needed and you also cannot live without oxygen just as you cannot live with a baby growing in your tube or your ovary.* I'm not trying to make you feel guilty but I just don't see the difference and people who argue against abortion that will save a person's life just boggle my mind.


I will never feel guilty over having an etopic pregnancy....the baby never made it to my womb...if she did, I would have a daughter right now about 26 years old

It's ok, spelmanlocks, if you don't see the difference.  That's the one thing about us as human beings...we all have the ability make our own choices in life and we do have our own thought processes. 

In the end....we shall all know the truth, and the truth will prevail, no matter what we think is right or wrong.

All the best to you...enjoy the rest of your day!



N&W

ETA: @ the bolded, because she had the baby in her uterus, we will never know if the baby had lived or not....she might just had enough oxygen to live.  It's not the same in the abdomen.


----------



## CoilyFields (Apr 22, 2010)

spelmanlocks said:


> Again, this is just YOUR interpretation of the Bible *and obviously you desire to read that the Bible says abortion is wrong, because it does not say whether it is wrong or right.* The Bible does not clearly say anything on abortion so all you can do is interject your opinion and interpretation of the Bible. You say that *God values life, well then if a mother is at risk of dying over pregnancy, is her life not also valued? *
> 
> I highly disagree with this also "*We know that only God can create...so regardless of the circumstances under which a pregnancy occur...it can only be attributed to an act of God*" *I'm sure rape and incest are not acts of God.* They are acts of the Devil. And there are gray areas all throughout the Bible, that is why people come up with their own interpretations of the Bible. I'm known to church hop and I've heard so many interpretations of things in the Bible. I choose to follow what my heart tells me as you choose to follow what you think is right.


 
To the First Bolded:
Actually it was not my desire to think abortion wrong...I was unsure in college and had to search for the answer. 

Also, in my post I pointed out that the Bible does not talk about "abortion" (lol duh, no such word then) but it does talk about life and pregnancy in the ways I mentioned above. 

My point was that when there are issues that have not been specifically outlined then we must use the evidence we do have to come to the most logical conclusion. I pointed out that in the Bible there is evidence to support the concept of "abortion" being wrong...but no evidence to support it being right. If you have found some then please share. 

You dont have to find the evidence I presented as convincing...but we are challenged to ALWAYS have a REASON for the hope that lies within...knowing why we believe something...for instance, knowing why you believe abortion is right based on the bible and your knowledge of God.

To the next bolded: 
Yes, God values the mothers life, and that is why there should not be any pre-emptive strike against her life to save the child. Maybe there is a misunderstanding because I am thinking in terms of "if we dont get this baby out of her RIGHT NOW mom will die RIGHT NOW" (and doing everything possible to save the baby too but mom is the priority) as being allowable, as opposed to saying "you're high risk and may not be able to carry to term, lets abort now."

To the Last bolded:
Also, I NEVER said incest and rape were acts of God dear. God cannot sin. But the act of creating life belongs to him and him alone. Not you, me, our SO's nor satan can give life. We can only use or misuse what God has created. (But that may be another topic for another time)


----------



## JayAnn0513 (Apr 22, 2010)

topsyturvy86 said:


> I personally think abortion is allowable when the mothers life is in danger. If the mother dies, the fetus dies too, whearas if the fetus is taken out, the mother can live.
> There is this scripture in the bible, Exodus 21:22-23
> 
> "22If men contend with each other, and a pregnant woman [interfering] is hurt so that she has a miscarriage, yet no further damage follows, [the one who hurt her] shall surely be punished with a fine [paid] to the woman's husband, as much as the judges determine.
> ...


 
In the time of the bible children were equal with cattle. The same thing would have happend if a guy killed your sheep by accident. Theonly the time they are treated differently if when God tells the parents they will be " special".


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 22, 2010)

Well as I said before all you can do is live your life the best you know how.  If you don't believe in abortion, then don't get one, its simple.  I am firmly pro-choice.  Always have been and always will be.  You will likely always be pro-life, and I really don't care to change your mind. Now I personally would never get an abortion unless my life was in danger, but I don't begrudge women who get them for whatever reason.  I also believe its a matter of personal choice.  And as long as the many societal ills we have exist that lead to women seeking an abortion, it will always be around.

And Nice&Wavy--you will never know if that Baby would have survived either.  There are a few documented cases of women who gave birth to babies from an ectopic pregnancy. There is no difference between aborting an ectopic or aborting a baby for any other medical reason, IMO.

*And I know the Bible doesn't use the word abortion.


----------



## Reminiscing (Apr 22, 2010)

nathansgirl1908 said:


> Yes, prayer changes things, and we should all have faith, but I don't see how it is totally relevant to the topic.  In your mother's situation she WANTED the child.  I think this is more about when people DON'T want to keep the child for various reasons.  If someone wants to keep her baby, whether the doctors say it is dangerous or not, she should.  They aren't going to force her to abort.  Same with rape or being too young .




It is relevant to the topic in that someone asked in the thread for stories of anyone who's been through it, therefore I shared my mother's story.  

Also, the topic is whether abortion is ok when it's needed due to health reasons.  It's not about whether someone wants their baby or not.  My mother was faced with the choice live or abort due to a health situation.  It's completely relevant to this thread. You should read the original post again.


----------



## topsyturvy86 (Apr 22, 2010)

JayAnn0513 said:


> In the time of the bible children were equal with cattle. The same thing would have happend if a guy killed your sheep by accident. Theonly the time they are treated differently if when God tells the parents they will be " special".


 

God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. I don't think God values children any less today than he did then ,or more or less than adults. In the KJV it said the 'fruit' in her womb, not the child in her womb.

On the topic, I think its a very personal thing between a person and God and really depends on the situation. If the mother is most certainly going to die and the fetus too if the pregancy continues, I think it would be better if the mother got saved and fetus removed and at least one life be saved. She can try for another baby if she can still carry but if they both die ... well... My cousin died of pregnancy complications (it was in her womb). She could have tried again.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 22, 2010)

spelmanlocks said:


> I have no problem with abortion especially in the case of rape and incest. No one is free from sin, especially these days as people pick and choose what they want to follow from the Bible. *Plus, the Bible does not clearly state where life begin*, so all we can do is interject our own interpretation. Either way God will make the final decision on judgment day, all we can do is live our life the best way we can.
> 
> So would you all tell a woman with an ectopic pregnancy to keep the child, even though there is an overwhelming chance she will die and only a handful of ectopics that have been carried to term in recorded history? If so, numerous women who are alive today would be dead.


 
*When Does Life Begin?*​
According to Psalm 51:5 life begins at conception: *“Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me” *the psalmist laments. If one can be a sinner as soon as they are conceived, then they must be "alive" and possess a complete human nature at the time of conception. The psalmist continues: “...you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.” (Psalm 139:13-16) The image of being “knit together” suggests the intricate weaving together of body and soul; and a body plus a soul equals a life.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 22, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> BUT, the baby was in your friends womb, where the etopic pregnancy is not....that's the difference.
> 
> Again, your friend made a CHOICE, where with an etopic pregancy you don't have a CHOICE...you can't live if a baby is in your abdomen....eta: and neither can the baby....there is nourishment in the womb, the baby is connected to the mother via the cord...there's no cord in the abdomen.



Yes, but based on what others have said, apparently it was all part of God's plan.  So any woman experiencing this should just pray and have faith, but not get rid of the baby.


----------



## Laela (Apr 22, 2010)

You're right, none of those Scriptures alludes to getting rid of a fetus as wrong... I provided Scripture to address your asking where in the Bible does it say life begins. You are free a free moral agent, to choose what you believe and what you don't believe.  I'm not disputing what you believe.



spelmanlocks said:


> *None of those things state getting rid of a fetus is wrong*.  Again you have interpreted them to say that.
> 
> The woman in that article had a laproscopic surgery which means the doctors REMOVED the fetus.  Had she not had the surgery to remove it she would have died.  It is nearly impossible to survive an ectopic pregnancy without getting rid of the fetus.  In some cases doctors give women medicine to take which dissolves the fetus, in other cases they remove it surgically.
> 
> ETA:  I'm sure someone has mentioned this but many argue that the Bible also condones slavery, but I doubt any of you would agree to going back to being a slave.






