ANY PRAYER REQUESTS ARE WELCOME!
Please, READERS, keep any input on the posts ON TOPIC. Thanks!
ALSO: Please give $11 a month to the Stephen Siller Tunnel toTowers Foundation!,
It's so worthwhile!
https://tunnel2towers.org/The chief danger that confronts the coming century will be religion without the Holy Ghost,
Christianity without Christ, forgiveness without repentance, salvation without regeneration,
politics without God, heaven without hell.
William Booth“I should like to see any power of the world destroy this race, this small tribe of unimportant people, whose wars have all been fought and lost, whose structures have crumbled, literature is unread, music is unheard, and prayers are no more answered. Go ahead, destroy Armenia . See if you can do it. Send them into the desert without bread or water. Burn their homes and churches. Then see if they will not laugh, sing and pray again. For when two of them meet anywhere in the world, see if they will not create a New Armenia.”
― William SaroyanThe inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. -- Winston Churchill
Ignorance is not an opinion, liberals
I believe in Christianity as I believe the sun has risen; not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else. C. S. Lewis
if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
2 Chronicles 7:14THERE WILL BE NO THREATS OF ANY KIND AT THIS BLOG, TO POLITICIANS OR OTHER COMMENTERS. thank you.
-
Recent Posts
Blogroll
- Always on Watch
- Armenian History Centennial blog
- blacksphere
- Bunkerville
- Chattering Teeth
- Diary of a Right-Wing Pussycat
- ELIZABETH
- Fix Bayonets
- Flash Report/California Politics
- FOLLOW THE PROOF
- fredd
- Mac 'n GeeeZ
- Mark Blog
- Mustang Koji-San
- Not of this World
- Old Geeez
- One America News
- SAM HUNTINGTON
- Silverfiddle
- Thoughts from Afar Mustang
- Truth for Life
- Will ReadySetQuestion
- Woodsterman
- WordPress Tutorial
Categories
Archives
Meta
Blog Authors
Tags
Blog Authors
geeez2014Copyright & Fair Use Statement I hereby assert that the purpose of this blog is educational/informative in matters of politics and faith. There is no commercial purpose to this blog. There is no revenue generated from any material posted here. I am not in competition with any news source, including any other on-line journal, and I have no interest in interfering with any person’s ability to earn an income as an author, journalist, photographer, or artist. This website contains some quotations and excerpts from copyrighted material. These uses fall well within the copyright doctrine of “Fair Use.” Section 107 of the United States Code, Title 17, specifies the conditions under which, “the fair use of a copyrighted work . . . for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching . . ., scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.” It provides four considerations for determining fair use: (1) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes, (2) The nature of the copyrighted work, (3) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and (4) The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work. The use on this website of other material involves “criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship or research” (a) The “purpose and character” of the website is not “commercial.” (b) The overwhelming majority of the material is the author’s own research and work. It is in no way a mere collection of others’ copyrighted works, nor is any material competitive with those sources. (2) The “nature of the copyrighted work” quoted is often “news” or “faith,” categories given lesser protection in fair use cases than works of fiction. (3) Most uses involve excerpts rather than entire works. Because the adverse financial impact on copyright owners is central to the purpose of copyright law, and the analysis of alleged violations, it’s relevant to note that, under factor (4), (a) no one in search of the quoted material would substitute this blog or book for the original source, (b) it is highly unlikely this website (or any material created from it) will ever have more than a de minimis impact on any of the copyright works’ potential market, and (c) to the extent it might do so, it would be far more likely be a positive, rather than a negative, impact (by drawing attention to the work, crediting it, and providing a source where it may be found). Finally, to the extent any copyright owner may wish, consideration will be given to all reasonable requests that copyright material be removed from this website. I will always endeavor to provide proper attribution to the source of another person’s work if I know it. If I do not know the source of incorporated work, I will state “source unknown.” I will happily credit any previously unknown source if their identity is made known to me in “blog comments.” -GeeeZ
GeeeZ .... 
