k sry took so long to write back, but im in the middle of exam week and i ahd an exam yesterday so to continue...
Yes as advice is something that your approve, but in 90% of the situations you feel obliqgated to give it regardelss of the persons creed. Mainly because random people don't walk up to you and ask you for ur advice on abortion or women's rights.
Why in the world will anyone that shares so different views ask advice if he knows that this is foreign?
MY EXACT SITUATION? i mean the guy knows im Christian and im one of 3 people he revealed this situation too.
As for point two, this highly depends on the relationship: My cousin and his childhood best friend (who is a muslim) discuss alot of things that one owuld not imagine these two to discuss. i.e. which church my cousin should hold hiswedding at, and yet again i've been in situations were a muslim person asks me wheter he should pray now or wait till he goes to the mosque. So just becuae one has never dealt with such situations doens't mean they dont exsist.
Gregory, I think, you keep on seeing abortion and women's rights as something exclusive to the Church- or just plain religiosity. That is just not on. There is not a set of rules for the religious and rules for the non-religious; we just can't expect that everyone would follow the rules, that's all. These aren't just rules of culture; these are life principles that you believe have been invoked by God to all of mankind, and which standard He will judge all. These are ethics.
Ethics and Life principles are two things as i stated before that are affected by a person's religous views and culture. Meaning i see them as being wrong because my Church and Beliefs don't agree with them and because i was raised in an enviroment which doesnt promote them. Now my grandmother's milkman was raised ina enviroment were he can be marry a second wife and its ok in his Religon. So just becuase we see taht
these are life principles that we believe have been invoked by God to all of mankind, and which standard He will judge all.
Doesn't mean that they do to, or that they have to follow them. Its just like saying that Christ is God, and whoever doesnt believe in him shall not go to Heaven. Muslims don't belive he is God but a prophet, and they believe in Mohammed as the prophet of God, and whoever doens't belive in him does not go to heaven. It says so in their Koran, that the Jews and Christians shall not enter through the gates of heaven (i heard this one day in microbus were the driver was blasting the Koran)
The idea that the pumping of hte heart comes from the fact that in order for a person to sruvive blood has to be actively runnign through the body were an exchange occurs. Now inorder for blood to flow, the heart (OR a mechanism that takes its place) has to be pumping. As for the point of hte etus having its own bloodype and HbF, this is bcause it is DEPENDANT on the mother, not on itself, HbF has a higher oxygen affinty then normal human Hb. Because the fetus isn't capable of sustaing its onw life, God granted it the gift that the Hb it has, has a higher affinty to the oxygen its body needs. But that is the fetus, im talking about a embryo that doesnt yet have the mechanism of making and using Hb.
Yes i never doubted that my theorys are opinons. A theory can be proven true or false. But with this point being made, i'll ask again: why is it hte mothers life preferred to the fetus's life when a decision has to be made between the two. I mean (whether we acknowledge it or not) we view the extra-uterine human as more valuable then the intra-uterine.
Also, may I ask exactly what course you are doing?
[quote author=gregorytheSinner link=topic=5941.msg79551#msg79551 date=1195680205] Yes as advice is something that your approve, but in 90% of the situations you feel obliqgated to give it regardelss of the persons creed. Mainly because random people don't walk up to you and ask you for ur advice on abortion or women's rights.
Why in the world will anyone that shares so different views ask advice if he knows that this is foreign?
MY EXACT SITUATION? i mean the guy knows im Christian and im one of 3 people he revealed this situation too.
As for point two, this highly depends on the relationship: My cousin and his childhood best friend (who is a muslim) discuss alot of things that one owuld not imagine these two to discuss. i.e. which church my cousin should hold hiswedding at, and yet again i've been in situations were a muslim person asks me wheter he should pray now or wait till he goes to the mosque. So just becuae one has never dealt with such situations doens't mean they dont exsist.
There are many situations that exist that shouldn't. These close friendships are expresibly forbidden both in the Bible and in the Koran. I emphasize close.
Gregory, I think, you keep on seeing abortion and women's rights as something exclusive to the Church- or just plain religiosity. That is just not on. There is not a set of rules for the religious and rules for the non-religious; we just can't expect that everyone would follow the rules, that's all. These aren't just rules of culture; these are life principles that you believe have been invoked by God to all of mankind, and which standard He will judge all. These are ethics.
Ethics and Life principles are two things as i stated before that are affected by a person's religous views and culture. Meaning i see them as being wrong because my Church and Beliefs don't agree with them and because i was raised in an enviroment which doesnt promote them. Now my grandmother's milkman was raised ina enviroment were he can be marry a second wife and its ok in his Religon. So just becuase we see taht
these are life principles that we believe have been invoked by God to all of mankind, and which standard He will judge all.