And here I'll address that not all ectopic pregnancies are tubal. It's impossible for a fetus to grow to term in a woman's fallopian tube. The fetus will rupture the tiny tube and kill the woman from massive bleeding. But there have been cases of ectopic pregnancies in the belly, outside of the womb, that have resulted in live births.




spelmanlocks said:


> Well as I said before all you can do is live your life the best you know how.  If you don't believe in abortion, then don't get one, its simple.  I am firmly pro-choice.  Always have been and always will be.  You will likely always be pro-life, and I really don't care to change your mind. Now I personally would never get an abortion unless my life was in danger, but I don't begrudge women who get them for whatever reason.  I also believe its a matter of personal choice.  And as long as the many societal ills we have exist that lead to women seeking an abortion, it will always be around.
> 
> And Nice&Wavy--you will never know if that Baby would have survived either.  *There are a few documented cases of women who gave birth to babies from an ectopic pregnancy. T*here is no difference between aborting an ectopic or aborting a baby for any other medical reason, IMO.
> 
> *And I know the Bible doesn't use the word abortion.


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 22, 2010)

Laela said:


> You're right, none of those Scriptures alludes to getting rid of a fetus as wrong... I provided Scripture to address your asking where in the Bible does it say life begins. You are free a free moral agent, to choose what you believe and what you don't believe.  I'm not disputing what you believe.
> 
> And here I'll address that not all ectopic pregnancies are tubal. It's impossible for a fetus to grow to term in a woman's fallopian tube. The fetus will rupture the tiny tube and kill the woman from massive bleeding. But there have been cases of ectopic pregnancies in the belly, outside of the womb, that have resulted in live births.



Either way it seems a bit hypocritical to me, if you all say life begins at conception.  Medical abortions are wrong, but oh wait, its okay if its an ectopic.  So its okay for a woman with an ectopic to save her life, but for a woman with other issues surrounding pregnancy, she should risk death and continue on with the pregnancy?  And yes, I'm well aware ectopics can be in various places in the abdomen, from the ovaries, outside the uterus, etc.


----------



## MahoganyJazz (Apr 22, 2010)

There are also cases of full term tubal pregnancies, resulting in healthy babies and mothers. So no, it isn't impossible for that to happen.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> To answer your revised question, my church's stance would vary per person. By the way, my church is multi-cultural and non-denominational but holds closest to Southern Baptist doctrine. But anyway, I know the pastor (who happens to be my dad) would say absolutely no to this girl having an abortion and that the girl should go through with the pregnancy and attempt to give birth to child. However, other church leaders and members in my church might say yes to abortion since the girl was raped and she is young.  And no, no one would be excommunicated at my church if they had an abortion. If the church sees abortion as a sin, it's just as forgivable as any other sin committed by other people. Hope that answers your question and sticks to the topic you have presented.



Well, not that we know yet if the girl is in medical danger, hypothetically.  They would allow a mother to abort if her life were in danger?


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

topsyturvy86 said:


> I personally think abortion is allowable when the mothers life is in danger. If the mother dies, the fetus dies too, whearas if the fetus is taken out, the mother can live.
> There is this scripture in the bible, Exodus 21:22-23
> 
> "22If men contend with each other, and a pregnant woman [interfering] is hurt so that she has a miscarriage, yet no further damage follows, [the one who hurt her] shall surely be punished with a fine [paid] to the woman's husband, as much as the judges determine.
> ...




Thanks for the scripture. In some circumstances where there is a father with young children and endangered pregnant wife, they truly face a dilemma and deserve compassion, either way they choose.  I personally wouldn't want the father and young children to suffer without a mother.  It's a tough situation.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> Can I share something?
> 
> An etopic pregnancy is far different than someone having an abortion.
> 
> ...



How did the doctor remove the ectopic pregnancy?  I don't see the difference between some llife-threatening condition where fetus is in utero.  Not sure when pre-eclampsia usually develops but that is a fatal condition if not treated either by inducing birth or caesarean.  I'm not sure if it occurs early enough for an abortion to be performed. That's one reason why I ask this difficult question.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> BUT, the baby was in your friends womb, where the etopic pregnancy is not....that's the difference.
> 
> Again, your friend made a CHOICE, where with an etopic pregancy you don't have a CHOICE...you can't live if a baby is in your abdomen....eta: and neither can the baby....there is nourishment in the womb, the baby is connected to the mother via the cord...there's no cord in the abdomen.




Sorry for the 4-5 posts back to back,  my computer was fried today.  But um, I know of a woman who had a full-term ectopic pregnancy and the doctor advised her against it but closely monitored her with her decision to carry full-term.  They both survived but I think she's sterile now.  She should have died but didn't.




			
				Laela said:
			
		

> I know what the gist of this thread is, but I wanted to address this: *Because a pregnancy is unwanted *- no matter the circumstances - it doesn't mean God didn't have a purpose for that seed. However, man does possess the power of Life and Death by his very tongue - Prov. 18:21.



They could abort even though wanting the child. I agree about the purpose of all life. Power of the tongue?  A doctor concluding a pregnancy is potentially fatal and because they're not exactly at that stage (trauma and distress requiring immediate termination), his words produce the death?  Or are you alluding to something else?


----------



## cgolden (Apr 23, 2010)

JustKiya said:


> At this stage, I suspect it wouldn't even be a 'vaginal' abortion - they might have to more or less give her a section, as the baby might be too big to fit through her pelvis already.
> 
> *sigh*


 
No. They would remove it vaginally, but cut the baby into pieces while it's still inside her and pull piece by piece out. A baby can be aborted anytime during pregnancy so there are soooo many different procedures.

But i dont think abortion is ever right in the eyes of God, but He is a forgiving God, so He would throw it into a sea of forgetfulness once you repent.

I feel like the sexual abuse will be more mentally traumatic than having the child or aborting. Physically it depends on the girl. I dont know the case, but she wouldnt b ther first 10 year old to have a baby and survive.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 23, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Well, not that we know yet if the girl is in medical danger, hypothetically. They would allow a mother to abort if her life were in danger?


Did you even read what I said?
Only the pastor would say NO to her aborting the child, even if her life was in danger.
Other church leaders and members _might_ say YES to her aborting the child since she was raped and if her life was in danger since she is so young.


----------



## CoilyFields (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> *When Does Life Begin?*​
> 
> According to Psalm 51:5 life begins at conception: *“Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me” *the psalmist laments. If one can be a sinner as soon as they are conceived, then they must be "alive" and possess a complete human nature at the time of conception. The psalmist continues: “...you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.” (Psalm 139:13-16) The image of being “knit together” suggests the intricate weaving together of body and soul; and a body plus a soul equals a life.


 
Very good point!


----------



## CoilyFields (Apr 23, 2010)

cgolden said:


> No. They would remove it vaginally, but* cut the baby into pieces while it's still inside her and pull piece by piece out*. A baby can be aborted anytime during pregnancy so there are soooo many different procedures.
> 
> But i dont think abortion is ever right in the eyes of God, but He is a forgiving God, so He would throw it into a sea of forgetfulness once you repent.
> 
> I feel like the sexual abuse will be more mentally traumatic than having the child or aborting. Physically it depends on the girl. I dont know the case, but she wouldnt b ther first 10 year old to have a baby and survive.


 
And yet we are debating if God would approve of this...


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 23, 2010)

He has approved of worse scenarios.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

cgolden said:


> No. They would remove it vaginally, but cut the baby into pieces while it's still inside her and pull piece by piece out. A baby can be aborted anytime during pregnancy so there are soooo many different procedures.
> 
> But i dont think abortion is ever right in the eyes of God, but He is a forgiving God, so He would throw it into a sea of forgetfulness once you repent.
> 
> I feel like the sexual abuse will be more mentally traumatic than having the child or aborting. Physically it depends on the girl. I dont know the case, but she wouldnt b ther first 10 year old to have a baby and survive.