Once you attempt this argument, if aborting a child is murder, than why exceptions- such as rape, incest or life of the mother?
I am not a Catholic nor a scholar, but at one point did not the church take the position that the baby’s right to life exceeded the life of the Mother?
The baby developed out of rape thus is entitled as much to life. Incest? Hmm. That is even harder to insist the mother must carry to term. A 13 year old?
But we make a moral judgement and value. Abortion up to an including the moment of birth finds most thinking this disagreeable. Six weeks or so? Not so much.
It is the same with the death penalty. Are there worse murders than others? Is a certain taking of a life worthy of the exchange of the perpetrators life?
We each have our own values and views.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The question is the notion of when that being is conferred person hood.
Both in a religious and legal sense. I’ve been told that some believe personhood is not conferred until breath. It seems that would allow late term or even post delivery. That sounds convenient for the person wanting cover for their decision to to abort. Some think it starts with a heartbeat or survivability outside the womb (how do you test that in a non destructive manner?)
Biden used to profess a pro-life position. He is stupid. In more ways than one. But in this case he is duplicitous.
Our 14th Amendment guarantees rights to “persons”. That’s a civil matter predicated on moral decision. The morals that inform that decision matter. Often, selfishness informs the morals of many.
LikeLike
The key part of the abortion issue is, of course, privacy. Except for religion and the act of killing itself, abortion is about as personal a decision as human behavior gets.
Terminating pregnancy at any stage and for any reason is not the business of anybody other than the host and her doctor once she has reconciled the act with her god, if she has one.
It is by NO means the concern of the general public, the media, or the government, nor should it require funding by taxpayers. And it does NOT belong on ballots.
The need to clean up for mistakes in judgment, self discipline, or personal hygiene often reflects selfishness, laziness, or ignorance. Alternate means for preventing stretch marks exist.
As my grandmother often said, the best medicine for preventing pregnancy is an aspirin, held firmly between the knees. And she had 8 kids, so she knew something about the process.
LikeLike
Abortion should be a soul-searching decision. When it becomes political, easily accessible, and the moral ramifications are dismissed with the opinion the possible citizen has no bearing, and can easily be destroyed – sometimes in great pain – then the gravity of the procedure is removed. That’s where we are. The procedure is a lucrative endeavor of doctors that should do no harm, politicians can use it for a political club, promiscuity is rewarded, and the fact there is something terribly wrong with destroying the unborn is ignored.
Legally abortion should be decided by the states. The Constitution does not explicitly address the issues, so the U.S. government has no standing without an amendment to the Constitution. From my view, states that forbid, abortion, except in extremely rare circumstances, have citizens that are more responsible. Those that embrace abortion are ignoring the moral turpitude decaying their society.
Biden is a pathetic, morally bankrupt politician that has reached the point he has no function except his position. In the beginning, he was willing to accept being manipulated for money. Now, he’s a senile, wicked pedophile that should have already faced his judgment. Rather the Catholics want to discuss his faith isn’t nearly as important as praying for the end of his power.
LikeLiked by 2 people
BUNKERVILLE…thank you for reminding me…yes, why is rape’s embryo okay to kill? Many say it’s too much pressure for the mother to carry a rapist’s child; and who could really argue that?
Life of the mother always is a curious one, too………..why her and not the baby? And, of course, most people would disagree with that question.
“We each have our own values and views.” We DO , that is FOR SURE…..
ED: Selfishness too often determines values and morals…no doubt about that.
BOCOPRO….As a Christian, I hesitate, but have to admit that I don’t believe it’s anybody’s business but the mother, maybe the father, and their doctor; and her God. If she can live with herself…that’s her choice. God tells us gossip is as big a sin as abortion or murder…sin is sin.
Still…..We have a forgiving God if we seek that forgiveness sincerely.
THIS IS A MOST DIFFICULT QUESTION….
