Originally posted by kccd
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
"It’s dehumanizing"
Collapse
X
-
Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
You say, "As I've pointed out previously, the translation you reference is a modern rendering derived under pressure to support the modern evangelical view of abortion..."
By "pointed out", you mean baldly asserted without a lick of evidence to support your accusation. In fact, the English Standard Version is what's called a "literal translation" with the goal of presenting as to close to a word-for-word translation of the original text as is possible without adding anything to the language and simply letting the original words speak for themselves, and based on my own humble researches, it does exactly that. Look, man, I even showed you an analysis of the Exodus passage in Hebrew, so your debate is not with any particular translation but with the original text.
You say that Jesus would not "recommend" that a rape victim seek an abortion, which is an interesting way of answering the question about whether or not he would have approved of doing so. I suspect the reason you had to implicitly change my question is because the answer makes you uncomfortable and conflicts with your liberal values, because based on everything the Bible tells us about Jesus, it's clear that he would not have approved of abortion in any way, shape, or form. "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven."My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by kccd View Post
The talk about rape/incest is really to determine what exceptions are accepted by anti-abortionists.
It is very trivializing to refer to the trauma of rape and incest as "emotional cudgels". While some victims can recover and are willing to go through with the pregnancy, other victims are traumatized and can need therapy for years.
The problem is compounded in some states which give the rapists paternity and visitation rights!My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by mossrose View Post
Ii see that the trauma that many women feel after having an abortion, which can need therapy for years, is dismissed as nothing.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
It is a rock and a hard place decision created by the violent act of another human being. There will be consequences, possible horrible consequences, either way. All that is on the rapist - not the woman raped.
Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kccd View Post
The talk about rape/incest is really to determine what exceptions are accepted by anti-abortionists.
It is very trivializing to refer to the trauma of rape and incest as "emotional cudgels". While some victims can recover and are willing to go through with the pregnancy, other victims are traumatized and can need therapy for years.
The problem is compounded in some states which give the rapists paternity and visitation rights!
Let's be real. The lack of a rape/incest exception is not why you oppose the restrictions on abortion like the one in the OP. If Texas passed an amendment to the law that added the exception back in you STILL would oppose the law.
Therefore there's no reason to bring them up...unless that is, you wanted us use the trauma of rape and incest as a political prop to attack your opponents. I.E. An emotional Cudgel.
So, the reality is that people using the rare occurrence of rape/incest abortions are the ones exploiting victims for political gain.
Congratulations.
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by mossrose View Post
I wasn't necessarily referring to women who had been raped.
My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
That is odd, that is what kccd was referencing in her post - women who had been raped.
For her to bring up the trauma that a raped woman endures downplays the the other trauma of killing an unborn child.
Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mossrose View Post
It isn't odd. The fact is indisputable that pro-abortionists downplay the trauma that many women go through following an abortion. Whether it's from rape or some other excuse, that trauma is never talked about.
For her to bring up the trauma that a raped woman endures downplays the the other trauma of killing an unborn child.
But that is not the case here, where the tendency in this discussion has been to minimize and almost treat as of no consequence the trauma of the rape victim and the impact of forcing her to not only endure the rape be to be forced to accept to herself a child as a product of that rape.
My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by Esther View Post
If this is true it is indeed wicked!
according to this article, 20 states allow a rapist to retain parental rights
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/1432450001/
Some of these are behind paywalls, but these are alabama, where the rape exception is not granted:
https://www.motherjones.com/crime-ju...tody-abortion/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8951751.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...669_story.html
https://nypost.com/2017/10/09/convic...victims-child/
Not sure if texas is more sensible, but given they have not given a rape exception, it may be coming there too.
It's really perverse and sick. The crazies appear to be running things on both sides of the isle.My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
I agree that there is a tendency on the pro-choice side to downplay the guilt women can experience from having had an abortion. And that is itself tragic.
