Bill Clinton Loses Temper, Lashes Out at Pro-Lifer

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by scotty

Why just two months prior?

Oh - it's not "just two months prior" I just wanted to give a clear scenario for the sake of arguement.

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by scotty

What about the man?!?!

I know , it is in the womans body. But what if the father had the means to care for his child, why does he not have a say in whether or not it lives or dies.

That’s always bothered me too Scotty. I think the court is considering the outcome of the legal position. It’s easy to say that morally speaking the father should have a say. And you’re right, morally speaking a father should. But where the court struggles is how to enforce the father’s say. If a father disagrees with the mother’s choice to abort does the court place her in solitary confinement until the child is born? For a law to be just it has to be reasonably enforceable. Now the next point is very depressing; but then there the issue of rape. Does a rapist have say as to if his victim should be forced to have his child? If so, how does the court enforce his will? Does this apply to father’s who molest their daughters? If a man has legal say in the matter, how does the court enforce it and does this say extend to any father? That’s why the court settled on the choice being entirely placed upon the mother.

Before I came to God I was in a serious relationship for 3 and a half years. She told me she was pregnant and wanted me to help pay for an abortion. She was still in college so she didn't feel having a baby was an option right then. I was through with college, had a great paying job, my own place and my mom and dad (who were in the church) totally volunteered to help me in the child’s care. I refused to help pay and begged her to have it and I would take the child and she could do as she wished. She payed for it all, killed the child and needless to say we parted ways.

What about me? What choice did I have in determining the future of my child.? Or is it not my child until its born? That was 18 years ago, yet I the tears still come when I think about the fact that I could be sitting at a graduation ceremony this summer and have 18yrs of fatherhood memories. Did she really have the right to take my child from me?

Brother Scotty, that is such a very tragic situation. I really feel so badly for you. In a situation like this the court would also look at if the two of you were married or not before weighing if you had any legal say in the woman’s choice. I’m assuming you were unmarried, so odds are even if fathers had legal say in some way the court would most likely decide in her favor. And if you were married the court’s challenge would be whose say to validate and how do they enforce that say? If they honored your wishes to they physically confine her until she gives birth? And in a situation where the parties are not married one cannot stress enough how pain and sorrow are always the result of sin. Often we never think that someone might loose their lives over our sinful pursuits. How God must feel so fed up with all of us at times. But it amazes me…in spite of it all, he still loves us. And if we turn to him in repentance and godly sorrow, his precious blood washes all our sins away.

This world is such a twisted up fallen mess bro. Sometimes I can’t help but be homesick for Heaven.

WWJD?

On a side note, did you know that the man who coined the term WWJD (What Would Jesus Do?) was none other than Charles Sheldon, a renowned Christian Socialist? He used this term (WWJD) in sermons advocating policies to relieve those suffering in the squalor of poverty. As it pertains to this subject, he was also a very outspoken advocate for women’s rights. You’d be amazed at how much of our Christian history has been washed away by the powers that be.

That will be our history bullet for today. LOL

It's not an economic issue brother, it's called society without God. Period

I disagree. When over half of all abortions are procured by women struggling in economic hardship, or who have jobs they risk loosing should they become pregnant, or who are attending college with thousands of dollars in loan debt and without the degree they would find it problematic to pay back the loans…economics is definitely a concern. They say so themselves when stating why they are procuring the abortion. Of course any Christian woman would be expected to endure homelessness if that’s what it took…but most of the women in the world (and sadly a even a good number who call themselves Christian) allow economic conditions to terrify them into making a the decision to abort…often the only viable choice they feel they really have.

That’s why the key to reducing the number of abortions is a focus on the needs women have and the issues they face. Especially those women who have an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy.