I suppose our country gets involved because we are a people who protects LIFE under any circumstances….MURDER IS PUT ON TRIAL…even pro abortion Americans believe that…………
SO, the question boils down to; IS ABORTION MURDER? Was it Pres Obama who toyed with letting a newborn die upon healthy delivery? I forget the details of that one…
and that rests on my post’s points and all of your excellent points/reminders.
JESS….I agree with you……….I don’t QUITE get why STATE v FEDERAL matters that much, never have.
Plus, my poor state has a gov who invited abortion seekers in states which don’t allow it to come to California! And we’ll even pay your airfare…and the abortion, remember?
Biden, at BEST, duplicitous………at worst; REALLY STUPID…on THIS subject, too.
LikeLike
Humans are such odd creatures. They seem to go out of their way to find reasons for disagreement. I don’t understand this particular argument for reasons I’ll address in a moment. First, though, I believe freedom of choice is a gift from God, and we should respect it. A corollary to that right is accountability. A judgment day will come when we all must stand in the dock and answer for our “unforgiven” sins.
Unfortunately (for me), my beliefs are such that I often view other “Christians” with skepticism. I reject the idea of some Christians that either you believe as they do and conform to their views or suffer the fires of hell for all eternity. I often think of these people as behaving no differently from radical Islamists (sans the stoning with genuine stones). Sanctimoniousness comes from excessive pride, a sin.
As an aside, my friend Bunks did an excellent job posing legitimate questions that everyone conveniently ignores. Her questions deserve a response. If a murderer can be forgiven, along with a rapist, homosexual, sailor, or any number of other deviant practices, and robbery, lying, or failing to acknowledge God, then what is so depreciatory about an abortion?
Now we arrive at Uncle Mustang’s history lesson: we know that women have been aborting fetuses for around 2,000 years. We know this because the Greek physician Soranus of Ephesus kept records of the methods he suggested using to abort a pregnancy. He is the subject of several books about the history of medicine. That period is significant because abortion was practiced during “biblical” times.
Yet, there is nothing in the Bible, Old Testament or New, that addresses abortion. Still, the absence of an explicit reference hasn’t stopped opponents of abortion from reaching into the Bible for support. “Reaching” is a good word for what people do.
For example, one argument cites man’s creation as being in God’s image. Fact: we have no idea what God looks like. It is a frivolous argument. I can show you visual proof that people in Asia believe that Jesus had slanted eyes and very high cheekbones, and that doesn’t look like me at all. The other frequent reach is to Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Paul the Apostle — said to have been called to their sacred tasks since their time in the womb. Right. Contrary to what Catholics say, Exodus 21 tells us that a pregnant woman’s life is more valuable than that of her fetus.
If this isn’t enough, we can always rely on common sense. Does the removal of a cancer to save someone’s life interfere with God’s plan? No? Then why is this other organism sacrosanct? Answer: it isn’t. In any case, let’s try to remember that childbirth has proven to be as deadly to women as any cancer.
And let us stop equating abortion to salacious behavior; doing this diminishes both the subject of the argument and the fool who makes it. Simply put, I support that a woman has the same rights as any man. In a contest between a pregnant woman and the man who claims fatherhood, which of them has jus primatus? In my view, whoever suffers the most physical pain in that process owns the right to the final decision. I support a woman’s right to choose — and to one day be held to account for unforgiven sins, just like every man.
LikeLike
This reminded me of a conversation I overheard years ago when my neighbor with 5 kids was talking with a Mexican worker he’d hired (both Catholics) say he and his wife use contraceptions, and my neighbor telling him the Pope says we can’t then the Mexican said “Well, the Pope doesn’t have to pay for the kids!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
No matter what slant you put on it, murder is murder. Murder when the state does it is legal; murder when someone else does it is against the law, excepting self-defense in some jurisdictions. Even accidental murder is against the law in most jurisdictions. In this example and others, it depends on attending circumstances. The government put Bernie Madoff in jail for doing what the Social Security Administration does daily: the pyramid scheme. I’ve heard conversations about rape when someone said, “Well, she had it coming.” No one has it coming; either that or we all have it coming. One of these days, we’ll figure it all out. Or not.