I thought the cut-off was 4 months or so?  And I thought that partial-birth was a banned practice in this country.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Did you even read what I said?
> Only the pastor would say NO to her aborting the child, even if her life was in danger.
> Other church leaders and members _might_ say YES to her aborting the child since she was raped and if her life was in danger since she is so young.



Yes I did and I refocused my response toward the case of medical danger only.  I wasn't sure if your response meant in general, that particular girl (who's not in medical danger) or a case presently in your congregation.  If there is no distress of child and mother, then it's not a medical emergency, it's just the case in which a young girl is preggers.  That's what I mean. 


See, I'm not going to support anyone getting an abortion in the case of rape and other circumstances, I'd only support abortion in the case of self-defense to save the life of the mother.  Thanks for the info about your religious side and support or rejection of the procedure.  Can you be a little NICER in your responses and not try to provoke folks as you typically do?  Sorry, but that's how I see it.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> According to Psalm 51:5 life begins at conception: *“Indeed, I was born guilty, a sinner when my mother conceived me” *the psalmist laments. If one can be a sinner as soon as they are conceived, then they must be "alive" and possess a complete human nature at the time of conception. The psalmist continues: “...you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.” (Psalm 139:13-16) The image of being “knit together” suggests the intricate weaving together of body and soul; and a body plus a soul equals a life.



I disagree.  I don't think that really means that life begins at conception.  I think the point is that God creates everything and that we are ALL sinners, even from the time we are born.  

Either way, I think that no one really knows what they would do until they are in that situation.  People can say that the women should pray and have faith and the like, but until you are facing it YOU JUST DON'T KNOW how you are going to react.  I am pro-choice,  I can't say that I would have an abortion myself, but I also can't say that I wouldn't.  It just depends.  But whatever the case may be, as some have said, IF it is a sin, God is just as forgiving of that sin as He is of other sins.


----------



## ~Sparklingflame~ (Apr 23, 2010)

I dont know if this has been asked or not b/c I havent read the whole thread so forgive me.

I have 4 children. If I got pregnant again ( crosses self ) and the child endangered my life to the point where I am expected to die if I carry the child to term, would it be wrong to terminate so that I can live for my other 4 children?

My answer is no but what do you think about it?


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

~Sparklingflame~ said:


> I dont know if this has been asked or not b/c I havent read the whole thread so forgive me.
> 
> I have 4 children. If I got pregnant again ( crosses self ) and the child endangered my life to the point where I am expected to die if I carry the child to term, would it be wrong not to terminate so that I can live for my other 4 children?
> 
> My answer is no but what do you think about it?



That's what I'm saying because I know of folks. God can heal but He also uses medicine to accomplish that.


----------



## Ms Lala (Apr 23, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> I understand that. It would still be sinning, but I think it would be judged differently. Even if you kill someone in self defense, it doesn't change the fact that you murdered someone. Is it judged differently?  Absolutely.




The circumstances do make a difference in whether something is killing or murder.  The translation of the commandment is not to murder.  I don't agree that killing someone in self-defense is murder. If this was the case this would mean that the soldiers overseas right now are sinning whenever there is a war related fatality.  There are times in the old testament when God instructed people to go to war and kill entire groups of people.  Was this a sin when they were following the instructions of the Lord?  And please know I am not comparing abortion to war just pointing out that all killing is not *always* a sin from what I read in the bible.
Circumstances and intent do make a difference.


----------



## Lylddlebit (Apr 23, 2010)

I was going to wait until this thread faded to a close, but it it's still here so.  Abortion:  Well free will is allowable, so we are able to have abortions without being forced to carry a baby to term.  I however will never believe that God condones consciously taking a life because it suits our comfort level, eases our fears, or fits into a mold of convenience.  Aborting a miracle, aborting any child for any reason blows me.  I once told a relative to asked me what I thought about it "something scares me about a person who can kill half of themselves especially when they claim to love me."


----------



## ~Sparklingflame~ (Apr 23, 2010)

Lylddlebit said:


> I was going to wait until this thread faded to a close, but it it's still here so.  Abortion:  Well free will is allowable, so we are able to have abortions without being forced to carry a baby to term.  I however will never believe that God condones consciously taking a life because it suits our comfort level, eases our fears, or fits into a mold of convenience.  Aborting a miracle,* aborting any child for any reason blows me*.  I once told a relative to asked me what I thought about it "something scares me about a person who can kill half of themselves especially when they claim to love me."


What about this reason that I posted above??



> I have 4 children. If I got pregnant again ( crosses self ) and the  child endangered my life to the point where I am expected to die if I  carry the child to term, would it be wrong to terminate so that I can  live for my other 4 children?


----------



## Lylddlebit (Apr 23, 2010)

~Sparklingflame~ said:


> What about this reason that I posted above??



I posted the answer to that question in the following sentence.  I probably should have worded it better.  Someone who can kill there baby consciously scares me to a degree.  I see killing your baby as killing a part of yourself...damaging the part that is selfless or has unconditional love for no reason.  You either desensitize yourself to the gravity of what took place, or learn to accept what you did.  Emotionally that is scary to me, it's cold, to set those emotions aside or not have them at all.


----------



## ~Sparklingflame~ (Apr 23, 2010)

Lylddlebit said:


> I posted the answer to that question in the following sentence.  I probably should have worded it better.  Someone who can kill there baby consciously scares me to a degree.  I see killing your baby as killing a part of yourself...damaging the part that is selfless or has unconditional love for no reason.  You either desensitize yourself to the gravity of what took place, or learn to accept what you did.  Emotionally that is scary to me, it's cold, to set those emotions aside or not have them at all.


Hmmm. I dont see how this answers the question but thanks!


----------



## Lylddlebit (Apr 23, 2010)

I mean people justify in their mind what they want to do before the do it many times...that is what that scenario did...You made a cost benefit analysis  to terminate one child based on 4.  Desensitized the emotional/practical value of the one based on the 4 logically.  Am I going to argue your personal logic, nope, or call your wrong and xyz, nope. Very few people will care about your children born or unborn more than you do.  I  still think it is scary, and I still think it's cold, so I'm glad that I am the only one with the power/responsibility(that I know of) to place and carry my own offspring to term.


----------



## Prudent1 (Apr 23, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> I thought the cut-off was 4 months or so? And I thought that partial-birth was a banned practice in this country.


It is but since when has that stopped ppl from doing what they want to do? Abortion itself was illegal not so long ago but ppl still found ways. Just like gun control laws or laws regarding intoxication, etc. Law abiding ppl aren't the ones breaking laws and lawbreakers are going to continue to break whatever laws anyway. It happens. If you can pay the right amount, you can do a lot of things...



Bachelorette said:


> He has approved of worse scenarios.


Will you give some examples of God approving of worse things?


----------



## ~Sparklingflame~ (Apr 23, 2010)

Lylddlebit said:


> I mean people justify in their mind what they want to do before the do it many times...that is what that scenario did...You made a cost benefit analysis  to terminate one child based on 4.  Desensitized the emotional/practical value of the one based on the 4 logically.  Am I going to argue your personal logic, nope, or call your wrong and xyz, nope. Very few people will care about your children born or unborn more than you do.  I  still think it is scary, and I still think it's cold, so I'm glad that I am the only one with the power/responsibility(that I know of) to place and carry my own offspring to term.


If Im understanding you right, yes, to abort the child in my scenario is wrong.


----------



## Laela (Apr 23, 2010)

What I'm trying to explain is clearly YOUR perception of hypocrisy. Please try to understand what I'm saying. Again, I'm quoting the Bible on when life begins. If you don't believe that, then that's likely why you're having a hard time with this. I believe God has a purpose for every _life_, whether it gets the chance to be born or not... A failed pregnancy could likely serve its purpose to bring a husband/wife together or even to reinforce a woman's faith in God. Whatever the situation is, *I believe* there is a PURPOSE.