Doesn't mean that they do to, or that they have to follow them. Its just like saying that Christ is God, and whoever doesnt believe in him shall not go to Heaven. Muslims don't belive he is God but a prophet, and they believe in Mohammed as the prophet of God, and whoever doens't belive in him does not go to heaven. It says so in their Koran, that the Jews and Christians shall not enter through the gates of heaven (i heard this one day in microbus were the driver was blasting the Koran)
The idea that the pumping of hte heart comes from the fact that in order for a person to sruvive blood has to be actively runnign through the body were an exchange occurs. Now inorder for blood to flow, the heart (OR a mechanism that takes its place) has to be pumping. As for the point of hte etus having its own bloodype and HbF, this is bcause it is DEPENDANT on the mother, not on itself, HbF has a higher oxygen affinty then normal human Hb. Because the fetus isn't capable of sustaing its onw life, God granted it the gift that the Hb it has, has a higher affinty to the oxygen its body needs. But that is the fetus, im talking about a embryo that doesnt yet have the mechanism of making and using Hb.
Yes i never doubted that my theorys are opinons. A theory can be proven true or false. But with this point being made, i'll ask again: why is it hte mothers life preferred to the fetus's life when a decision has to be made between the two. I mean (whether we acknowledge it or not) we view the extra-uterine human as more valuable then the intra-uterine.
So what they don't follow the rules that God has made indelible in there consciousness and has revealed through His Word? Doesn't make it right. Just because a drunk and extortionist, who conversed with heretics and was demon-possessed, so much-so that he became epileptic when getting his messages and drooled, doesn't make their ethics unscrutinised by God. The Sun shines regardless whether you believe it is up there or not. The Earth is almost spherical regardless whether you lived thousands of years ago or today. And if you act that the Sun doesn't exist, or the Earth isn't round, then you might get hurt.
God is merciful; and understands that the indoctrination was at a young age, and he values things like obedience, and faith- these are our values that we have some common ground with our Muslim friends, and hence the reason we can respect their views.
But when public policy, or when our friends ask us about our beliefs, what else can we give but our own convictions? So what if it is not politically correct? Aren't we to please God and fear Him only? So what if it prejudiced? Everyone has prejudice!
Secondly, HbF exists with all people, it just is expressed less. It becomes quite minimal by 6 months. However, in people with thalassaemia, it is perhaps the only reason they are alive (barely even so).
In life there is many developments occuring. We don't develop our secondary reproductive characteristics until puberty, yet we still don't consider them to be infertile...they just not able to reproduce yet.
Who says a "pumping heart" equals a "living person". Go to your local hospital and see how many are on dialysis, are oxygenated, are constantly infused certain drugs, that are on pacemakers--> these are all people who are DEPENDANT on something else.
How about all those who are dependent on their medications? If someone was having an asthmatic attack, would preventing them from having their corticosteroids (lung dilator) be murder or not?
We are all dependent on things in many times in our life. What makes the foetus a special case? Because it has utter dependence? That just means we have utter responsibility!
We are not able to sustain our life without air. We are not able to sustain life unless we have the money to pay for our groceries. We are not able to sustain life if we don't have access to clean water.
No one is not dependent on something or someone. It is the public responsibility that we take care of the less fortunate, and to sustain all life. Dependence does not equal partial death- it just means a complicated life.
Murder remains murder. Dependent or not. Period.
To further my point, I will allude to H.G. Bishop Serapoion (I think...whoever is the Bishop of Southern US):
In the New Testament, we are given examples of babes already alive at different gestational stages. In the Holy Gospel of St Luke 1:41, we are told, "And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit." The babe, St John the Baptist, was in his sixth month of gestation.
A lot of biblical figures had been ordained before birth:
Samson, the strong man, was ordained before his birth to deliver Israel from the Philistines (Judg 13:2-5).
Samuel, who later ministered with the priest Eli was ordained before his birth to serve God (1 Sam 1:11-20).
St. Paul was foreordained to minister to the Gentiles (Gal 1:15)
St. John the Baptist, the kinsman of the Lord Jesus Christ was ordained to be His forerunner (Lk 1: 13-17)
Jeremiah, the prophet was ordained before birth to be God's messenger (Jer 1:5)
Josiah, the king of Judah, his birth as well as his reign were foretold to King Jeroboam (1 Kin 13:2)
Psalm 139 talks about God knowing King David before his birth
The angel Gabriel foretold the Lord Jesus Christ's birth and ministry to St. Mary. Even at the earliest gestational stages, before birth, God Himself ordained many biblical personalities. This speaks for life with great respect be it life after birth, or life at conception.
I think this shows clearly that the prospects of life happen during gestation. This clearly shows the value of the unborn foetus, and shows how an arbitrary definition of yours about what life is or isn't, is insufficient, or has a lot to answer for with the regard God has clearly shown.
By the way, I refute your definition of life, but I acknowledge the difficulty of doing so.
When people argue about when life starts, it is usually a station on the way to tell us when they think it should end.