LikeLike
The base question is “what is it?” If it isn’t a human0 this is a mute issue. We observe the size, location and degree of development is different from an adult, but we know a baby will NEVER become an eagle. Too bad. Then it might have more protection.
If it is truly a choice between 2 lives, I would opt for the adult who is vs. the baby who could be one. I understand – but don’t know for a fact – that the Roman Catholic position was the opposite in the past. And I know a very Catholic woman who around 1965 chose to have her babies delivered in a Jewish hospital and not a Catholic one because SHE believed that was the Catholic position, and she wanted to be the one they tried to save if it came down to the choice of one or the other. It does not always, btw – a choice, that is. But it’s been so abused by the baby killing (and now re-sale) industry that any inconvenience has been swept into a mushy broad category of life of the mother OR mental health, etc.
Is it murder if YOU kill my baby, but not if I do? Or I hire someone else to? When did THAT enter law? Why is that logic not applied when I kill my troubled 9-yr old who tortures animals then? At least at that point we’re acting with greater knowledge to nip future grief in the bud, no?
There are those who opt for abortion until the baby can survive on its own. We need to be very careful what we wish for. There are MANY fully developed people who can’t survive on their own. Herr Hitler observed this and moved to cleanse his country of them long before the Jews. WHO DECIDES? I sure don’t want that crowd leading the covid fiasco to decide.
In our society abortion is joining the path to self-extinction. No wonder governments at various times and places in the past outlawed or greatly discouraged it. The early Soviets quickly reversed their gears on this one when they thought about it for a minute.
Although I am staunchly pro-life, I am not absolutist. Before 5 weeks, before a heartbeat is there yet a soul? This question would be much easier to answer if God let us know when a soul is engendered in that little one. As for a pregnancy from an illegal/immoral act, I have wondered out loud if the ultimate penalty is with the one who committed the crime vs. the one who unburdened herself of the result. I have known 2 women who were the result of a real rape. One of them in war. Both were glad to have life. Yet, German doctors performed many abortions for women who were raped by French African troops. It would have left children marked for more troubles in that society. (My friend’s mother was raped by a Russian soldier, so at least she was white and “fit” in to German society.)
Should Lady Justice be blind in only one eye? I’m raising more questions than I answered. Add emotions, fear and greed to the mix, and no wonder this is such a contentious subject.
I agree with Jess. The U.S. government has no standing in this issue. It’s a matter of federalism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
MUSTANG: Not all of us ignored Bunkerville’s excellent questions….
I have to admit that LIFE being SO important in Scripture, I hesitate, but have to fall on the side of a woman choosing for herself and, what I’ve frequently said, is it’s between HER and her God…. As I also said above, God is a forgiving God to those who seek it…though I know women at my bible study who’ve had abortions years ago, know they’re forgiven, and WILL NEVER FORGET THE WHOLE THING….. Forgiven or not, they still, sometimes 45 yrs later, suffer. That tells ME something.
I don’t think “in God’s image” is what He looks like….it’s His Words, His being…His wisdom from the Word
Thanks for your input….don’t agree with all of it, and Do believe especially that it’s Scripture some of us Christians adhere to, much of which is very clear, some open to some interpretation, mostly turned interpretive because not everyone LIKES that they read! And anybody veering from Scripture and insisting you believe or go to hell is himself not reading much Scripture 🙂
BAYSIDER……..It’s a totally moot issue; As I said above in my post; are those embryonic cells going to become a Buick or Whirlpool dishwasher? they”ll become a HUMAN, I don’t care what ANYBODY says. That’s my “PERIOD!” moment I see no more discussion on that issue…. that’s why I’m appalled at “If it’s rape” ”If it’s incest” ”if it’s…” that’s still killing those embryos. PERIOD.
Do we kill those embryos because they’re marked for poverty or trouble? WHAT?
