There is Everything Wrong with Abortion

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Columbus, OH

#227569 Mar 7, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Hello OCB, you are giving me a history lesson that I do not need,'thou shalt not kill' or 'thou shalt do no murder', they are both in the Bible and they both mean the same thing, the point is that your friend Liam practically swears that the Bible does not put it in that term, when it is right there in Exodus 20:13 to read, so I'm sorry but he is either blind or ignorant or both, but his lack of knowledge has been exposed.
Anyone who is an expert in Hebrew will say it is not "kill" it is "murder" and until you get a degree in the Hebrew language, I'll take the word of people who speak the language over the word of someone who just wishes it were true.

“Ignore the trolls”

Since: Oct 08

Southampton, UK

#227570 Mar 7, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Here is an opportunity for you to take your own advice, you are also not the boss of me, and I will continue to post on the evils of abortion when I chose to do so, don't like it? too bad, you can't shut anyone's mouth.
Coming from the poster who agreed with LIP that I should shut up and leave here? Glad to see there are no dual values and expectations of others in your world. You get what you give out - sometimnes known as karma.

“Ignore the trolls”

Since: Oct 08

Southampton, UK

#227571 Mar 7, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Tony are you REALLY THIS ignorant? the word lets us know that all scripture is given by inspiration of God, hand written by men but convey to them by the Lord through his spirit, he also used the hands of man to put the Bible together and break it down into books, chapters and verses, he got his Word over to his people and that included everything that he intended for our use IN Christ be it the OT or the NEW which includes the four gospels and everything else in it.
And a question..........why do we NOW have to hunt witches or offer up blood sacrifices when Christ is the end of the law and the ultimate sacrifice for all mankind?
There you go, bandyiong around that word ignorant again. Ignorance is ignoring my question about the books of the NEW TESTAMENT (that's the part of the bible you claim modifies God's message) which were discarded. Did God tell man to discard them? Or is that another too difficult question? Care to produce any evidence to substantiate your claim about God's influence in creating the bible? Btw, you are aware that the Jewish religion - that of the OT - was not monotheistic originally? Ignorance is telling everyone that your view of the world, whether about religion or about abortion is the right one - ergo, look in the mirror to see ignorance.

Buddha reached enlightenment through meditation - how do you know God was not in that - oh, of course, Buddha didn't come up with your message, so it has to be wrong. You believe that Mohammed and Confucius were wrong in their view - you can't prove it as it is belief, which is unprovable. Even the Christian churches cannot unite on a message - hence all the differing versions of it leadeing to the different sects. But you reckon you know it all, simply by parroting a message without thought. That defines ingorance.

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#227572 Mar 8, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Here is an opportunity for you to take your own advice, you are also not the boss of me, and I will continue to post on the evils of abortion when I chose to do so, don't like it? too bad, you can't shut anyone's mouth.
Re-read that post and show anyone here where she says you should shut up or stop posting.

Reading Comprehension. It does a brain good.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227573 Mar 8, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Here is an opportunity for you to take your own advice, you are also not the boss of me, and I will continue to post on the evils of abortion when I chose to do so, don't like it? too bad, you can't shut anyone's mouth.
Show me where I said you had to quit posting, or even that I want you to.

http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0SOT21...

My advice was to quit lying. If in your case the two are the same, that's your problem.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#227574 Mar 8, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Hello OCB, you are giving me a history lesson that I do not need,'thou shalt not kill' or 'thou shalt do no murder', they are both in the Bible and they both mean the same thing, the point is that your friend Liam practically swears that the Bible does not put it in that term, when it is right there in Exodus 20:13 to read, so I'm sorry but he is either blind or ignorant or both, but his lack of knowledge has been exposed.
More's the pity for you if you take the NEW Testament version of "thou shalt not kill" as the words you live by.

That means every time you step on an ant you are going against the sixth commandment.

It means every time you eat animal flesh you are endorsing, condoning and encouraging the killing of animals.

And sorry, Lawest, but again:

"You shall not murder sometimes translated as You shall not kill, KJV Thou shalt not kill (LXX &#959;&#8016; &#966;&#959;&#957; &#949;&#973;&#963; &#949;&#953;&#962; , translating Hebrew &#1500;&#1465;&#14 88; &#1514;&#1460;&#14 68;&#1512;&#1456;& #1510;&#1464;&#1495; lo tir&#7779;a&#7717;), is a moral imperative included as one of the Ten Commandments in the Torah,[1] specifically Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17.

