Post of the day...Idiot variety

[glorydaz]

Why is it so hard for you to understand that it is not necessary to intentionally/actively kill the child in order to save the mother in any of these circumstances?

True, one could intentionally/actively save the mother whose life was in jeopardy.

1. You have made yourself a false accuser of the brethren in making your claim that in my eyes the two of you are not saved.
2. I turned my "wrath" on Angel in that thread when it happened. Don't act like this is sudden.

* I wasn't accusing you. Did I say you did or said something you didn't?

Oh, I'm sure in your eyes this proves we aren't saved at all. Happily for us, we know better. :carryon:

I was speculating as to what you might think, just as you were speculating as to what you think you would do if your wife or child was in the hypothetical cases we have been discussing.

* I'm not acting like this is sudden. In fact, I'm surprised it's even being discussed considering there isn't one believer I know of who would ever make such a decision without seeking the Lord's will ...concerning their particular circumstance.

Just to clarify the story aCW told never actually happened. Not to mention he never claimed the girl became pregnant from the supposed rape; he offered up a "what if".

Exactly, a "what if" that has turned into harsh words being spoken against fellow believers. Personally, I haven't forgotten for one minute.....and to see it being dredged up again is mind boggling.

 

[Lighthouse]

Exactly, a "what if" that has turned into harsh words being spoken against fellow believers.

What harsh words?

 

[Arthur Brain]

No.

Good.

The child makes no decision to kill the mother.

Well of course they don't...

If you make the decision to kill the child, then the child is going to be killed. Right?

If you make the decision that the mother should undergo a pregnancy that will kill her, then the mother is going to be killed. Right?

Do you see how facile that approach is to the subject here, and why it's better to have a more reasoned argument instead?

 

[glorydaz]

What harsh words?

I have to admit, Lighthouse, that I'm really remembering back to the harsh words you spoke to me months ago. When you brought up that thread, it all came back to me. I have not been following these recent threads because there is nothing of profit coming from any of them. They all end the same way. I see law trumping grace, and I am left shaking my head.

 

[Tambora]

If you make the decision that the mother should undergo a pregnancy that will kill her, then the mother is going to be killed. Right?

No one kills her if she dies from complications of a pregnancy. It would be a natural death.

Do you see how facile that approach is to the subject here, and why it's better to have a more reasoned argument instead?

I see that if you kill someone, then you kill someone.

As unpleasant and painful as it may be that a woman was left with a decision to either let herself die or kill her child to save her life, if she chooses to kill the child ...... then she is killing a child.

You can come up with several scenarios where the woman's life may be in grave danger because of a difficult pregnancy.
And it would be a gut wrenching decision on her part.
But no matter how gut-wrenching it is, to kill a child is still killing a child.

Rather than try to make it out to be anything other than what it is, as if either decision could possibly come out as a win-win, pray that you (well not you, but women in general) are never put in a position to make a decision like that. Because your only options are to let yourself die or kill a child.

And by the way, her decision will have ZERO to do with her salvation.
It is not about whether she is saved or not.
It is about whether it is killing a child or not. And it is killing a child.

 

[Nick M]

No one kills her if she dies from complications of a pregnancy. It would be a natural death.

I see that if you kill someone, then you kill someone.

He is one of the worst human beings I have ever seen on the internet. Full of hate and evil.

 

[Granite]

He is one of the worst human beings I have ever seen on the internet. Full of hate and evil.

Classic projection 101...

 

[Rusha]

He is one of the worst human beings I have ever seen on the internet. Full of hate and evil.

Projection at it's finest.

 

[fool]

Liquid Nitrogen.

 

[resurrected]

He is one of the worst human beings I have ever seen on the internet. Full of hate and evil.

artie?

he's a tard :idunno:

self-induced through years of alcoholism, most likely

 

[Rusha]

He is one of the worst human beings I have ever seen on the internet. Full of hate and evil.

artie?

he's a tard :idunno:

self-induced through years of alcoholism, most likely

Projection at it's finest.

 

[S0ZO]

Amazing how everything got twisted in that thread about birth control (which is a sin) into a completely different discussion where most everyone lost track of both the context and the point.

 

[intojoy]

Good work CC.
Yea yea and nah nah

 

[IMJerusha]

And killing a mother is killing a mother too.

Yes. That is why this is a decision that must be between God and the mother and father. It doesn't make it any easier but the medical community does not consider an ectopic removal to be an abortion. Physicians who are serious about the Hippocratic Oath see this surgery as necessary to save a life because there is no chance for the child to complete it's gestation. It's a heartbreaking situation. One point I haven't seen addressed and that is the possibility that God might consider a woman's choice to die a sin.

 

[IMJerusha]

Amazing how everything got twisted in that thread about birth control (which is a sin) into a completely different discussion where most everyone lost track of both the context and the point.

How do you label all birth control a sin?

 

[Granite]

How do you label all birth control a sin?

Please don't feed him.

 

[S0ZO]

Yes. That is why this is a decision that must be between God and the mother and father. It doesn't make it any easier but the medical community does not consider an ectopic removal to be an abortion. Physicians who are serious about the Hippocratic Oath see this surgery as necessary to save a life because there is no chance for the child to complete it's gestation. It's a heartbreaking situation.

Blatantly false, and that is why it is important that the INTENT of everyone involved is to save both mother and child, even if that does not happen. To arbitrarily "choose" to end a life because of what one individual doctor purports is lazy.

 

[S0ZO]

How do you label all birth control a sin?

How do you not?

Do you understand what birth control is?

 

[IMJerusha]

How do you not?

So anyone who practices the rhythm method is committing sin?

Do you understand what birth control is?

I do.

 

[IMJerusha]

Blatantly false, and that is why it is important that the INTENT of everyone involved is to save both mother and child, even if that does not happen. To arbitrarily "choose" to end a life because of what one individual doctor purports is lazy.

The Hippocratic Oath is not "one individual doctor". Are you also aware that in the case of ectopic pregnancy, there is no saving both mother and child? Additionally, most women aren't even aware there is a tubal pregnancy until just before or after the tube has ruptured. By that time, there is absolutely no chance for the infant's survival and certainly no chance for the woman's survival without the surgery to repair her tube.
And btw, there is nothing arbitrary about the choice to survive. God instilled this in us. His gift of life is not to be treated lightly.