SO MUCH STUFF HERE, ISN’T THERE, EVERYBODY!? TO ME, THE MONTH DOES NOT MATTER IN THE LEAST…IT’S EITHER POTENTIAL LIFE OR IT IS NOT.
STILL, I don’t think the government should be involved… but then we go back to “But MURDER IS ILLEGAL” SO, if it IS Murder………..or killing, anyway…….does the government’s rule stop at ‘unborn’? ….uhoh!!
Great conversation, great input, everyone! Thank you
LikeLike
The one thing that wasn’t stressed by anyone is, it still begins on a PERSON, not a hospital or a factory somewhere, ergo, although it is life in its earliest form, it is on an individual (host) and should be decided by that individual what should take place. No. It’s not like a wart or other growth. It is life in its earliest form. It becomes a question of morality and should not be looked upon the same way as murder.
LikeLike
MAL…I hesitated, but did use MURDER, and I agree; not the best term to use…though some would think it is exactly that…
And your point is the one I make; this is a PERSON, or potential person…it’s NOT a potential anything else………………I think a lot of us believe it’s up to that ‘host’…yes…
Not sure how you separate murder from any discussion on morality, but…I’m with you!
LikeLike
I agree with your last statement, Z. It’s hard to separate the two.
LikeLike
Another thought just occurred to me. When a pregnant woman is murdered, which happens, does the perp get charged with 1 or 2? Not sure, but it seems as like it’s been 2. If the death is by accident, say auto crash, they mention the fact she was pregnant, but thats different than murder.
LikeLike
Mal, you are right. If a pregnant woman is murdered and the baby dies, the law sees it as two murders historically.
The argument that it is not a federal issue ignores the 14th amendment issue I mentioned earlier. Perhaps no one read it.
Personhood.
For Mustang to say that the baby in the womb is a like a cancerous growth made me reread it a couple times to make sure I didn’t misunderstand him.
Because it’s such a stupid thing to say.
Cancerous growths to not grow up to be children, do not develop heartbeats, show pain when harmed or share the genetic composition of both parents.
Just because abortion has happened for 2000 years doesn’t make it right.
They used to offer their children to Moloch also.
Which many of us see as similar to this.
Does the Bible outright condemn abortion? “Thou shalt not murder.” sounds like it does.
At what point is it murder? After a heartbeat? After conception? After birth?
If it can grow to be a person, if it isn’t already, maybe we should err on the side of caution.
Unless you don’t believe there is a an impartial Judge, who sees what is done in secret, in which case, “do as you will”.
LikeLike
Ed, your statement about a cancerous growth had me wonder what if it’s found the baby in the womb is abnormal in some way, esp. physically (cancer?) or missing an important body part, like a brain? How about when twins are joined together in such a way they have to make a decision which one lives (sharing one head, heart, etc)? Aside from which one has the best chance for survival, the surgeon must decide who lives and who dies, doesn’t he? This open a lot of fodder for debate.
LikeLike
ED, I had to reread MUSTANG’s comment to see where he likened an embryo to a cancerous growth. He’ll have to respond to you but I truly doubt what he said means that. ”At what point is it murder” is what got me writing this post today….when I heard how the Republicans think abortion should only be done until 3 months and Dems supposedly don’t mind if it’s done just before birth, for example. I got to thinking “is this REALLY the question? WHEN should a baby be aborted? What’s TIMING got to even DO with it?” I still feel that way.
MUSTANG did say “In any case, let’s try to remember that childbirth has proven to be as deadly to women as any cancer.””
This , I doubt, as many more women who get cancer die from it than the amount of women who get pregnant and die from it…..
MAL…fascinating point that I’d forgotten; Yes, when a pregnant woman is killed, I believe it’s USUALLY a charge of TWO murders. And, yes, I’ve frequently thought “How’s this murder but aborting a child isn’t?”
Really…how crazy is THAT? And, yes, a doc often has to decide which baby in the womb dies and which does not..
ALL great stuff, everyone………..thanks for a fascinating Sunday Faith Post 🙂
LikeLike