The imperative is against unlawful killing resulting in bloodguilt. The Hebrew Bible contains numerous prohibitions against unlawful killing, but also allows for justified killing in the context of warfare, capital punishment, and self-defense."

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

That what was written in the OLD Testament was distorted in the NEW Testament does not change what was originally written.

Also:

"Those of us who are familiar with the original Hebrew text of the Bible find frequent occasion to whine about inaccuracies and misleading expressions in the translations that are in use among non-Jews. Many of these discrepancies arose out of patently theological motives, as Christian interpreters rewrote passages in the “Old Testament” so as to turn them into predictions or prefigurations of the life of Jesus. Some of the mistranslations, though, are harder to account for.

For me, one of the most irksome cases has always been the rendering of the sixth commandment as “Thou shalt not kill.” In this form, the quote has been conscripted into the service of diverse causes, including those of pacifism, animal rights, the opposition to capital punishment, and the anti-abortion movement.

Indeed,“kill” in English is an all-encompassing verb that covers the taking of life in all forms and for all classes of victims. That kind of generalization is expressed in Hebrew through the verb “harag.” However, the verb that appears in the Torah’s prohibition is a completely different one,” ratsah” which, it would seem, should be rendered “murder.” This root refers only to criminal acts of killing.

It is, of course, not just a question of etymology. Those ideologies that adduce the commandment in support of their gentle-hearted causes are compelled to feign ignorance of all those other places in the Bible that condone or command warfare, the slaughter of sacrificial animals, and an assortment of methods for inflicting capital punishment."

http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2010/03/25...

So if you take "thou shalt not MURDER" to mean "thou shalt not KILL", then your god is guilty of what he has commanded his "children" to NOT do.

That is an example of HORRIBLE "parenting"- that being to say to children: Do as I SAY, not as I DO.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#227575 Mar 8, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Anyone who is an expert in Hebrew will say it is not "kill" it is "murder" and until you get a degree in the Hebrew language, I'll take the word of people who speak the language over the word of someone who just wishes it were true.
The word is clearly "murder" and NOT "kill".

That the Christians took it upon themselves to twist, distort and actually change what was written in the OLD Testament doesn't change what was originally written or what the original intent was of that which was written.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#227576 Mar 8, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Hello OCB, you are giving me a history lesson that I do not need,'thou shalt not kill' or 'thou shalt do no murder', they are both in the Bible and they both mean the same thing, the point is that your friend Liam practically swears that the Bible does not put it in that term, when it is right there in Exodus 20:13 to read, so I'm sorry but he is either blind or ignorant or both, but his lack of knowledge has been exposed.
And to highlight for you:
And sorry, Lawest, but again:

"You shall not murder sometimes translated as You shall not kill,..."

Do you see where it states "sometimes" translated as "You shall not kill"?

A translation is just that- a translation but that doesn't mean it is an accurate translation as not all translations ARE accurate and this is one translation that is among the many which are NOT accurate.

To kill and to murder are two separate things.

While murder always results in someone or something having been killed, killing is NOT always murder- and abortion is one of several cases in which while something is killed, NOTHING is murdered.

I'm sorry you don't like these facts, but you might be able to better accept facts if you deal with what actually IS rather than what you wish actually WAS.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#227577 Mar 8, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Show me where I said you had to quit posting, or even that I want you to.
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0SOT21...
My advice was to quit lying. If in your case the two are the same, that's your problem.
The self-inflicted persecution complex of many Christians runs deep- no matter that it is unwarranted....Lawest is one of those Christians who suffers from that self-inflicted persecution complex.

Of course, those chosen to be hailed as martyrs are chosen very carefully; not a snowball's chance in "hell" that Lawest will be among them.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#227578 Mar 8, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>The word is clearly "murder" and NOT "kill".
That the Christians took it upon themselves to twist, distort and actually change what was written in the OLD Testament doesn't change what was originally written or what the original intent was of that which was written.
There are so many incorrect translations in the bible. But again, these people use it to justify their beliefs and actions rather than the other way around. Religion has been so perverted that I don't know how anyone can not question it. The books that were taken out of the bible...those were "inspired by god" too, right? Yet, I guess Christians don't care about those...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#227579 Mar 8, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>The same God who gave moses and the Isrealites those old despensation laws is the same God who sent his son with a new message for those who are reborn IN Christ Jesus.
No, the xian message was invented by Paul and various "church" fathers after him. The God that gave the Laws to Moses also said that those laws were to be followed for ever. A message that had to be repeated often, by most of the prophets...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#227580 Mar 8, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Hello OCB, you are giving me a history lesson that I do not need,'thou shalt not kill' or 'thou shalt do no murder', they are both in the Bible and they both mean the same thing, the point is that your friend Liam practically swears that the Bible does not put it in that term, when it is right there in Exodus 20:13 to read, so I'm sorry but he is either blind or ignorant or both, but his lack of knowledge has been exposed.
The only place that it says "thou shalt not KILL" is in MIStranslation of the actual verse, which is quite clear in that what is prohibited is MURDER. Killing is not only NOT prohibited, it is DEMANDED in certain circumstances.