God knows the answer to both these things - and it is a sign of of sin that we think we can take on His role. We are so wise and so knowledgeable - and the world is what it is. If we were more humble and more open to walking in His way, the world would be more as He meant it to be.
[quote author=Anglian link=topic=5941.msg79580#msg79580 date=1195816519] When people argue about when life starts, it is usually a station of the way to tell us when they think it should end.
That is exactly why I do not like to define it- it leaves much to be answered. As I said, these superficial and usually arbitrary definitions has consequences for many people who most others would consider living. Such a legalistic way of defining life, will mean a legalistic attitude on what is life, and what is murder. It can lead to infanticide, killing of the elderly, those on life-support, while patient has heart surgery (they don't have a beating heart- so are they consdiered living), etc. This is something I don't think many pro-choice consider. The debate is not just about abortion- it is about others who have the same characteristics that apparently makes them less than a person or living, and giving licence to kill them. It is injustice. Even if a definition can be made, if we cannot verify it, then we are in serious infringement of God's laws.
If only God can define life because He is the arbitrator of life, which I argue, (because life is linked with the impalpable spirit and not the body), then it is obvious that the science is not adequate in this discussion, for we do not know the Mystery of the Spirit.
If we were more open to carrying our cross, then we would not be entertaining the idea of a "maybe" murder. We would take the cross with joy. Yes, what a world that would be.
The mindset with which we contend is not a Christian one, and for Christians to begin to compromise with it is, alas, t get into waters which will swallow them.
If we believe that all life is a gift from God, and that each of us is made in His image and is an heir to life eternal, it matters not how old the person is, or what their state of health is; all are children of God. There are other points of view, more characteristic of western humanism, which have their own internal consistency and form part of the mindset of another world-view - but the Church has not changed its teaching on this - nor can it.
Just a little clarification... [quote author=Doubting Thomas link=topic=5941.msg79560#msg79560 date=1195713768] To further my point, I will allude to H.G. Bishop Serapoion (I think...whoever is the Bishop of Southern US):
Bishop Serapion is Bishop of the Diocese of Los Angeles, Southern California, and Hawaii
yet again, i apologize for the delay, but as i explained before i have exams this week plus having an egyptian dialup connection doesnt help either lol and so im writing this running on a very limited amount of sleep so excuse the errors
Now regarding
there are many situations that exist that shouldn't. These close friendships are expresibly forbidden both in the Bible and in the Koran. I emphasize close.
Can u cite some examples, because i don't belive its forbidden to us Christians. I mean the Psalms of David speak about eating with the sinners, or entering the homes of the evil ones, but not all muslims are evil or bad people.
So what they don't follow the rules that God has made indelible in there consciousness and has revealed through His Word? Doesn't make it right. Just because a drunk and extortionist, who conversed with heretics and was demon-possessed, so much-so that he became epileptic when getting his messages and drooled, doesn't make their ethics unscrutinised by God
I wholly agree with you, but the whole point of this convo is that they don't accept it alot of things taht SHOULD BE ACCEPTED, and this can only hurt them, but at the same time its not for us to judge them or to talk to them according to our standards. It's like a college prof. and a 3rd grader conversing. The College Prof. won't use big words wit the 3rd grader, because the child is not atthe same level as he is. Lets also try to respect and not use words taht can only lead to unrest regarding their beliefs (or their prophets) even if we dont' accept him or acknowlege his "prophecies" ...because as Christians we should do unto others as we'd have done to us.
A lot of biblical figures had been ordained before birth:
Samson, the strong man, was ordained before his birth to deliver Israel from the Philistines (Judg 13:2-5).
Samuel, who later ministered with the priest Eli was ordained before his birth to serve God (1 Sam 1:11-20).
St. Paul was foreordained to minister to the Gentiles (Gal 1:15)
St. John the Baptist, the kinsman of the Lord Jesus Christ was ordained to be His forerunner (Lk 1: 13-17)
Jeremiah, the prophet was ordained before birth to be God's messenger (Jer 1:5)
Josiah, the king of Judah, his birth as well as his reign were foretold to King Jeroboam (1 Kin 13:2)
Psalm 139 talks about God knowing King David before his birth
The angel Gabriel foretold the Lord Jesus Christ's birth and ministry to St. Mary. Even at the earliest gestational stages, before birth, God Himself ordained many biblical personalities. This speaks for life with great respect be it life after
These verses are the answers i needed concerning whether thethe embryo/fetus in teh stomach is alive or not. And clearly i was wrong. I mean as i said before i was never pro abortion, i just felt it was a necc. action taht had to be taken. btw i met HG Bishop Serapion a week ago, truly a very educated individual.
Yet again i maybe reverting to my opinons but i honeslty find the sin of abortion is prefered incomparasion to the sin of raising a child and basically raising him into a human with no spiritual life who lives life in inquity and then gets condemnd to hell. I mean i don't kno what the future holds, but this is the way he'll be raised, whether or not he'll have a change of heart when he grows up only God knows.