*A tubal ectopic will KILL a woman. Period.* That's not an abortion; the operation is to keep the fetus from rupturing the supertiny fallopian tube, so the woman doesn't die. It's not an option, like abortion. The only exception for an ectopic is if the fetus is in the abdomen, then there's a likely chance the fetus can come to term. 

I don't know who "you all" is, but I'm done with this topic... you have a blessed day. 



spelmanlocks said:


> *Either way it seems a bit hypocritical to me,* if you all say life begins at conception.  Medical abortions are wrong, but oh wait, its okay if its an ectopic. * So its okay for a woman with an ectopic to save her life,* but for a woman with other issues surrounding pregnancy, she should risk death and continue on with the pregnancy?  And yes, I'm well aware ectopics can be in various places in the abdomen, from the ovaries, outside the uterus, etc.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 23, 2010)

~Sparklingflame~ said:


> I dont know if this has been asked or not b/c I havent read the whole thread so forgive me.
> 
> I have 4 children. If I got pregnant again ( crosses self ) and the child endangered my life to the point where I am expected to die if I carry the child to term, would it be wrong to terminate so that I can live for my other 4 children?
> 
> My answer is no but what do you think about it?



I don't think so.  I would certainly understand why someone would do that and to be quite frank, I think God would too.  It is MAN that places such strict standards on this kind of thing as evidenced by this thread and some of the responses.   God does indeed know our hearts and he recognizes that we are in fact human.  We are not perfect.  Some of the things that have been stated in this thread boggle my mind because they don't take into account reality or the fact that we are but flesh.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 23, 2010)

*@ spelmanlocks* and *nathansgirl1908,*

Question:
If life doesn't begin at conception, then when do you think it begins according to God (not yourself)?


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

Lylddlebit said:


> I mean people justify in their mind what they want to do before the do it many times...that is what that scenario did...You made a cost benefit analysis  to terminate one child based on 4.  Desensitized the emotional/practical value of the one based on the 4 logically.  Am I going to argue your personal logic, nope, or call your wrong and xyz, nope. Very few people will care about your children born or unborn more than you do.  I  still think it is scary, and I still think it's cold, so I'm glad that I am the only one with the power/responsibility(that I know of) to place and carry my own offspring to term.



But what about the people who are already here who need you to raise them?  Not to mention, a spouse who will be single raising those kids when it could be prevented.  You save not only 1 life, but the rest of the family.  

That's why I made this thread, it's a very difficult subject and, IMHO, not exactly black and white.  As a quasi analogy, I believe that persecuted people in war have a right to kill to preserve themselves - not murder, but to kill, especially when God is part of the matter.  For example, religious groups.  Amalekites, killed to further the people of God.  I wonder if there would have been any christians without the killings back then.  Sounds horrific, I know, but??????  Did Moses murder or did he kill?  Because it happened as a response to his knowledge that he was, in fact, Hebrew and that he was being called to lead them out of bondage. The gray area for me is whether his anger was righteous or sinful.  And that makes me wonder if killing a child who will kill the mother is righteous self-defense/family-defense or sinful such as to allow them both to die a horrible death.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 23, 2010)

^^^^CreoleNat, how about this... Religion and Reality don't always mix. I could elaborate but personally, even though I am "pro-life"...if I was a 10-year-old that was pregnant by a rapist, I would probably have an abortion.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> ^^^^CreoleNat, how about this... Religion and Reality don't always mix. I could elaborate but personally, even though I am "pro-life"...if I was a 10-year-old that was pregnant by a rapist, I would probably have an abortion.



Religion and reality don't mix with certain TYPES of people, but it mixes with people who don't take themselves too seriously.  I tend to ignore the unrealistic stuff.  That's why each person's relationship with God is so inherently personal and unique.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> *@ spelmanlocks* and *nathansgirl1908,*
> 
> Question:
> If life doesn't begin at conception, then when do you think it begins according to God (not yourself)?



Who knows?  I won't sit here and say viability.  But like you mentioned, I can't say conception either.    





But I will go on a tangent and say this: God may or may not approve of or be pleased with abortions, but he probably isn't pleased with the unbending attitudes that some have towards the subject.  Reading posts that suggest that someone should carry a baby to term when it could kill her, even when she has other children to raise, or in the case of a 10-yr old, just boggles my mind.  And although I hate to see people disheartened, it is stuff like this that really turns people off and away from the church and ultimately from God.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> ^^^^CreoleNat, how about this... Religion and Reality don't always mix. I could elaborate but personally, even though I am "pro-life"...if I was a 10-year-old that was pregnant by a rapist, I would probably have an abortion.




You can leave that carrot there dangling!!!  I want to sample that one.  What do you mean?   Spill it!


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 23, 2010)

nathansgirl1908 said:


> Religion and reality don't mix with certain TYPES of people, but it mixes with people who don't take themselves too seriously. I tend to ignore the unrealistic stuff. That's why each person's relationship with God is so inherently personal and unique.


I agree.



nathansgirl1908 said:


> Who knows? I won't sit here and say viability. But like you mentioned, I can't say conception either.
> 
> But I will go on a tangent and say this: God may or may not approve of or be pleased with abortions, but he probably isn't pleased with the unbending attitudes that some have towards the subject. Reading posts that suggest that someone should carry a baby to term when it could kill her, even when she has other children to raise, or in the case of a 10-yr old, just boggles my mind. And although I hate to see people disheartened, it is stuff like this that really turns people off and away from the church and ultimately from God.


 Yeah. And since God is supposedly in control and nothing happens unless God wills it, He may very well approve of everything that goes on.


----------



## ~Sparklingflame~ (Apr 23, 2010)

IMO abortions shouldnt be done EXCEPT in certain circumstances. One being the rape of a woman/child who has gotten pregnant as a result and two if the pregnancy is life threatening to the mother.

I cant see how its justifiable to let a mother of other children die as a result of a pregnancy that can kill her and I cant see the sense in making a baby have a baby in the event that she is raped.

In all things, even in the law of God there are exceptions. Sometimes you have to take the lesser of two evils.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 23, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> You can leave that carrot there dangling!!! I want to sample that one. What do you mean? Spill it!


 
Well, it may go off subject a bit, but it's like this...I'm going to provide an example with tithing...

There are pastors that preach up and down how you must tithe 10% of your GROSS income, but in reality, it is NO WHERE in the Bible. They go as far as to say you are cursed and you sin against God if you do not tithe 10% of your GROSS income.  That's what Religion wants you to do. But the Reality of it all is that based on each person's individual financial situation, it is IMPOSSIBLE _(sorry for those that believe nothing's impossible with God, a verse that's commonly taken out of context)_ for everyone to tithe 10% of their gross income. Just with how the world and the economy runs, some people do not have enough left over. Yes, I have heard Christians say people need to save better, or spend less, or cut back on bills, but there are some genuine savers that STILL cannot afford to give one particular church 10% of their gross income, or even their net income. And why do they harp on it being just one particular church to give their money to? Is it really giving to God? Well some will argue "it's giving to God's people of the church". No, that money is going into a bank account somewhere for the church leaders to decide on how to spend the money.

But anyway, hope that makes somewhat of a point. But to use abortion as an example, fellow Christians can point out verses left and right against abortion and how bad of a sin it is and how God values life and so on so forth, but let this particular instance happen to us or someone close in our family or circle of friends. Let one of your daughters get pregnant by a rapist. Let one of your younger cousins or friends get pregnant by a rapist. Would these fellow Christians still say no to abortion?  Just like those pro-choicers who say they aren't pro-abortion... pro-life doesn't always have to mean anti-abortion.