The ignorance is all yours...

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#227581 Mar 8, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>he is only a false prophet to the likes of you because you are a hypocrite who only want to twist the Word of God to your own benefit and try to establish your own righteousness in God which will always be doomed to failure.
Romans 8:2-10
<useless babble deleted>
...
So Paul is an apostle because Paul SAYS that he is an apostle...

But Paul is a false prophet because the Bible says that he is a false prophet by the only definition that matters: he tells people to ignore the Laws of the Torah.

It really does not get any clearer than this, in over a dozen places in Deuteronomy along, the Bible very specifically states that ALL of the Laws are to be followed FOR EVER, and that anyone who calls for changing even one letter is a false prophet that must be stoned to death. Then Paul comes along and says to drop the Laws, ignore them, they weren't really meant to be for ever, that was just God joking with the Jews...

Is this MY righteousness? No, don't be stupid. I am merely telling you what the Bible really says. If you choose not to believe me, feel free to read Deuteronomy for your self.
The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#227582 Mar 8, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
So Paul is an apostle because Paul SAYS that he is an apostle...
But Paul is a false prophet because the Bible says that he is a false prophet by the only definition that matters: he tells people to ignore the Laws of the Torah.
It really does not get any clearer than this, in over a dozen places in Deuteronomy along, the Bible very specifically states that ALL of the Laws are to be followed FOR EVER, and that anyone who calls for changing even one letter is a false prophet that must be stoned to death. Then Paul comes along and says to drop the Laws, ignore them, they weren't really meant to be for ever, that was just God joking with the Jews...
Is this MY righteousness? No, don't be stupid. I am merely telling you what the Bible really says. If you choose not to believe me, feel free to read Deuteronomy for your self.
I wouldn't count too much on Lawest. She'll probably dump a ragequit on us and make up some bs about teh Bible, cuss us out some more and then go offline to sulk around some more. It's really a quite predictable pattern.
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227583 Mar 9, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<edited for space...>
<quoted text>
Except that morality is, always has been, and always will be, relative and subjective.
Is it wrong to kill? Usually, yes but not always. It is morally right to kill in the defense of one's family - killing one prevents greater evil.
(Edited for space)

Three points:

1 – I think you might be confusing “morality” with “opinion” here. Morality is not the same as opinion. How do we know what “morality” is anyway? Morality is what is considered to be basic, acceptable conduct between one another, as opposed to a subjective world based on the opinions of the most rich and powerful. We can understand certain moral imperatives by studying history, and observing the patterns of nature, and by using our power of reasoning. One of the foundations of what is moral, or right is to understand that we all share the same fate, and must be subject to the same laws regardless of race, gender, disability, age, stage of development, state of dependency, place of residence or amount of property. We can't forget that inevitably we are all vulnerable, and that the strong must protect the weak.

2 - Killing someone in self defensive is an act that protects one's own inherent rights(self-interest), or the inherent rights of others(moral interest), and must be equally applied to all in order to be just. I never brought up anything in the Bible, but it is hypocritical that twice in the same comment you both condone, and condemn the same thing, which is 1: killing innocent children, and 2: the justification used for killing in the Bible.

3 – The age or condition at which a person has a higher survival rate should make no difference on their value as a person, or the inherent rights that they possess. There has to be some point at which a human becomes a “person”. The most obvious point of that happening used to be thought of as being at birth. Now with modern ultrasound equipment we can actually see the development of a child in the womb. Some people now say that the point of personhood should be when the heart starts beating at 18 days, or when the brain can be detected at 8 weeks. Some would say that it is when all of the structures necessary to feel pain are functioning at 9 weeks, or when it is possible for a baby to live outside of the womb at 24 weeks . Some say that it is only after the child leaves the mother's womb, and still others think that it is even after that – up to 3 years after birth. But the most distinct point other than at birth is at the point of conception. At this point the one celled human being is created and becomes completely distinct from either of it's parents, and even has it's entire genetic code established to make it who it will be as an adult. No other time in the child's development is so dramatic a point of demarcation as this. Since there is no other outstanding difference in the child at birth other than that instead of being inside of the mother, it is now outside of the mother and visible to us, it has to be the moment of conception that marks the beginning of a person.