Lastly a little update, i've been pushing my original idea of getting them married now and hten having them deliver the baby, and its sorta picking up some momentum because the other option is going to france to have the abortion.
So what they don't follow the rules that God has made indelible in there consciousness and has revealed through His Word? Doesn't make it right. Just because a drunk and extortionist, who conversed with heretics and was demon-possessed, so much-so that he became epileptic when getting his messages and drooled, doesn't make their ethics unscrutinised by God
I wholly agree with you, but the whole point of this convo is that they don't accept it alot of things taht SHOULD BE ACCEPTED, and this can only hurt them, but at the same time its not for us to judge them or to talk to them according to our standards. It's like a college prof. and a 3rd grader conversing. The College Prof. won't use big words wit the 3rd grader, because the child is not atthe same level as he is. Lets also try to respect and not use words taht can only lead to unrest regarding their beliefs (or their prophets) even if we dont' accept him or acknowlege his "prophecies" ...because as Christians we should do unto others as we'd have done to us.
This is not the case here. They asked for your opinion; your advice, and frankly if they asked a professor of physics to explain gravity, he won't pretend that it doesn't exist.
And as I said before, God has given them a conscience, and the Grace of God is upon all humans to guide them to righteousness, though those who are not-Christian have not the grace of being anointed by the Holy Spirit and knowing the source of our righteousness. These two, both intrinsic and extrinsic forces, with your confirming voice through God, can be the voice they needed to stop this murder.
I know that we cannot expect that those who have different world views have our ethics, but we have as much right as they do to make clear what they are, and we are responsible that we live by them. And when we are asked, we cannot dance with their views, and speak as a politician to gain their favoritism; especially when a life is at stake.
Oh...and sorry for incorrectly referencing the Bishop! I am not from the United States...sorry.
On the point about the damnation of the child...I disagree. This has been a wake-up call for these parents, about their responsibilities, and by the grace of God they can overcome the very real obstacles all parents face. It is not going to be perfect, and since they are not-Christian there is more chance that they will be on a number of things at odds with Christ, but that does not mean that we should hope that all non-Christian children not be born! Christ would not allow their birth if there was no chance to get joy from them. He takes pleasure in all His creation. Secondly, just because the parents sinned, does not mean the child lives in sin.The child may have it a bit tough, but Gregory, lots of children have difficulties, be it mental instability, medical problems, poor families...we can't run from the world judging us.
This is not the case here. They asked for your opinion; your advice, and frankly if they asked a professor of physics to explain gravity, he won't pretend that it doesn't exist.
Yes of course he wont' deny it, but at the same time his explanation will be a "sub-avg." asnwer in comparison to the knowledge concerning it.
Yes God has given them a conscience, and they accept it, but they limit it, depending on their reliogus stance towards it. The whole polygpmy issue, clearly before one takes the decision to marry again, his conscience comes into play, but because its ok religously, they limit it.
I know that we cannot expect that those who have different world views have our ethics, but we have as much right as they do to make clear what they are, and we are responsible that we live by them. And when we are asked, we cannot dance with their views, and speak as a politician to gain their favoritism; especially when a life is at stake.
Yes of course, we are responsible for living by what our church teaches us. I mean had i been the one who got my girlfriend pregnant, i def. would have taken action in a mcuh different way, considering my religous point of view first and foremost. But as for him, if his religon says its ok (not sure though) and if he believes in his religon, and btw he knows its wrong in Christianity then i cant hold him to my position regarding this case [i.e. not have the abortion]
has been a wake-up call for these parents, about their responsibilities, and by the grace of God they can overcome the very real obstacles all parents face.[/quote uhhhh not soo much........there not ready to be parents they said so themselves so if they have the kid then hte mother will show some resentment towards it, and so will the father who was thinking of running away.
t we should hope that all non-Christian children not be born!
of course not, i nevr said that, because most Non-Christian born children are born to parents who are willing to raise them and teach them properly, so that they become functioning members of society.
The child may have it a bit tough, but Gregory, lots of children have difficulties, be it mental instability, medical problems, poor families...we can't run from the world judging us.
so true, but this case is much diff. it will be born to "Kids" who will not provide hte needed steps to nurture and raise this kid. All the examples you stated, require nurturing and caring by the parents.