But that is not the case here, where the tendency in this discussion has been to minimize and almost treat as of no consequence the trauma of the rape victim and the impact of forcing her to not only endure the rape be to be forced to accept to herself a child as a product of that rape.
The tendency in most abortion discussions is to minimize the effects of abortion on a lot of women after the deed is done.
Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
I agree that there is a tendency on the pro-choice side to downplay the guilt women can experience from having had an abortion. And that is itself tragic.
But that is not the case here, where the tendency in this discussion has been to minimize and almost treat as of no consequence the trauma of the rape victim and the impact of forcing her to not only endure the rape be to be forced to accept to herself a child as a product of that rape.
Therefore there's no reason to bring them up...unless that is, you wanted us use the trauma of rape and incest as a political prop to attack your opponents. I.E. An emotional Cudgel.
So, the reality is that people using the rare occurrence of rape/incest abortions are the ones exploiting victims for political gain.
Congratulations
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
I've been over this ad nauseam in other threads and you didn't listen then, and I don't really expect you to listen now - though I have referred to many of the basic elements that have driven the historical translation of this text. Basically, if you can look at the Septuagint, the vulgate, the KJV, thousands of years of Jewish tradition and teaching on the topic, and multiple English translations prior to the 1970's and still just assume they are all wrong and ignore the fact we only see this sort of rendering in the era of intense politicization of the issue of abortion, then logic is not what is at play in the first place. I've been over this before MM. And you were just as unwilling to engage in civil debate over the issue then as you are now.
As I said in my answer, I doubt Jesus would recommend abortion, and then I also said 'and neither would I'. The issue here is making the exception available and why we should do so. That is entirely different than actually recommending abortion as the best solution. It has to do with the difference between what is my right and what glorifies God or what is the best thing morally. It has to do with whether we force self-sacrifice - making her a victim twice over, or whether that person willingly accepts self-sacrifice. It is my right to have restitution if you steal from me. But I can chose to forgive rather than to punish, and often that is what would be the recommended solution in Christ - even though I have a right to see you tried and convicted. A raped woman that is made pregnant should have available to her the option of abortion for the reasons I have put forth. But that is very different from it being the right or recommended choice.
And now you're likening abortion to restitution for theft? Look, man, I can't believe I need to explain this to someone who claims to be a Christian, but if someone steals from you, you don't make it right by killing an innocent person! Seriously, man, what is wrong with you? That's just evil. No matter how horrible the experience of being raped is, that in no way makes it acceptable to murder an unborn human life. And, no, I do not believe for a second that Jesus would merely not recommend it and then quietly turn a blind eye if the woman did it anyway; on the contrary, I believe he would outright condemn it. Frankly, allowing a rape victim to do such a wicked thing is one of the least loving and compassionate things you could do.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post
Let's be real. The lack of a rape/incest exception is not why you oppose the restrictions on abortion like the one in the OP. If Texas passed an amendment to the law that added the exception back in you STILL would oppose the law.
This is from a secular perspective, acknowledging that arguments about the soul are religious in nature. But scientifically we know that when a certain level of brain activity exists, there is someone home in that body. We can't allow abortions after that and not in fact be killing a person.
Therefore there's no reason to bring them up...unless that is, you wanted us use the trauma of rape and incest as a political prop to attack your opponents. I.E. An emotional Cudgel.
So, the reality is that people using the rare occurrence of rape/incest abortions are the ones exploiting victims for political gain.
CongratulationsMy brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1
If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26
This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 01:19 PM
|
9 responses
76 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 11:58 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Yesterday, 12:23 PM
|
42 responses
145 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 08:41 AM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:46 AM
|
16 responses
122 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Stoic
Yesterday, 04:44 PM
|
||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 04:37 AM
|
23 responses
109 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 02:49 PM
|
||
Started by seanD, 05-02-2024, 04:10 AM
|
27 responses
158 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 01:37 PM
|
Comment