Just to respond to your last paragraph, think about the fact that 100% of born people die.
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227584 Mar 9, 2013
mamma-san wrote:
<quoted text>
There is much more to my story and I've posted it extensively on this forum. So I'm not going to repeat it.
I had to make a decision as to whether I could be the mother that child deserved. I didn't feel I could be and still be an effective mother to my sons.
Ultimately, that is the question each pregnant woman must ask herself. Not "is it barbaric to have an abortion" but "can I raise this child and be the parent it deserves?"
A child is a lifetime commitment. You can't turn them off at 7 p.m. because you are exhausted and done for the day. You don't get weekends, holidays, or vacations. Especially not if you're a single parent.
Sorry, but I can't defend abortion for the reasons that you are suggesting because every argument that you have appealed to can just as easily be made about your twelve-year-old, your husband, or your parents. When you realize that a preborn child is a full-fledged person just like you or I, you can't rationally defend abortion unless you also defend the right to kill other human beings.
huffus

Rochester, PA

#227585 Mar 9, 2013
youtube.com/watch... …
Sex is the Probale,,just quit sex,,cures aborition

“Becoming a better me!”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#227586 Mar 9, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but I can't defend abortion for the reasons that you are suggesting because every argument that you have appealed to can just as easily be made about your twelve-year-old, your husband, or your parents. When you realize that a preborn child is a full-fledged person just like you or I, you can't rationally defend abortion unless you also defend the right to kill other human beings.
I wasn't asking you to defend abortion, nor was I asking you to condone my opinion.

I simply tried to get you to consider WHY a woman might make this decision.

And if you cannot understand the difference between a six week gestation embryo and a twelve year old child, you have far more problems that we can possibly discuss on this forum.

Fortunately, in this country, a woman is not forced to remain pregnant and give birth against her will.

Your opinion not withstanding.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227587 Mar 9, 2013
huffus wrote:
youtube.com/watch?v=qrAlF07Dgy I …
Sex is the Probale,,just quit sex,,cures aborition
You first.
LightForce

Rockford, MI

#227588 Mar 9, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not all human beings do possess the same inherent rights. We have laws that address that. You could say all humans have the right to life, yet we put people to death.
No, there is no such thing as universal truth. There is my truth, there is your truth. Trust most certainly is relative.
Your assertion that life should be fair and equitable for everyone is nice. But that's not a reality, is it?
Any choice I make in my best interest is a good choice and it is the right choice. My choice to have an abortion was the best choice I could've made in my circumstances. It is not for anyone else to say if it was a good choice or the right choice. It is no one's right to assert their truth over my own. If you oppose it, you oppose it on your own version of something that is true, which would be that abortion is wrong. My truth is that abortion is not wrong.
As for clarifying anything for me, I don't need clarification on anything. I'm quite clear on my own beliefs and my own values. You still don't have the right to tell anyone else how to live their lives or what decisions to make. And you certainly don't have any right to assert your judgement and tell them they're wrong. And you most definitely don't have the right to assert those beliefs in the name of your religion when not all people share your religion.
The real world is not a just world, and is based on subjective truths and morality. Our JUST laws address inherent rights, and deal with the infringement on those rights, so we sometimes put people to death to protect those inherent rights. But the laws of man are usually unjust, unfair, unequally distributed, and often only based on opinion or preference. That's what the poor, the weak, and the vulnerable fight against every day.

In your own words – sort of:“There is no such thing as universal opinion. There is opinion, there is your opinion. There most certainly is opinion.” I agree wholeheartedly.“Choice” or “opinion” is not the same as the “truth.” But you certainly have the right to your choice or opinion until it infringes on the inherent rights of anybody else, then it is everybody's business.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 7 min Eagle 12 - 41,701
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 11 min kent 690,298
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 13 min Eagle 12 - 989,613
Bring the jobs back to the USA! 36 min Big Al 518
Lido Theater, Dallas (Mar '12) 1 hr Jobob 545
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 1 hr Peter Ross 6,586
Would the world have been better off...without ... 1 hr Doctor REALITY 1
More from around the web