abortion is a really serious discussion, especially in this case which your two friends obviously didn't practice abstinence...my view is very strong, since its backed up by the church's. I have a question for you gregory have you ever seen that billboard or big signs in people frontyards saying "UNBORN BABIES CAN FEEL PAIN" well if you haven't it's out there. why don't you tell them to give the baby up for adoption instead of killing a human being. so your saying that abortion is the only way..i'm sorry but think again. and since they aren't coptic christian this is where the humility part comes in...try to convince them that abortion isn't the way, make sure when you talk to them both that you are mentally and physically structured through body language, if you keep hesitating than they won't take you seriously...does anybody know besides yourself about this situation? i'm not sure how old you are, but abortion is for different purposes such as rape..but in this case i'm guessing these two people wanted something to happen..so let them give it up for adoption if they can't handle this on their own! we have this girl in my grade at school and she and this guy "did it" as you may call it, and instead of aborting it, she wanted to give it up for adoption...take not that this girl is only in 10th grade...!
i did lol like the whole abortion thing came when their was no toher way i orignally wnated him and her to go sign a paper under teh supervision of a Sheikh to state that they are married and thats the idea im still pushing and their sorta accepting but the only thing holding them from doing that is the fact taht they believe that they are not ready for parenthood as for the whole adoption idea, ya we thought of that too, but its not as easy as it is in america, i.e. here if someone finds out she had a child w/o being married its like a huge disgrace to their family and the pepole around them and so she can't deliver the baby adn put it up for adoption instead she has to abort it.
oh, well not being in the US explains a lot, that's why i kept questioning myself saying it's so simple, just go give the baby up for adoption, but I'm sorry for misunderstanding!
[quote author=Coptic Servent link=topic=5941.msg79637#msg79637 date=1195948668] but abortion is for different purposes such as rape..
Murder is not allowed in rape. You can't murder your rapist (unless your life is at stake, hence, in defence); why would you be able to murder the innocent victim?
[quote author=Coptic Servent link=topic=5941.msg79637#msg79637 date=1195948668] I have a question for you gregory have you ever seen that billboard or big signs in people frontyards saying "UNBORN BABIES CAN FEEL PAIN" well if you haven't it's out there.
Unborn babies can't feel pain until the 22nd week (if you are liberal) and later if you are conservative.
It is these posters with pseudoscientific messages that give us pro-lifers a bad name.
Honestly, it is not your baby to kill. It is God's creation. Whether or not it feels pain is meaningless. life is not yours to give and not yours to take. unless one of us here can create something from dust. without God, then go do that and kill it. everything belongs to God, do not take the life He has given, because it is not yours or anyone elses.
Quote This is not the case here. They asked for your opinion; your advice, and frankly if they asked a professor of physics to explain gravity, he won't pretend that it doesn't exist.
Yes of course he wont' deny it, but at the same time his explanation will be a "sub-avg." asnwer in comparison to the knowledge concerning it.
This is what (I hope) Thomas is getting at. This professor won't deny that gravity exists, but he'll explain it in layman's terms to get his point across.
Similarly, we as Christians are at times called to do the same. We must therefore give our advice within the bounds of our own ethics, explaining it in terms that non-Christians are likely to comprehend and, hopefully, take heed...
[quote author=His Servant link=topic=5941.msg79816#msg79816 date=1196386308] Honestly, it is not your baby to kill. It is God's creation. Whether or not it feels pain is meaningless. life is not yours to give and not yours to take. unless one of us here can create something from dust. without God, then go do that and kill it. everything belongs to God, do not take the life He has given, because it is not yours or anyone elses.
I think it is quite clear that I am a hard-line Pro-life advocate. But I just want you to refine your thoughts: if an animal is God's creation, then why is it permissible to eat of meat?
Godd question, but it is clear from Genesis that God gave us dominion over the animals; they are not to be equated with people. That, however, is no excuse for cruelty to animals, and as a Christian I feel it is my duty to only purchase meat from suppliers where I know the animals have been treated humanely.
That said, few of us would eat meat had we been to an abattoir.
Well i figured sicne the topic was about my friends "baby" i'd fill u in with what went down:
Basically they told their parents who pushed for the aboriton, but before it could happen they secretly wed, and as the parents continued on with their hope of getting them married, the doctors found that the abortion can proove fatal to the girl, and so evantually the somewhat offically got married, and are having the baby.
Comments
so to continue...
Yes as advice is something that your approve, but in 90% of the situations you feel obliqgated to give it regardelss of the persons creed. Mainly because random people don't walk up to you and ask you for ur advice on abortion or women's rights. MY EXACT SITUATION? i mean the guy knows im Christian and im one of 3 people he revealed this situation too.
