Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Morality and Theology Should abortions be legal?Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Should abortions be legal? | Login/Join |
Good response, Derek. Katy, maybe you could say more about what you have in mind by the scientific aspect. | ||||
|
When does the Spirit enter the baby? .. Is it measurable? So you are saying it is just something we take on faith? When a baby is aborted, does it have a Spirit. It may be body and soul, but not a complete human being. http://weblog.xanga.com/dannyd...-a-human-being.html# | ||||
|
Astonishingly quickly, we get into epistemological issues.  I have ordered a copy of Jacques Maritain's book on this subject. While I was at it, I ordered Jim's book on post-sanjuanist developments in contemplative prayer. And then I added Phil's book on kundalini to the order just because I've been interested in it for a while. In six months' time, I should be equipped to continue this discussion LOL. | ||||
|
Katy, spirits aren't measurable so there's no way to scientifically evaluate its presence. If one believes, however, that the human soul is the source of life for an embryo, then the fact that it is alive means it has a soul. It certainly is a human life -- what else could it be? The author of the article you link to asks some deep, pointed questions, but seems to not take into account that God creates outside of space and time. A soul's incarnation, then, is the development in space and time of what God already sees and knows in eternity. This is a theistic perspective and could not be used in secular discussion, but I do not see how Christians could view things otherwise. We are known and loved by God from all eternity. That it is necessary for us to begin our earthly sojourn as a zygote, then embryo, then fetus, then infant does not change what God has created, nor how we are viewed by God as persons who are loved. It's just how things have to unfold in a space-time world where we develop our spirituality in the context of embodiment. | ||||
|
Thanks Phil and Derek... I was thinking that , since like at death, the departing of the spirit IS measureable,(at least that's what I read somewhere.) the entering of the spirit could be too.  Also I think there needs to be better understanding of the differene between soul and spirit. Animals have souls, but not spirits. Also as I think we all know the brain isn't the soul, nor the mind. Oh well, I think I've gotten into this over my head. lol Again thanks for your replies. :-) Katy | ||||
|
You're maybe thinking of a doctor Duncan MacDougall, who in the early 1900s tried to measure the weight of a departing soul and came up with the answer 21 grams. His theory was popularized in a movie title: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_Grams I think his methods are nowadays considered too crude to be reliable. | ||||
|
Derek, not sure where I heard that... and never heard of the movie.. looks like it might be interesting though. Thanks, Katy | ||||
|
I wasn't sure if you were meaning Spirit or spirit, neither of which has mass that can be measured. The human soul is spiritual and in that sense differs from animal souls. Thomas Aquinas held that we also possess animal souls, but these are incorporated into and informed by the spiritual soul. The Holy Spirit, on the other hand, is of God, and is communicated to us through our union with the ascended Christ. Maybe this page would help? - http://shalomplace.com/res/anthrp.html Skim through and you'll see what's going on. | ||||
|
Oh my, looks interesting. Since I am into holistic health.. wholeness.. and relationship between body, mind (soul) and spirit (well o.k., or soul) I'll be glad to learn some new things. However, I did an extensive study on body/soul/spirit years ago, and concluded that we are body, soul (consisting of the will, intellect and emotions) and spirit.. When we are baptized, God's Spirit comes to dwell in our spirit. Well, I guess this is getting off topic, so I'll quit here. Thanks for the link. Katy | ||||
|
Read this story and see what you think. I mean . . . why not? Same exact consequence as the abortion would have had, right? So what's the difference? | ||||
|
Yes, what horror! And you are right, what's the difference: kill the baby on the inside of mother's body or kill the baby on the outside? God help these people... | ||||
|
I think these are positive and long overdue steps: White House Begins Effort to Bridge the Divide on Abortion. A good move by President Barack Obama and his administration.
| ||||
|
 |
That's so nice! Just think how wonderful it would have been in the 1850s if abolitionists and pro-slavery advocates had gotten together in a room and listened to each other. They could have come up with all sorts of common ground agreements; we might have been able to avoid the civil war; we might even still have slavery! Er . . . | |||
|
The objective is to reduce abortion numbers. In my book that is good. I cannot fathom why you would mock such an effort. | ||||
|
|
That is a good thing, but it's not like it's a new idea. Both sides have been doing this for years. The exercise completely sidesteps the issue of the morality of abortion, which was the point of my sarcastic analogy. I mean, can you imagine abolitionists settling for policies that merely guaranteed better treatment of slaves, and calling that progress? | |||
|
|
Behind the Angst at Notre Dame is a well-reasoned opinion by a Notre Dame law professor on why it is wrong for the university to have invited President Obama to give the commencement address. I found myself in complete agreement with his reasoning. | |||
|
|
I'll use this discussion to call notice to the recent encyclical by Pope Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritae (Love in Truth). George Weigel, writing for NRO, has a good reflection on some aspects of it, especially re. the abortion issue.
