Red Envelope Day to protest abortion

[kurious_kathy]

Yep, we were known before we were even created.

Known by whom? And what is the basis of this 'knowledge'? Please don't cite the bible as support, because there is no evidence that the bible is the word of any deity.

There is plenty of evidence of the validity of scripture, you are misled if you do not know this. God has preserved his word quite nicely over the history of the world. But we need to stop derailing the OP of this discussion. Go Red Letters!

 

[proudnonbbeliever]

i support post-natal abortion - just kidding or am i?

 

[Mr Clingford]

Originally Posted by kurious_kathy View Post
Psalm 139: 13-16
For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.

I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.

My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place.
When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,

your eyes saw my unformed body.
All the days ordained for me
were written in your book
before one of them came to be.
Originally Posted by kurious_kathy View Post
When I was woven together speaks pretty clearly of it. So does when I was made in secret. Also you knit me together in my mothers womb, and your eyes saw my unformed body, Wouldn't you agree? The whole passage seems to make this point clear.

My reply:
'Knit together' in mother's womb does not address, though, when a human life begins - it used to be thought by Christians that it was at the quickening, when the baby first moved, that the soul was implanted.

'I was woven together in the depths of the earth' - this is obviously not literally true and contradicts the 'mother's womb' idea. Psalms are poetical forms making use of a lot of metaphor, as is made clear here. The psalm speaks powerfully of God the creator caring for his amazing creation. I don't understand how these verses say that life begins at conception.

Permit me, Kathy, but what do you think of the above?

 

[Mr Clingford]

i support post-natal abortion - just kidding or am i?

You are Peter Singer and I claim my reward.

 

[sophia8]

I really hope those envelopes were opened and the message on the inside of them is heard!
This envelope represents one child who died in abortion.
It is empty because that life was unable to offer anything to the world.

But there wasn't anything inside the envelopes. And what exactly does "offer to the world" mean? What does any person "offer to the world"?
Could you please say what you mean instead of spouting Hallmark cliches.

 

[Egg]

i support post-natal abortion - just kidding or am i?

So, we could say you're pro-choice too? Or did you mean forced post-natal abortion?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

On the topic of the "Red Envelope Day": I don't like these "bully tactics". Politics shouldn't be made on the basis of "what the biggest pressure group can cook up this time". Maybe I'm too emotionally distant to these issues, but I like my politics based on past experience, science and rationality. Past experience suggests that outlawing abortion means back-alley practices and shady and dangerous procedures (coat hangers have been mentioned) and it means keeping the whole XX-chromosome part of the population under the thumb of the XY part. That sounds neither rational nor compassionate to me.

Agreed. Demonstrations and this kind of thing might be fun, but they're not what democracy should be about, in my eyes.

Want to get something done? Go through the regular channels. Write letters, join a political party, get involved. Sure, it's not as fun as waving posters and shouting slogans in a square, but if you really care about the issue, surely you'll do it anyway, right?

...thought not.

 

[themusicteacher]

Think of it this way, religious folk:

Those aborted "people" got to go straight to their ultimate reward in heaven. They didn't even have to pass go. You're just jealous, right?

When all you anti-choice folks state, in writing, that you will provide for all the earthly needs (money, shelter, food, emotional care, education, etc) of all the fetuses that would have been aborted, I'll vote for an amendment banning abortion. I'm talking real care, as in taking them into your home and treating them as your own child (sort of the way Joseph did for Jesus). Oh, and that means ALL of them, not just the cute blond-haired, blue-eyed ones without serious medical issues. No cherry-picking and no government assistance, either!

 

[ponderingturtle]

Thanks for the quote - i wondered if you were thinking of this passage. But how does this tell us that life begins at conception?

Was there even a concept of conception? I know it was thought for a long time that women were little more than an incubator for the seed planted by the man. So it would be ejaculation and not conception that would be the key moment.

This is the problem of fitting concepts that predate modern medical understanding into a modern medical framework.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Mmmmm... I don't think so. There are plenty of choices that can be made *prior to* conception.

That said, however, if genetic testing indicates a baby with serious problems... well *I* would still choose "life", but I don't think I would blame anyone who disagrees with me. Similar for rape.

How much of a threat to the womans health does a pregnancy need to involve before it becomes ethical to abort? There is always risks but you seem to be fine forcing a certain degree of risks on the mother, something less than say a 80% chance of stroking out and dying but greater than 0.

 

[Mr Clingford]

Was there even a concept of conception? I know it was thought for a long time that women were little more than an incubator for the seed planted by the man. So it would be ejaculation and not conception that would be the key moment.