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 23, 2010)

Laela said:


> What I'm trying to explain is clearly YOUR perception of hypocrisy. Please try to understand what I'm saying. Again, I'm quoting the Bible on when life begins. If you don't believe that, then that's likely why you're having a hard time with this. I believe God has a purpose for every _life_, whether it gets the chance to be born or not... A failed pregnancy could likely serve its purpose to bring a husband/wife together or even to reinforce a woman's faith in God. Whatever the situation is, *I believe* there is a PURPOSE.
> 
> 
> *A tubal ectopic will KILL a woman. Period.* That's not an abortion; the operation is to keep the fetus from rupturing the supertiny fallopian tube, so the woman doesn't die. It's not an option, like abortion. The only exception for an ectopic is if the fetus is in the abdomen, then there's a likely chance the fetus can come to term.
> ...



I'm not referencing you, but it was said in this thread that medical abortions are wrong, but in the same breath people are saying its okay to abort a tubal pregnancy.  That's straight hypocrisy. And yes, purposely getting rid of a baby is abortion no matter what the reason. I know a tubal pregnancy will kill  a woman, so will *MANY* other pregnancy situations.  So you are saying its wrong to abort in any situation except for a tubal pregnancy.  Why tubal pregnancy and no other medical situation?  To me, that's just straight hypocrisy.  And as a poster stated before there have been a few situations of women who have birthed babies from tubal pregnancies.  Other posters in this thread said have faith and if it is god's will that you should die then so be it, so does that include ectopics?

Also, you are just quoting a bunch of interpretations of scripture and personal beliefs just as I am.  The Bible is open to interpretation and everyone is not going to see the Bible in the same way that you do.  Its just like my pastor is firmly against divorce.  He does not believe a woman should leave her husband even if he beats her.  He has quoted plenty of scripture regarding this.  However, that's HIS interpretation.  The things you have quoted are YOUR interpretation.  NOT mine.  Therefore please stop trying to convince me otherwise.

In reference to pooh bear's question, I believe life begins when you are born.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

I myself don't know when life begins and believe that the body is being knitted together but at some point and time, God places the soul within the body.


----------



## spelmanlocks (Apr 23, 2010)

nathansgirl1908 said:


> Who knows?  I won't sit here and say viability.  But like you mentioned, I can't say conception either.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I agree, and it is sad.  I doubt any of the women in this thread have been in that 10 year olds situation, so I take what people say about abortion in these situations with a grain of salt.  No one knows what they would do until it happens to them.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 23, 2010)

spelmanlocks said:


> I'm not referencing you, but it was said in this thread that medical abortions are wrong, but in the same breath people are saying its okay to abort a tubal pregnancy. That's straight hypocrisy. And yes, purposely getting rid of a baby is abortion no matter what the reason. I know a tubal pregnancy will kill a woman, so will *MANY* other pregnancy situations. So you are saying its wrong to abort in any situation except for a tubal pregnancy. Why tubal pregnancy and no other medical situation? To me, that's just straight hypocrisy. And as a poster stated before there have been a few situations of women who have birthed babies from tubal pregnancies. Other posters in this thread said have faith and if it is god's will that you should die then so be it, so does that include ectopics?
> 
> Also, you are just quoting a bunch of interpretations of scripture and personal beliefs just as I am. The Bible is open to interpretation and everyone is not going to see the Bible in the same way that you do. Its just like my pastor is firmly against divorce. He does not believe a woman should leave her husband even if he beats her. He has quoted plenty of scripture regarding this. However, that's HIS interpretation. The things you have quoted are YOUR interpretation. NOT mine. Therefore please stop trying to convince me otherwise.
> 
> In reference to pooh bear's question, I believe life begins when you are born.


You made a good point about hypocrisy. It goes to show you how there are so many factors that play into certain issues that are commonly debated.

And thanks for answering my question. And you know what? I can actually see how life begins when you're born. Just think about it... let's say someone is born December 25, 1934 and they die on December 25, 2004. No one says that the person lived to be 70 years old + the months he or she was in their mother's womb. 

But even the word "life" is defined in so many ways. There are definitions that support a baby having life inside the mother's womb. See here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/life


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 23, 2010)

Prudent1 said:


> Will you give some examples of God approving of worse things?



Just because some people like to do away with the Old Testament doesnt mean it doesnt exist or shouldnt be considered.

Read OT and you WILL see that he has approved of worse scenerios.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> You made a good point about hypocrisy. It goes to show you how there are so many factors that play into certain issues that are commonly debated.
> 
> And thanks for answering my question. And you know what? I can actually see how life begins when you're born. Just think about it... let's say someone is born December 25, 1934 and they die on December 25, 2004. No one says that the person lived to be 70 years old + the months he or she was in their mother's womb.
> 
> But even the word "life" is defined in so many ways. There are definitions that support a baby having life inside the mother's womb. See here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/life




Actually, in some African traditions, the moment you are born, you are 1 year old.


----------



## KnottyGurl (Apr 23, 2010)

I know alot of people are saying that the main reason she should abort is because of her age and size, but I found this list of similar incidents in the news to be interesting. It's sad, I know, but they did not abort and lived. Unless it's been decided that it's definitely life-threatening, I wouldn't want to make the situation worse by adding an unnecessary medical procedure to an already delicate situation. That's just my opinion though.
*
Cases by age  of mother*

*[edit] Age 5*

 

*1939:* Precocious puberty allowed Lina  Medina of Ticrapo, Peru to become  pregnant at 5 years, 7 months, and 21 days old; she gave birth to a  2.0 kg (4.4 lb) son, named Gerardo, by caesarean sectionLima. Her  parents, who assumed their daughter had a tumor, took  her to a hospital, where she was determined to be seven months pregnant.  Although Medina's father was arrested on suspicion of child sexual abuse, he was later released due to lack  of evidence, and the identity of who impregnated Medina was never  uncovered.[1][2] on May 14, 1939 in 
 *[edit] Age 8*

 

*2006:* A girl from Huanuco, Peru, gave  birth to a baby weighing 2 kg (4.4 lb) by caesarean section at a  hospital in Lima in December 2006. Her ninth birthday occurred a  couple of days later. She became pregnant after being raped by two of  her cousins.[3][4]
 *[edit] Age 9*

 

*1957:* Hilda Trujillo gave birth to a girl weighing over 6 lb  (2.7 kg) at a hospital in Lima, Peru  in December 1957. Her 22-year-old cousin, who was staying in her  family's one-room house at the time, was arrested for rape.[5]
*2001:* Wanwisa Janmuk gave birth in February 2001 to a girl at  a hospital in Phetchabun, a northern province of Thailand.  The father was her 27-year-old husband; Thai law allows for the  arranged marriages of minors by their parents.[6]
*2004:* A Singaporean  girl gave birth to a boy in 2004 after being impregnated by a fellow  student at her school. Her mother initially thought she had a urinary tract infection, but, upon  taking her to the doctor, learned she was already six months pregnant.  The baby was placed for adoption.[7]
*2005:* A girl gave birth to a baby boy by caesarean section at  a hospital in Butare, Rwanda, in December 2005. The child, who underwent breast development at age six and menarche at age eight, became pregnant after being  raped by her family's domestic servant.[8]
*2006:* A girl of the Apurinã,  an indigenous people from the Amazon Rainforest in Brazil,  gave birth to a baby girl weighing 2.2 kg (4.8 lb) by caesarean section  at a hospital in Manaus in  July 2006. Police are investigating the case.[9][10]
*2010:* A 9-year-old girl from Songyuan  in north-east China gave birth to a healthy  2.75kg baby on January 27, 2010. A case has been registered with the  police in this regard.[11][12]
 Cont'd...