As for point two, this highly depends on the relationship: My cousin and his childhood best friend (who is a muslim) discuss alot of things that one owuld not imagine these two to discuss. i.e. which church my cousin should hold hiswedding at, and yet again i've been in situations were a muslim person asks me wheter he should pray now or wait till he goes to the mosque. So just becuae one has never dealt with such situations doens't mean they dont exsist. Ethics and Life principles are two things as i stated before that are affected by a person's religous views and culture. Meaning i see them as being wrong because my Church and Beliefs don't agree with them and because i was raised in an enviroment which doesnt promote them. Now my grandmother's milkman was raised ina enviroment were he can be marry a second wife and its ok in his Religon. So just becuase we see taht Doesn't mean that they do to, or that they have to follow them. Its just like saying that Christ is God, and whoever doesnt believe in him shall not go to Heaven. Muslims don't belive he is God but a prophet, and they believe in Mohammed as the prophet of God, and whoever doens't belive in him does not go to heaven. It says so in their Koran, that the Jews and Christians shall not enter through the gates of heaven (i heard this one day in microbus were the driver was blasting the Koran)
The idea that the pumping of hte heart comes from the fact that in order for a person to sruvive blood has to be actively runnign through the body were an exchange occurs. Now inorder for blood to flow, the heart (OR a mechanism that takes its place) has to be pumping. As for the point of hte etus having its own bloodype and HbF, this is bcause it is DEPENDANT on the mother, not on itself, HbF has a higher oxygen affinty then normal human Hb. Because the fetus isn't capable of sustaing its onw life, God granted it the gift that the Hb it has, has a higher affinty to the oxygen its body needs. But that is the fetus, im talking about a embryo that doesnt yet have the mechanism of making and using Hb.
Yes i never doubted that my theorys are opinons. A theory can be proven true or false. But with this point being made, i'll ask again: why is it hte mothers life preferred to the fetus's life when a decision has to be made between the two. I mean (whether we acknowledge it or not) we view the extra-uterine human as more valuable then the intra-uterine.
Also, may I ask exactly what course you are doing?
[quote author=gregorytheSinner link=topic=5941.msg79551#msg79551 date=1195680205]
Yes as advice is something that your approve, but in 90% of the situations you feel obliqgated to give it regardelss of the persons creed. Mainly because random people don't walk up to you and ask you for ur advice on abortion or women's rights. MY EXACT SITUATION? i mean the guy knows im Christian and im one of 3 people he revealed this situation too.
As for point two, this highly depends on the relationship: My cousin and his childhood best friend (who is a muslim) discuss alot of things that one owuld not imagine these two to discuss. i.e. which church my cousin should hold hiswedding at, and yet again i've been in situations were a muslim person asks me wheter he should pray now or wait till he goes to the mosque. So just becuae one has never dealt with such situations doens't mean they dont exsist.
There are many situations that exist that shouldn't. These close friendships are expresibly forbidden both in the Bible and in the Koran. I emphasize close.
[quote author=gregorytheSinner link=topic=5941.msg79551#msg79551 date=1195680205] Ethics and Life principles are two things as i stated before that are affected by a person's religous views and culture. Meaning i see them as being wrong because my Church and Beliefs don't agree with them and because i was raised in an enviroment which doesnt promote them. Now my grandmother's milkman was raised ina enviroment were he can be marry a second wife and its ok in his Religon. So just becuase we see taht Doesn't mean that they do to, or that they have to follow them. Its just like saying that Christ is God, and whoever doesnt believe in him shall not go to Heaven. Muslims don't belive he is God but a prophet, and they believe in Mohammed as the prophet of God, and whoever doens't belive in him does not go to heaven. It says so in their Koran, that the Jews and Christians shall not enter through the gates of heaven (i heard this one day in microbus were the driver was blasting the Koran)
The idea that the pumping of hte heart comes from the fact that in order for a person to sruvive blood has to be actively runnign through the body were an exchange occurs. Now inorder for blood to flow, the heart (OR a mechanism that takes its place) has to be pumping. As for the point of hte etus having its own bloodype and HbF, this is bcause it is DEPENDANT on the mother, not on itself, HbF has a higher oxygen affinty then normal human Hb. Because the fetus isn't capable of sustaing its onw life, God granted it the gift that the Hb it has, has a higher affinty to the oxygen its body needs. But that is the fetus, im talking about a embryo that doesnt yet have the mechanism of making and using Hb.
Yes i never doubted that my theorys are opinons. A theory can be proven true or false. But with this point being made, i'll ask again: why is it hte mothers life preferred to the fetus's life when a decision has to be made between the two. I mean (whether we acknowledge it or not) we view the extra-uterine human as more valuable then the intra-uterine.
So what they don't follow the rules that God has made indelible in there consciousness and has revealed through His Word? Doesn't make it right. Just because a drunk and extortionist, who conversed with heretics and was demon-possessed, so much-so that he became epileptic when getting his messages and drooled, doesn't make their ethics unscrutinised by God. The Sun shines regardless whether you believe it is up there or not. The Earth is almost spherical regardless whether you lived thousands of years ago or today. And if you act that the Sun doesn't exist, or the Earth isn't round, then you might get hurt.
God is merciful; and understands that the indoctrination was at a young age, and he values things like obedience, and faith- these are our values that we have some common ground with our Muslim friends, and hence the reason we can respect their views.
But when public policy, or when our friends ask us about our beliefs, what else can we give but our own convictions? So what if it is not politically correct? Aren't we to please God and fear Him only? So what if it prejudiced? Everyone has prejudice!
