|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 12:16 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 6:11 pm
 |
|
|
|
I am pro-choice.
1. America is secular. This means that we cannot force people to follow our religion, and we must abide by the constitution. That Constitution states that everyone born or naturalized in the United States has the right not to be subjected to harm against their will. Any woman who does not wish to carry a child, yet is being forced to, is being violated. However; some will say that a fetus has the right not to be subjected to harm against its will. There are two things wrong with this: A fetus cannot state its will, the mother has to make decisions for it, and fetii have not been born into the United States and are therefore not protected by the Constitution. Furthermore, a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. This means that the only defense against abortion is that a fetus has a "soul" from conception. That defense is obviously religiously based.
2. The Bible does not say that a fetus has a soul from conception. In fact, the Old Testament treats fetii as mere property.
Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath:
Genesis 2:7 7 the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Clearly, the Bible is not pro-life, and neither is the Constitution.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 10:09 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 5:02 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:08 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 1:12 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 1:26 pm
|
|
|
 |
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori I am pro-choice. 1. America is secular. This means that we cannot force people to follow our religion, and we must abide by the constitution. That Constitution states that everyone born or naturalized in the United States has the right not to be subjected to harm against their will. Any woman who does not wish to carry a child, yet is being forced to, is being violated. However; some will say that a fetus has the right not to be subjected to harm against its will. There are two things wrong with this: A fetus cannot state its will, the mother has to make decisions for it, and fetii have not been born into the United States and are therefore not protected by the Constitution. Furthermore, a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. This means that the only defense against abortion is that a fetus has a "soul" from conception. That defense is obviously religiously based. 2. The Bible does not say that a fetus has a soul from conception. In fact, the Old Testament treats fetii as mere property. Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath: Genesis 2:7 7 the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Clearly, the Bible is not pro-life, and neither is the Constitution.
I'm a little curious about this. The relevence of the first quote, I'm not really understanding. The baby is not really mentioned at all, save for it says that the woman is pregnant. Women were treated as property in some cases...are we not people?
With the second quote I could see the argument, but I think it might be taking it a little too far. Adam was formed from the dust. Not from a womb. The circumstance is different.
Needless to say, I would disagree with the statement that the Bible is pro-choice ^^
The Bible talks about how we were formed by God while still in the womb
Quote: For you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb Pslams 139:13
Also how the unborn child is still included in the sins of the world
Quote: Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Psalms 51:5
Also, in Job 31:15, Psalms 22:10, Isaiah 44:32, 24; and Jeremiah 1:5 talks about God's protection of the development of the unborn child. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 2:57 pm
|
|
|
|
x_Hikari_x Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori I am pro-choice. 1. America is secular. This means that we cannot force people to follow our religion, and we must abide by the constitution. That Constitution states that everyone born or naturalized in the United States has the right not to be subjected to harm against their will. Any woman who does not wish to carry a child, yet is being forced to, is being violated. However; some will say that a fetus has the right not to be subjected to harm against its will. There are two things wrong with this: A fetus cannot state its will, the mother has to make decisions for it, and fetii have not been born into the United States and are therefore not protected by the Constitution. Furthermore, a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. This means that the only defense against abortion is that a fetus has a "soul" from conception. That defense is obviously religiously based. 2. The Bible does not say that a fetus has a soul from conception. In fact, the Old Testament treats fetii as mere property. Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath: Genesis 2:7 7 the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Clearly, the Bible is not pro-life, and neither is the Constitution.
from The Pro-Choice Action Network:
This passage allows only for the punishment of a man who injures a woman causing her to miscarry. However, a careful scrutiny of these verses uncovers a startling revelation. A miscarriage is punishable only by a fine, yet if there is any further harm, such as the death of the woman, the penalty is life for life! The implication of this passage is clear—the life of the unborn child is not accorded anywhere near the same status as the life of the woman. To put it another way, the man who causes a woman to miscarry is guilty not of murder, but a misdemeanor.
Quote: With the second quote I could see the argument, but I think it might be taking it a little too far. Adam was formed from the dust. Not from a womb. The circumstance is different.