----------



## KnottyGurl (Apr 23, 2010)

Part 2 cont'd

*Age 10*

    * 1834: Sally Deweese of Butler County, Kentucky, was reported by Dr. D. Rowlett to have delivered a baby girl weighing 7.75 pounds (3.52 kg) on April 20, 1834. Deweese allegedly developed breasts within weeks of birth and began menstruating at 12 months.[13]
    * 1979: A girl aged 10 gave birth to twins six weeks premature, both weighing 3 lb 6 oz, at a hospital in Indianapolis. She is thought to have been the youngest mother of twins at the time.[14]
    * 2000: A girl from Bolivia gave birth to a baby girl weighing 2.5 kilograms (5.5 lb) by caesarean section at a hospital in Parque Patricios, Buenos Aires, Argentina on September 25, 2007. A 28-year-old was arrested on a charge of rape.[15][16]
    * 2005: A girl from Calama, Chile, gave birth to a baby boy by caesarean section at a hospital in Antofagasta, Chile on April 13, 2005. The child became pregnant after having been raped by her father at age nine. Her parents, who both came from Bolivia, were jailed.[17][18][19]
    * 2005: A girl gave birth to a baby girl at a hospital in Sion, Switzerland in August 2005. She had immigrated to Switzerland from Cameroon with her siblings when her mother married a Swiss citizen. A 68-year-old man who was in a relationship with the mother admitted to having molested the girl but a DNA test found that he was not the father of the girl's child.[20][21][22]
    * 2006: A girl in Abbeville, South Carolina gave birth by caesarean section in 2006 after having been raped by then-26-year-old William Edward Ronca. Ronca admitted to having molested the girl over a two year period and was sentenced to 25 years in prison as a result. The baby was placed for adoption.[23]
    * 2006: A girl from Charleroi, Belgium gave birth in 2006. After the child began gaining weight, her mother put her on a diet, but when the girl visited a doctor, it was discovered that she was nine months pregnant. The father was a then-13-year-old boy who attended the same school as the girl. News of the birth did not become publicly known until 2007.[24]
    * 2006: A girl from Jaral del Progreso, Guanajuato, Mexico gave birth naturally to a baby girl weighing 2.3 kilograms (5.1 lb) on April 3, 2006. She became pregnant after being raped by a 47-year-old neighbour, who was sentenced to 11 years, 6 months in prison for the crime.[25][26]
    * 2007: A girl from San Lorenzo Cacaotepec, Oaxaca, Mexico gave birth to a baby boy on July 2, 2007. Her pregnancy was the result of a rape committed by the 65-year-old landlord of the house which her parents rented. The man was jailed.[27][28][29][30]
    * 2008: In St. Anthony, Idaho, U.S., a girl gave birth to a 6 pounds (2.7 kg) baby at Madison Memorial Hospital. 37-year-old Guadalupe Gutierrez-Juarez was jailed on one felony count of rape.[31]

*Age 11*

    * 1972: A girl gave birth at the age of 11 years, 10 months at Royal Buckinghamshire Hospital in Aylesbury, England. The father was the young girl's stepbrother.[32]
    * 2002: A girl from Bridgeport, Connecticut gave birth after being raped by a 75-year-old man, who was arrested on April 17, 2002.[33]
    * 2004: A girl gave birth to a baby boy weighing 8.4 lb (3.8 kg) at a hospital in Kharkov, Ukraine in January 2004. The girl, who is currently the youngest mother in Ukraine, is suspected to have been impregnated by a 26-year-old neighbour, who fled in the fear of facing prosecution.[34]
    * 2005: Valentina gave birth to a boy in Moscow, Russia, after she was impregnated by her 14-year-old boyfriend.[35]
    * 2006: A girl of African origin gave birth to a baby boy at a hospital in West London, United Kingdom on May 5, 2006. A 37-year-old man was arrested.[36]
    * 2007: A girl from Valhalla Park, Cape Town, South Africa gave birth to a baby boy on July 12, 2007. An elderly security guard was arrested in connection with rape. She agreed to give the baby up for adoption on the condition she could visit him once a month.[37]
    * 2007: A girl from Lockland, Ohio, gave birth to a child on November 4, 2007. Her mother's boyfriend, Michael Chaffer, was sentenced to 28 years in prison on charges of felonious assault and two counts of rape. The baby is under the care of relatives.[38]
    * 2009: Kordeza Zhelyazkova, a Roma school girl, gave birth to a healthy daughter in Bulgaria on her wedding day. Nineteen-year-old husband Jeliazko Dimitrov, with whom the child was allegedly conceived a week after meeting, now faces up to six years in jail for having sex with a minor. [39][40]
    * 2010: An unidentified girl in Texas gave birth without complications to a healthy baby boy. No information was available regarding the father's identity. "My daughter and (her) baby are fine, and the baby is absolutely beautiful," said the mother of the 11-year-old girl.[41]


----------



## MahoganyJazz (Apr 23, 2010)

Actually, you're wrong. Here's 1 case that's an example of a woman carrying a baby to term in her *TUBE*! It can, and has happened. *Period*.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3294090






Laela said:


> *A tubal ectopic will KILL a woman. Period.*


----------



## ~Sparklingflame~ (Apr 23, 2010)

MahoganyJazz said:


> Actually, you're wrong. Here's 1 case that's an example of a woman carrying a baby to term in her *TUBE*! It can, and has happened. *Period*.
> 
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3294090


If that happened to me, I would not take that chance.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 23, 2010)

GeechyGurl said:


> I know alot of people are saying that the main reason she should abort is because of her age and size, but I found this list of similar incidents in the news to be interesting. It's sad, I know, but they did not abort and lived. Unless it's been decided that it's definitely life-threatening, I wouldn't want to make the situation worse by adding an unnecessary medical procedure to an already delicate situation. That's just my opinion though.



Actually, the girl inspired the thread but her circumstances didn't color my opinion.  It's rather about maternal morbidity from  complications at any age.  And such complications do increase with prolonged labor  the younger the mother.   In developing countries, the life-expectancy of surviving children lowers post maternal morbidity. 



MahoganyJazz said:


> Actually, you're wrong. Here's 1 case that's an example of a woman carrying a baby to term in her TUBE! It can, and has happened. Period.
> 
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3294090



Did you actually purchase the article to read the stats, determing this as extremely rare as well?


----------



## Lylddlebit (Apr 23, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> But what about the people who are already here who need you to raise them?  Not to mention, a spouse who will be single raising those kids when it could be prevented.  You save not only 1 life, but the rest of the family.
> 
> That's why I made this thread, it's a very difficult subject and, IMHO, not exactly black and white.  As a quasi analogy, I believe that persecuted people in war have a right to kill to preserve themselves - not murder, but to kill, especially when God is part of the matter.  For example, religious groups.  Amalekites, killed to further the people of God.  I wonder if there would have been any christians without the killings back then.  Sounds horrific, I know, but??????  Did Moses murder or did he kill?  Because it happened as a response to his knowledge that he was, in fact, Hebrew and that he was being called to lead them out of bondage. The gray area for me is whether his anger was righteous or sinful.  And that makes me wonder if killing a child who will kill the mother is righteous self-defense/family-defense or sinful such as to allow them both to die a horrible death.




That's the thing...I don't subscribe to the consequentialism ideology of thinking(where the consequences of the action determine if it was moral or not).  To me the means is just as important than the end if not more so.  I don't always get it right, but when I actually do something with pure motives(not damage control, not making the best out of it, not salvaging what I may) then it is what it is.   A husband is designed to be the head of the household, that remains with or without my heartbeat, and I expect that from a man chosen as my husband.  Children are to be taken care of until they can take care of themselves, that starts in pregnancy to me.   I don't see my benefits to the quality of life in those around me as more important than the  right to life to someone inside me. However, I understand how that can be controversial being human, or living in America and other developed countries.


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 24, 2010)

Did the person who posted pre teens having not dying from birth complications bother to read that 95% of those cases were due to rape and incest? 

Is that something to be proud of? "well her brother raped her and she didnt abort she didnt die during child birth, so no one should use that as an excuse"..Seriously? or what is the point of that list?


----------



## KnottyGurl (Apr 24, 2010)

Here we go...

Where did you get that I was saying that's something to be proud of? Like I said in my post, "I" felt that if the abortion wasn't absolutely life-threatening, then "I" don't understand why people are so quick to put this child through a procedure that in itself could do more harm than good. I thought the list was interesting b/c obviously this isn't the first case of this happenening, including this year. Also, I think it shows what the body CAN handle if necessary.  

You need to get a grip and re-examine why you're so defensive.  