Secondly, HbF exists with all people, it just is expressed less. It becomes quite minimal by 6 months. However, in people with thalassaemia, it is perhaps the only reason they are alive (barely even so).
In life there is many developments occuring. We don't develop our secondary reproductive characteristics until puberty, yet we still don't consider them to be infertile...they just not able to reproduce yet.
Who says a "pumping heart" equals a "living person". Go to your local hospital and see how many are on dialysis, are oxygenated, are constantly infused certain drugs, that are on pacemakers--> these are all people who are DEPENDANT on something else.
How about all those who are dependent on their medications? If someone was having an asthmatic attack, would preventing them from having their corticosteroids (lung dilator) be murder or not?
We are all dependent on things in many times in our life. What makes the foetus a special case? Because it has utter dependence? That just means we have utter responsibility!
We are not able to sustain our life without air. We are not able to sustain life unless we have the money to pay for our groceries. We are not able to sustain life if we don't have access to clean water.
No one is not dependent on something or someone. It is the public responsibility that we take care of the less fortunate, and to sustain all life. Dependence does not equal partial death- it just means a complicated life.
Murder remains murder. Dependent or not. Period.
To further my point, I will allude to H.G. Bishop Serapoion (I think...whoever is the Bishop of Southern US): I think this shows clearly that the prospects of life happen during gestation. This clearly shows the value of the unborn foetus, and shows how an arbitrary definition of yours about what life is or isn't, is insufficient, or has a lot to answer for with the regard God has clearly shown.
By the way, I refute your definition of life, but I acknowledge the difficulty of doing so.
God knows the answer to both these things - and it is a sign of of sin that we think we can take on His role. We are so wise and so knowledgeable - and the world is what it is. If we were more humble and more open to walking in His way, the world would be more as He meant it to be.
In Christ,
Anglian
When people argue about when life starts, it is usually a station of the way to tell us when they think it should end.
That is exactly why I do not like to define it- it leaves much to be answered. As I said, these superficial and usually arbitrary definitions has consequences for many people who most others would consider living. Such a legalistic way of defining life, will mean a legalistic attitude on what is life, and what is murder. It can lead to infanticide, killing of the elderly, those on life-support, while patient has heart surgery (they don't have a beating heart- so are they consdiered living), etc. This is something I don't think many pro-choice consider. The debate is not just about abortion- it is about others who have the same characteristics that apparently makes them less than a person or living, and giving licence to kill them. It is injustice. Even if a definition can be made, if we cannot verify it, then we are in serious infringement of God's laws.
If only God can define life because He is the arbitrator of life, which I argue, (because life is linked with the impalpable spirit and not the body), then it is obvious that the science is not adequate in this discussion, for we do not know the Mystery of the Spirit.
If we were more open to carrying our cross, then we would not be entertaining the idea of a "maybe" murder. We would take the cross with joy. Yes, what a world that would be.
Yes, I think you make some important points here.
The mindset with which we contend is not a Christian one, and for Christians to begin to compromise with it is, alas, t get into waters which will swallow them.
If we believe that all life is a gift from God, and that each of us is made in His image and is an heir to life eternal, it matters not how old the person is, or what their state of health is; all are children of God. There are other points of view, more characteristic of western humanism, which have their own internal consistency and form part of the mindset of another world-view - but the Church has not changed its teaching on this - nor can it.
In Christ,
Anglian
[quote author=Doubting Thomas link=topic=5941.msg79560#msg79560 date=1195713768]
To further my point, I will allude to H.G. Bishop Serapoion (I think...whoever is the Bishop of Southern US):
Bishop Serapion is Bishop of the Diocese of Los Angeles, Southern California, and Hawaii
http://www.lacopts.org/index.php/bishop_serapion/
Bishop Youssef is Bishop of the Southern United States.
http://suscopts.org/diocese/bishop/
Now regarding Can u cite some examples, because i don't belive its forbidden to us Christians. I mean the Psalms of David speak about eating with the sinners, or entering the homes of the evil ones, but not all muslims are evil or bad people.
I wholly agree with you, but the whole point of this convo is that they don't accept it alot of things taht SHOULD BE ACCEPTED, and this can only hurt them, but at the same time its not for us to judge them or to talk to them according to our standards. It's like a college prof. and a 3rd grader conversing. The College Prof. won't use big words wit the 3rd grader, because the child is not atthe same level as he is. Lets also try to respect and not use words taht can only lead to unrest regarding their beliefs (or their prophets) even if we dont' accept him or acknowlege his "prophecies" ...because as Christians we should do unto others as we'd have done to us.
These verses are the answers i needed concerning whether thethe embryo/fetus in teh stomach is alive or not. And clearly i was wrong. I mean as i said before i was never pro abortion, i just felt it was a necc. action taht had to be taken. btw i met HG Bishop Serapion a week ago, truly a very educated individual.