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I do not agree that passing laws against criminal acts is "messing with certain rights." Murder is a criminal act, and it is appalling to me that anyone would think that murdering an unborn child should fall outside the definition.
Furthermore, the laws are discriminatory against men, which is a minor issue, but an issue nonetheless. They are half of the parental set, and while their bodies aren't used to bring a child to fruition, if they are deemed fit, they should have an equal say-so in whether or not the child is aborted or not. If a mother can say "yes", the father should have the option of saying "no." Men's rights when it comes to abortion have been virtually wiped out.

The best way to reduce the number of abortions IMO is to allow them only for life & death situations, or in cases of rape, incest or molestation. I don't agree with it even then, but I think that if the law allowed for those extenuating circumstances, it might be passable.

I said that under the assumption that there is no law that states abortion is murder. You nor I can tell someone what they can and can not do with there body, unless it breaks a preceeding law. IMO. There is nothing fair to make a real comparison to abortion with. It is an animal all of its own. I do agree that the father has been pushed out of the situation. I guess you could fight it out in court or something. What should happen is if you make the choice to sleep together then you should consider the conciquences. Plan accordingly. There is an alternative....adoption. If you were to make it illegal to have an abortion it would be cool then to have all the children put up for adoption. I do not see a real answer to this unless, as you said, have a preceeding law that states abortion is killing babies.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I do not agree that passing laws against criminal acts is "messing with certain rights." Murder is a criminal act, and it is appalling to me that anyone would think that murdering an unborn child should fall outside the definition.
Furthermore, the laws are discriminatory against men, which is a minor issue, but an issue nonetheless. They are half of the parental set, and while their bodies aren't used to bring a child to fruition, if they are deemed fit, they should have an equal say-so in whether or not the child is aborted or not. If a mother can say "yes", the father should have the option of saying "no." Men's rights when it comes to abortion have been virtually wiped out.

The best way to reduce the number of abortions IMO is to allow them only for life & death situations, or in cases of rape, incest or molestation. I don't agree with it even then, but I think that if the law allowed for those extenuating circumstances, it might be passable.

Exactly. The right to life is NOT a definition of a nation's law - but an inalienable right - granted by God himself.

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Exactly. The right to life is NOT a definition of a nation's law - but an inalienable right - granted by God himself.

But does that right extend to a cancer patient who doens't have health insurance or a sick person that cannot afford treatment or medication?

A consistant life ethic holds life as being sacred from womb to tomb.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

But does that right extend to a cancer patient who doens't have health insurance or a sick person that cannot afford treatment or medication?

A consistant life ethic holds life as being sacred from womb to tomb.

How dare you make the comparison!?!

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

But does that right extend to a cancer patient who doens't have health insurance or a sick person that cannot afford treatment or medication?

A consistant life ethic holds life as being sacred from womb to tomb.

You are comparing unintentional death to intentional termination. Apples & Oranges. And I hope you don't turn this into a health care thread...LOL!

[scotty]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

You are comparing unintentional death to intentional termination. Apples & Oranges. And I hope you don't turn this into a health care thread...LOL!

If he thinks he can use it to make his point......

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

How dare you make the comparison!?!

A life is as sacred two minutes before birth as it is after it is born. A life is as sacred at 30 years old as it was when first born. And a life at 90 years old is as sacred as a life that is only 90 seconds old.

Remember, those who cannot afford health care were unborn at one time. We saught to protect and prevent their abortion then...we should seek to uphold and care for them when sick at 30 years of age.

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

You are comparing unintentional death to intentional termination. Apples & Oranges. And I hope you don't turn this into a health care thread...LOL!

Fair enough. We shouldn't turn this into a health care thread. But insurance companies do intentionally turn down coverage for sick people all the time. And we intentionally argue that it's perfectly fine. Note 18,000 people die a year because of this. It's all about the sanctity of life. Some compartmentalize sanctity and morality. A consistant life ethic is from womb to tomb. If we advocate for the unborn...what about the born?

But back to this aspect of the sanctity of life. Abortion is horrible. We have to do what we can to minister to the needs of women in our society as a society.