Relax-Relate-Release



Bachelorette said:


> Did the person who posted pre teens having not dying from birth complications bother to read that 95% of those cases were due to rape and incest?
> 
> Is that something to be proud of? "well her brother raped her and she didnt abort she didnt die during child birth, so no one should use that as an excuse"..Seriously? or what is the point of that list?


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 24, 2010)

Father, forgive them...for they know not what they do or say!

In Jesus name, amen.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 24, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> Father, forgive them...for they know not what they do or say!
> 
> In Jesus name, amen.




Who????


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 24, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Who????


I was talking to the Lord...He knows.

Have a blessed evening, CreoleNat.

ETA: and before anyone gets bent out of shape, I wasn't talking to the Lord about anyone specific in this thread, ok?


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> I was talking to the Lord...He knows.
> 
> Have a blessed evening, CreoleNat.
> 
> ETA: and before anyone gets bent out of shape, I wasn't talking to the Lord about anyone specific in this thread, ok?


If you were talking to the Lord, then why did you post your so-called "talk with the Lord" in CreoleNat's thread? (a question that doesn't need to be answered) No one is stupid or ignorant, you were definitely aiming at one or more ladies in this thread...


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> If you were talking to the Lord, then why did you post your so-called "talk with the Lord" in CreoleNat's thread? (a question that doesn't need to be answered) No one is stupid or ignorant, you were definitely aiming at one or more ladies in this thread...


You know PB...I'm really tired of you coming behind my posts in many threads and questioning my motives. I have a right to post what I like, just like you and everyone else on this forum.  I would appreciate it if you would leave me alone...if not, I will certainly ask that it be enforced.

Thank you.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

Bachelorette said:


> Did the person who posted pre teens having not dying from birth complications bother to read that 95% of those cases were due to rape and incest?
> 
> Is that something to be proud of? "well her brother raped her and she didnt abort she didnt die during child birth, so no one should use that as an excuse"..Seriously? or what is the point of that list?


I think she was posting that to show how there were young girls who had no problems giving birth to children, not as something to be proud of. It is sad that most of these cases were from rape and incest.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> You know PB...I'm really tired of you coming behind my posts in many threads and questioning my motives. I would appreciate it if you would leave me alone...if not, it will certainly ask that it be enforced.
> 
> Thank you.


Yeah right. If you were tired of me, you would have put me on ignore. I would suggest that you put me on ignore if you want it to be enforced. I'm free to comment and reply just like you. But I can tell you one thing, your motives are not Christ-like, and I'm not the only one noticing it...


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

*And to NICE&WAVY, don't bother responding, you're on my ignore list, so I can no longer see your posts! Woo-hoo! Thank the Lord! Thank you Jesus! There's some sarcasm for ya! *


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Yeah right. If you were tired of me, you would have put me on ignore. I would suggest that you put me on ignore if you want it to be enforced. I'm free to comment and reply just like you. But I can tell you one thing, your motives are not Christ-like, and I'm not the only one noticing it...


How would you know what being Christ-like is, Poohbear?  The way you behave is childlike and worldly...and I'm not the only one noticing it.

I don't have to put you on ignore...why don't you just ignore any of my posts and we will be ok...ok?

Thank you.


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> *And to NICE&WAVY, don't bother responding, you're on my ignore list, so I can no longer see your posts! Woo-hoo! Thank the Lord! Thank you Jesus! There's some sarcasm for ya! *


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 24, 2010)

CreolNat...I won't be responding anymore to your thread, as I was going to share something that the Lord has shown me, but I'm seeing that in doing so will bring out hostility in some

ETA: I know I just did, but I'm done now....going to pray.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

What a nice & lovely image:


----------



## Nice & Wavy (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> What a nice & lovely image:


I know you will see this post, Poohbear and I just want to say that I'm praying for you, because apparently you are truly being tormented by the enemy.  His plan is to totally destroy you and tear you apart.  Don't allow him to do that to you, I'm sure there's more to you then beneath the eye.


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 24, 2010)

GeechyGurl said:


> Here we go...
> 
> Where did you get that I was saying that's something to be proud of? Like I said in my post, "I" felt that if the abortion wasn't absolutely life-threatening, then "I" don't understand why people are so quick to put this child through a procedure that in itself could do more harm than good. I thought the list was interesting b/c obviously this isn't the first case of this happenening, including this year. Also, I think it shows what the body CAN handle if necessary.
> 
> ...



Im defensive cos I find the reasoning behind the list to be gross. Anything else?

Yea there are pre teens who are able to carry a child to term without problems..AND?

I like how you say the body can handle like everyone is the same. Sorry to break it to you but we're not ALL the same. What some people can handle, others can not. That shouldnt be hard to comprehend.

And I repeat 95% of those on that list were thru rape and incest..so if someone in such a situation were to decide NOT to go thru the pregnancy for reasons other than medical , like hm, NOT WANTING TO BE REMINDED OF SITUATION they were in, are you saying God will turn against them? Since some of you are there saying "God would be against this, God would be against that..so God wasnt against these girls that being molested by family members and raped by others then"??


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> I think she was posting that to show how there were young girls who had no problems giving birth to children, not as something to be proud of. It is sad that most of these cases were from rape and incest.



I know but still if some of these girls had decided to get an abortion instead of going thru labor carrying a demon seed then are they horrible people? Gonna burn in hell? what then and the list doesnt make sense cos no one said they were too young to give brth, it was said that some were warned NOT to due to complications

Ironically Im sure if there were to dig deeper, most of the girls on that list probably died AFTER child birth. I guess that's better to some.


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:
			
		

> 10796534No one is stupid or ignorant, you were definitely aiming at one or more ladies in this thread...



Im sure no one believed that so dont worry.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> You made a good point about hypocrisy. It goes to show you how there are so many factors that play into certain issues that are commonly debated.
> 
> And thanks for answering my question. And you know what? I can actually see how life begins when you're born. Just think about it... let's say someone is born December 25, 1934 and they die on December 25, 2004. No one says that the person lived to be 70 years old + the months he or she was in their mother's womb.
> 
> But even the word "life" is defined in so many ways. There are definitions that support a baby having life inside the mother's womb. See here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/life


 
Anyone that says life does not begin at conception, please give me an example of anything that is growing but not living.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

Oh wow. That Lina Medina (who got pregnant at 5) is apparently still alive. She got married and even had another child in 1972.  Here's a picture of her when she was pregnant:




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

authenticitymanifesting said:


> Anyone that says life does not begin at conception, please give me an example of anything that is growing but not living.


 Yeah, I would like an example of that too.


----------



## Renovating (Apr 24, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Oh wow. That Lina Medina (who got pregnant at 5) is apparently still alive. She got married and even had another child in 1972. Here's a picture of her when she was pregnant:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


 That is beyond awful! 

perplexederplexed I don't even understand how it is even possible for a five year old to get pregnant. I've never even heard of someone starting menstruation that early.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

Bachelorette said:


> I know but still if some of these girls had decided to get an abortion instead of going thru labor carrying a demon seed then are they horrible people? Gonna burn in hell? what then and the list doesnt make sense cos no one said they were too young to give brth, it was said that some were warned NOT to due to complications
> 
> Ironically Im sure if there were to dig deeper, most of the girls on that list probably died AFTER child birth. I guess that's better to some.


Yeah, I also think it's odd how all these women had precocious puberty and then get pregnant. Is it like once a boy or man found out the little girl started puberty, they decided to have sex with the little girl and ejaculate inside of her? erplexed


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 24, 2010)

Couple more pics of Lina Medina...

Dr. Lozada, Lina, and her 11-month-old son:





Lina at age 33 in 1967:


----------



## Priss Pot (Apr 25, 2010)

I believe that sometimes people get so warped up in Bible scriptures and stuff that they forget to look at the reality of the situation and think with common sense.

Everything is not black and white.  What happened to the saying "God knows your heart?"  He knows the reason why you're having the abortion, and that's all that matters.  Have faith in that and make your decision as you see fit.