Yet again i maybe reverting to my opinons but i honeslty find the sin of abortion is prefered incomparasion to the sin of raising a child and basically raising him into a human with no spiritual life who lives life in inquity and then gets condemnd to hell. I mean i don't kno what the future holds, but this is the way he'll be raised, whether or not he'll have a change of heart when he grows up only God knows.
Lastly a little update, i've been pushing my original idea of getting them married now and hten having them deliver the baby, and its sorta picking up some momentum because the other option is going to france to have the abortion.
This is not the case here. They asked for your opinion; your advice, and frankly if they asked a professor of physics to explain gravity, he won't pretend that it doesn't exist.
And as I said before, God has given them a conscience, and the Grace of God is upon all humans to guide them to righteousness, though those who are not-Christian have not the grace of being anointed by the Holy Spirit and knowing the source of our righteousness. These two, both intrinsic and extrinsic forces, with your confirming voice through God, can be the voice they needed to stop this murder.
I know that we cannot expect that those who have different world views have our ethics, but we have as much right as they do to make clear what they are, and we are responsible that we live by them. And when we are asked, we cannot dance with their views, and speak as a politician to gain their favoritism; especially when a life is at stake.
Oh...and sorry for incorrectly referencing the Bishop! I am not from the United States...sorry.
On the point about the damnation of the child...I disagree. This has been a wake-up call for these parents, about their responsibilities, and by the grace of God they can overcome the very real obstacles all parents face. It is not going to be perfect, and since they are not-Christian there is more chance that they will be on a number of things at odds with Christ, but that does not mean that we should hope that all non-Christian children not be born! Christ would not allow their birth if there was no chance to get joy from them. He takes pleasure in all His creation. Secondly, just because the parents sinned, does not mean the child lives in sin.The child may have it a bit tough, but Gregory, lots of children have difficulties, be it mental instability, medical problems, poor families...we can't run from the world judging us.
Yes God has given them a conscience, and they accept it, but they limit it, depending on their reliogus stance towards it. The whole polygpmy issue, clearly before one takes the decision to marry again, his conscience comes into play, but because its ok religously, they limit it. Yes of course, we are responsible for living by what our church teaches us. I mean had i been the one who got my girlfriend pregnant, i def. would have taken action in a mcuh different way, considering my religous point of view first and foremost. But as for him, if his religon says its ok (not sure though) and if he believes in his religon, and btw he knows its wrong in Christianity then i cant hold him to my position regarding this case [i.e. not have the abortion]
Forever,
Coptic Servent
like the whole abortion thing came when their was no toher way
i orignally wnated him and her to go sign a paper under teh supervision of a Sheikh to state that they are married
and thats the idea im still pushing and their sorta accepting but the only thing holding them from doing that is the fact taht they believe that they are not ready for parenthood
as for the whole adoption idea, ya we thought of that too, but its not as easy as it is in america,
i.e. here if someone finds out she had a child w/o being married its like a huge disgrace to their family and the pepole around them and so she can't deliver the baby adn put it up for adoption instead she has to abort it.
Forever,
Coptic Servent
but abortion is for different purposes such as rape..
Murder is not allowed in rape. You can't murder your rapist (unless your life is at stake, hence, in defence); why would you be able to murder the innocent victim?
I have a question for you gregory have you ever seen that billboard or big signs in people frontyards saying "UNBORN BABIES CAN FEEL PAIN" well if you haven't it's out there.
Unborn babies can't feel pain until the 22nd week (if you are liberal) and later if you are conservative.
It is these posters with pseudoscientific messages that give us pro-lifers a bad name.
Similarly, we as Christians are at times called to do the same. We must therefore give our advice within the bounds of our own ethics, explaining it in terms that non-Christians are likely to comprehend and, hopefully, take heed...
God bless,
Andrew
Honestly, it is not your baby to kill. It is God's creation. Whether or not it feels pain is meaningless. life is not yours to give and not yours to take. unless one of us here can create something from dust. without God, then go do that and kill it. everything belongs to God, do not take the life He has given, because it is not yours or anyone elses.
I think it is quite clear that I am a hard-line Pro-life advocate. But I just want you to refine your thoughts: if an animal is God's creation, then why is it permissible to eat of meat?
Godd question, but it is clear from Genesis that God gave us dominion over the animals; they are not to be equated with people. That, however, is no excuse for cruelty to animals, and as a Christian I feel it is my duty to only purchase meat from suppliers where I know the animals have been treated humanely.
That said, few of us would eat meat had we been to an abattoir.
In Christ,
Anglian
i'd fill u in with what went down:
Basically they told their parents who pushed for the aboriton, but before it could happen they secretly wed, and as the parents continued on with their hope of getting them married, the doctors found that the abortion can proove fatal to the girl, and so evantually the somewhat offically got married, and are having the baby.