They will do nothing, of course, as their primary aim is to get re-elected. see http://article.nationalreview....NzAyMTJiNTU3MTAzN2M= for the full article. Very good! | |||
|
|
I know I'm just talking to myself on this thread, but dialoguing with pro-choicers in a local newspaper forum has me acutely aware of errors in their reasoning. Re. the legal/moral status of the fetus, it's interesting to see how states have written their "fetal homicide laws." - http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=14386 So many states consider the fetus an individual person deserving of protection by law if it is killed by someone other than the woman, and against her will. Kind of hints where things would go if Roe v. Wade were overturned and the matter would become a states rights issue. | |||
|
Phil: I do read this thread as you post to it, as I'm guessing others do. It is such a sad "state" of affairs. To outright admit the person and dignity of the unborn child and yet in virtually the same sentence commit the innocent to death is grisly. Just shows how strong the sense of entitlement is behind the pro-choice initiatives such that simple logic and conscience can't be openly considered. | ||||
|
Hey, Phil. I read your postings here too. But there is only so much sick stuff I can digest and respond to. I only got through the first two clips on the concentration camp officer. Too much grisly for me... I do appreciate your sharing your updates on this topic as I utilize some of this material in teaching my MA counseling students. Your work here does bear fruit, no doubt about it.  | ||||
|
|
Thank you, w.c. and shasha, for your affirmation. As I noted above, I've been dialoguing with pro-choicers on a newspaper forum lately and so I'm very much aware of the vacuity of their reasoning. The best argument they can come up with is that this is such a complicated and controversial issue that it's best to let the woman herself choose what is in the best interest of her own health. I've granted the legitimacy of situations when her health is at risk (double-effect principle), but they expand this to mean most anything that might inconvenience her (or her sexual partner's) plans. The fallacy, here, of course, is that it does not take into account the fetus' right to live and realize his/her destiny. Mostly, however, the pro-choicers I find on these forums use ad hominems and straw-man fallacies to make their points. Not impressive, to say the least. Here's a point I've made several times: that it's been quite common in almost every family in history for women to have unexpected and even unwanted pregnancies while in a state of troubled mental health or strained physical health, but to give birth anyway and do their best to love their child, albeit imperfectly. This is, to me, great heroism -- even saintliness -- which is rewarded by the satisfaction and pride they come to feel in seeing their offspring grow and develop. Even in the worst of cases, where the woman is just overwhelmed for various reasons, her child has a chance to live and overcome the obstacles of an impaired childhood. This is infinitely preferable to depriving a human being of this opportunity. | |||
|
|
Here's something from the 2nd C. of Christianity by Tertulian, one of our earliest theologians: For us, murder is once for all forbidden... It makes no difference whether one take away the life once born, or destroy it as it comes to birth. He is a man, who is to be a man; the fruit is always present in the seed. ... Tertullian (Quintus S. Florens Tertullianus) (160?-230?), Tertullian: Apologetic and practical treatises [2nd-3rd century] - I can understand there being pro-choice agnostics, atheists, and, perhaps, some from other religions. I can't understand the thinking informing "pro-choice Christians." | |||
|
LOL did you Google that, or did you just happen to be reading Tertullian? I am reading A New History of Christianity by Charles Freeman, and he mentions that the Didache (c. AD 100) also includes abortion as immoral. | ||||
|
|
Ah, no. I was going through some quotes from early church fathers and there it was. Good one, don't you think? And, yes, for the Didache, too. | |||
|
Here's a bright spot in the darkness: --------------------- The former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in southeast Texas says she had a "change of heart" after watching an abortion last month — and she quit her job and joined a pro-life group in praying outside the facility. ------------------- http://www.foxnews.com/us/2009...abortion-ultrasound/ She tells of the pressure from superiors to do more abortions at the clinic as it is a big money-maker. Seems like a collusion of many dark forces operating here. | ||||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Shalom Place Community Shalom Place Discussion Groups General Discussion Forums Christian Morality and Theology Should abortions be legal?