This is the problem of fitting concepts that predate modern medical understanding into a modern medical framework.

Yes, exactly.

 

[TimCallahan]

Kathy:

If we are human beings at conception, I would assume that you mean we have souls at that point. However, if "ensoulment" takes place at conception, how do you explain the fact that, by conservative estimate, about two thirds of the fertilized ova - human beings with souls according to you - do not live longer than one month. About half the fertilized ova are grossly deformed and die. Of those remaining, some fail to implant in the uterine wall and are flushed out in the next menstruel period. Others do implant and reproduce by cell division; but the cells fail to differentiate. Thus, no unmbilical chord is formed, and they too are swept away in the next menstruel period.

I read this in an issue of "Christianity Today" from the 1980s. As I said, the two-thirds number is a conservative estimate. Others place the number of fertilized ova that only live a month or less as high as 80%. This is in well-nourished, healthy women, free from either physical or emotional trauma.

Thus, to accept ensoulment and human status at conception, we must believe that God allows to exist a situation in which the majority of the human race exists only briefly in the womb. Considering the doctrine of Original Sin, these humans would have to be considered depraved, unregenerate sinners and as such consigned to eternal damnation.

Are you sure you want to assert humanity and ensoulment at conception, considering the implications outlined above?

 

[mazyloron]

We know you have thought that just maybe
You ought to get rid of your baby.
But life is so precious, you see
(A coat hanger's murder, 3rd degree).
So instead of aborting your fetus,
Come down to the clinic to meet us!

Ha! That is amazing!

How about sending these idiots back 1,000,000 red coat hangers?

Make sure they're metal ones, and just dip the pointy end in paint. This is about the sort of response their little "campaign" deserves.

Make no mistake, this red letter nonsense is not an attempt to spark a rational debate or come to a reasoned consensus, they're just trying to bully politicians into caving on an important and controversial issue without really considering all sides first.

 

[Cayvmann]

Exodus 21:22-25:

And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

Send those red envelopes to the civil court, apparently that's where abortion should be discussed, according to the bible.....

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

maddog, I'll respect Unrepentant Sinner's request to keep to the topic of the thread, but quixotecoyote summed things up pretty nicely. I do note your use of the term "baby" to describe what would accurately be called a zygote, embryo, or fetus, depending on the stage of development.

Maddog - maybe you should have used the term "human" instead of "baby"?

 

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

Can we keep this thread more focused on Red Evelope Day than on the larger issue of abortion in toto?

Yeah right, since when does anything having to do with abortion not inevitably turn into a debate about abortion? Your best bet would probably be to either start the new thread yourself or ask the mods to split this one.

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

The thing I was wondering when I heard about this is why didn't they do this while President Bush, ostensibly a pro-lifer, was still in office instead of waiting until now?

Is this the only purpose of your post? Because, if so, I think the part I bolded above in your own OP answers your own question.

 

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

When I was woven together speaks pretty clearly of it. So does when I was made in secret. Also you knit me together in my mothers womb, and your eyes saw my unformed body, Wouldn't you agree? The whole passage seems to make this point clear.

You are aware that the bible only requires men who assaulted a woman and caused her to miscarry to pay a fine correct? The punishment for murder in the bible is death. Murder as defined is the unlawful taking of a human life by another human. If the bible calls for the punishment of causing a miscarriage to be anything other than death then the bible does not consider the fetus to be a life, quod erat demonstrandum.

Sorry sinner, could not resist.

 

[mazyloron]

You are aware that the bible only requires men who assaulted a woman and caused her to miscarry to pay a fine correct? The punishment for murder in the bible is death. Murder as defined is the unlawful taking of a human life by another human. If the bible calls for the punishment of causing a miscarriage to be anything other than death then the bible does not consider the fetus to be a life, quod erat demonstrandum.

Sorry sinner, could not resist.

Further, and I could be reading it wrong, but it seemed to say that only when men were fighting another and accidentally hit a woman, causing her to miscarry, would they be fined. So, there is nothing in there about intentional causing of a miscarriage (a.k.a. abortion). If it's intentional, then there's no fine, no death penalty, nothing. Just if I meant to hit you and you ducked, and I hit your woman (note the possessive connotation) and cause her to miscarry, then I owe you reparations, for having damaged/destroyed something of yours.

Sorry to contribute to the derail, couldn't resist.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

When I was woven together speaks pretty clearly of it. So does when I was made in secret. Also you knit me together in my mothers womb, and your eyes saw my unformed body, Wouldn't you agree? The whole passage seems to make this point clear.

No, not in my eyes.