This 10 year-old should NOT be forced to have this baby.  People are forgetting what this 10-year-old BABY will be going through if she has this child.  You can sit behind a computer screen and give your judgements, but you are not the one that's 10 years-old and pregnant.  

Sometimes all you have is faith when there seems to be nowhere else to go, but in this case, you actually have options.  There is no way I would force my baby girl into giving birth to her rapist's child.  I am so grateful that I am able to have an objective point-of-view on this issue.


----------



## MahoganyJazz (Apr 25, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Did you actually purchase the article to read the stats, determing this as extremely rare as well?



No, I did not. I watch a lot of Discovery Channel, and there was a show once talking about babies surviving to full term outside of the womb.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 25, 2010)

Nice & Wavy said:


> Father, forgive them...for they know not what they do or say!
> 
> In Jesus name, amen.


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 25, 2010)

Poohbear said:


> Yeah right. If you were tired of me, you would have put me on ignore. I would suggest that you put me on ignore if you want it to be enforced. I'm free to comment and reply just like you. But I can tell you one thing, your motives are not Christ-like, and I'm not the only one noticing it...


Well said.  There is nothing Christ-like about it.  And as you pointed out earlier, if you are talking to the Lord,  and not about anyone in this thread, why post it in the thread?

I think there is a scripture though about people  praying out loud for the attention of others.  And the scripture basically says God is not pleased with it or impressed. 


It is attitudes like this that turn people off.  And to say someone is acting child-like and worldly is too much. 

Somebody needs to rethink their attitude and search their heart to discover their true motives.


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 25, 2010)

Poohbear, whether a 5 year ld survived childbirth doesnt make her any better than those younger or older that decide NOT to go ahead with birth so sorry if Im not gonna applaud her or her family. She could deal with it, some others can not. Neither should be condemned for picking whatever option is best for them.



> This 10 year-old should NOT be forced to have this baby. People are forgetting what this 10-year-old BABY will be going through if she has this child. You can sit behind a computer screen and give your judgements, but you are not the one that's 10 years-old and pregnant.
> 
> Sometimes all you have is faith when there seems to be nowhere else to go, but in this case, you actually have options. There is no way I would force my baby girl into giving birth to her rapist's child. I am so grateful that I am able to have an objective point-of-view on this issue.



Thank You. completely agree.


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 25, 2010)

nathansgirl1908 said:


> W
> I think there is a scripture though about people  praying out loud for the attention of others.  And the scripture basically says God is not pleased with it or impressed.
> 
> It is attitudes like this that turn people off.  And to say someone is acting child-like and worldly is too much. .



*nd when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they  love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the  streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have  their reward.*


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 25, 2010)

--------------------not even worth it.


----------



## Guitarhero (Apr 25, 2010)

nathansgirl1908 said:


>




Well, actually, I appreciate Nice & Wavy's response even though I don't agree with it.  This is just discussion.  Imagine the apostles trying to wrap their minds around the fact that God has a body and came in the form of a man.  This is practically no different, attempting to apply scripture and determine what is permissible and what is not.  But at least she actually CARES about those of us here in this thread.  She is not taunting and provoking us.

We can all agree to disagree with respect and most of you have accomplished this.


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 25, 2010)

Actually I found that "prayer" taunting but I guess that's just me. *shrugs*


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 25, 2010)

Bachelorette said:


> *nd when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they  love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the  streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have  their reward.*



Thanks, girl!


----------



## nathansgirl1908 (Apr 25, 2010)

CreoleNat said:


> Well, actually, I appreciate Nice & Wavy's response even though I don't agree with it.  This is just discussion.  Imagine the apostles trying to wrap their minds around the fact that God has a body and came in the form of a man.  This is practically no different, attempting to apply scripture and determine what is permissible and what is not.  But at least she actually CARES about those of us here in this thread.  She is not taunting and provoking us.
> 
> We can all agree to disagree with respect and most of you have accomplished this.



I don't see it as so much caring.  I see it as a superiority thing and somewhat judgmental.  I'm beginning to see a pattern with her responses.   

But I think that we HAVE  pretty much managed to agree or disagree in a respectful manner.


----------



## Poohbear (Apr 25, 2010)

Bachelorette said:


> Poohbear, whether a 5 year ld survived childbirth *doesnt make her any better than those younger or older that decide NOT to go ahead with birth* so sorry if Im not gonna applaud her or her family. She could deal with it, some others can not. Neither should be condemned for picking whatever option is best for them.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank You. completely agree.


I agree with what you have said. No one is better than anyone. I was just posting pictures of the girl because I thought it was interesting to see.


----------



## cgolden (Apr 25, 2010)

seriously.... ya'll have gone really far from the issue at hand and are getting really upset and hostile over people you dont know. nobody is judging this little girl. nobody is damning her to hell. they just said whether they thought it was OK for her to get an abortion because of her circumstances. it's an opinion poll, people, not everyone has the same opinion as you. GET OVER IT! lol
some may feel like the WORD is very clear, i feel the same way, but everyone is entitled to their own interpretation, and they have to answer to God, not any1 else. so if someone feels that the Lord says it's ok to get an abortion, because God doesnt address it that's on THEM. if you disagree state your opinion and move on.

but this message prolly wont matter because i feel that this thread will die relatively soon. lol


----------



## cgolden (Apr 25, 2010)

and these are the abortion types i spoke of before. you can get an abortion all the way through, you just cant go get one anywhere.

http://www.americanpregnancy.org/unplannedpregnancy/abortionprocedures.html

_*What abortion procedures are used during the first trimester?*_


I've seen several presentations on the various procedures, but i didnt want to post pictures or anything graphic, cause thats not cool. if you want to see more you can google it yourself. 
*Methotrexate & Misoprostol (MTX): *a medical abortion procedure used up to the first seven weeks of pregnancy.

*Mifepristone and Misoprostol*: a medical abortion procedure used up to the first seven to nine weeks of pregnancy. It is also referred to as RU-486, the abortion pill and Mifeprex. 

*Suction Aspiration:* a surgical abortion procedure used to terminate pregnancy between 6 to 12 weeks gestation. It is also referred to as suction curettage or vacuum aspiration.


*What abortion procedures are used during the second trimester?*

*Dilation & Curettage* (D & C): a surgical abortion procedure used to terminate a pregnancy between 13 to 15 weeks gestation. It is also referred to as suction curettage or vacuum aspiration.

*Dilation & Evacuation * (D & E): a surgical abortion procedure used to terminate a pregnancy between 15 to 21 weeks gestation.

*Induction Abortion*: a rarely performed surgical procedure where salt water, urea, or potassium chloride is injected into the amniotic sac; prostaglandins are inserted into the vagina and pitocin is injected intravenously.


_*What abortion procedures are used during the third trimester?*_
*Induction Abortion*: a rarely done surgical procedure where salt water, urea, or potassium chloride is injected into the amniotic sac; prostaglandins are inserted into the vagina and pitocin is injected intravenously. 

*Dilation and Extraction*: a surgical abortion procedure used to terminate a pregnancy after 21 weeks of gestation. This procedure is also known as D & X, Intact D & X, Intrauterine Cranial Decompression and Partial Birth Abortion.


----------



## Crackers Phinn (Apr 25, 2010)

cgolden said:


> seriously.... ya'll have gone really far from the issue at hand and are getting really upset and hostile over people you dont know. nobody is judging this little girl. nobody is damning her to hell. they just said whether they thought it was OK for her to get an abortion because of her circumstances. it's an opinion poll, people, not everyone has the same opinion as you. GET OVER IT! lol



"Get over it LOL" @ a 10 yr old being raped and forced to carry a child.  

It is a sick notion that G-d led that pervert into this childs 10 yr old vagina so that the miracle of life could happen.  Because ultimately, by making her carry this child to term, that IS the judgement that is being passed.

The PC anthem that "every child is a blessing" is complete nonsense.  What this child has growing inside of her is an abomination.


----------



## Bachelorette (Apr 26, 2010)

Can always count on Crackers for a dose of common sense.


----------