Also from The Pro-Choice Action Network:
The Hebrew word for human being or living soul is nephesh, which is also the word for "breathing." Nephesh occurs over 700 times in the Bible as the identifying factor in human life. Obviously, fetuses do not breath and therefore cannot be considered as human beings according to the Bible. Here is another verse that reinforces this conclusion. God says:
"Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live." (Ezekiel 37:5)
Quote: Needless to say, I would disagree with the statement that the Bible is pro-choice ^^ The Bible talks about how we were formed by God while still in the womb Quote: For you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb Pslams 139:13 Also how the unborn child is still included in the sins of the world Quote: Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Psalms 51:5
PCAN:
All this passage states is that God is directly involved in the creation of a fetus and knows its future. This is useless for the anti-choice position, since God creates all living things, including trees and bugs. Plus, just because God is supposedly omniscient doesn't give fetuses any special status—it simply means God already knows whether they will live or die. It is dishonest to conclude from this verse that a fetus is a human being deserving of more protection than women. The passage is poetic prose that anti-choicers have twisted and trivialized by giving it a literal, objective meaning where there is none.
Quote: Also, in Job 31:15, Psalms 22:10, Isaiah 44:32, 24; and Jeremiah 1:5 talks about God's protection of the development of the unborn child.
Please read PCAN on the Bible. http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/bible.shtml |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 10:28 pm
|
|
|
|
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori x_Hikari_x Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori I am pro-choice. 1. America is secular. This means that we cannot force people to follow our religion, and we must abide by the constitution. That Constitution states that everyone born or naturalized in the United States has the right not to be subjected to harm against their will. Any woman who does not wish to carry a child, yet is being forced to, is being violated. However; some will say that a fetus has the right not to be subjected to harm against its will. There are two things wrong with this: A fetus cannot state its will, the mother has to make decisions for it, and fetii have not been born into the United States and are therefore not protected by the Constitution. Furthermore, a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. This means that the only defense against abortion is that a fetus has a "soul" from conception. That defense is obviously religiously based. 2. The Bible does not say that a fetus has a soul from conception. In fact, the Old Testament treats fetii as mere property. Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath: Genesis 2:7 7 the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Clearly, the Bible is not pro-life, and neither is the Constitution.
from The Pro-Choice Action Network:
This passage allows only for the punishment of a man who injures a woman causing her to miscarry. However, a careful scrutiny of these verses uncovers a startling revelation. A miscarriage is punishable only by a fine, yet if there is any further harm, such as the death of the woman, the penalty is life for life! The implication of this passage is clear—the life of the unborn child is not accorded anywhere near the same status as the life of the woman. To put it another way, the man who causes a woman to miscarry is guilty not of murder, but a misdemeanor.
Quote: With the second quote I could see the argument, but I think it might be taking it a little too far. Adam was formed from the dust. Not from a womb. The circumstance is different.
Also from The Pro-Choice Action Network:
The Hebrew word for human being or living soul is nephesh, which is also the word for "breathing." Nephesh occurs over 700 times in the Bible as the identifying factor in human life. Obviously, fetuses do not breath and therefore cannot be considered as human beings according to the Bible. Here is another verse that reinforces this conclusion. God says:
"Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live." (Ezekiel 37:5)
Quote: Needless to say, I would disagree with the statement that the Bible is pro-choice ^^ The Bible talks about how we were formed by God while still in the womb Quote: For you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb Pslams 139:13 Also how the unborn child is still included in the sins of the world Quote: Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Psalms 51:5
PCAN:
All this passage states is that God is directly involved in the creation of a fetus and knows its future. This is useless for the anti-choice position, since God creates all living things, including trees and bugs. Plus, just because God is supposedly omniscient doesn't give fetuses any special status—it simply means God already knows whether they will live or die. It is dishonest to conclude from this verse that a fetus is a human being deserving of more protection than women. The passage is poetic prose that anti-choicers have twisted and trivialized by giving it a literal, objective meaning where there is none.
Quote: Also, in Job 31:15, Psalms 22:10, Isaiah 44:32, 24; and Jeremiah 1:5 talks about God's protection of the development of the unborn child.
Please read PCAN on the Bible. http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/bible.shtml
The hebrew word translated "breath" in Ezekial 37:5 is
Quote: rûach roo'-akh From H7306; wind; by resemblance breath, that is, a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions): - air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit ([-ual]), tempest, X vain, ([whirl-]) wind (-y).
Jer 1:1 Words of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah, of the priests who are in Anathoth, in the land of Benjamin,
Jer 1:2 unto whom the word of Jehovah hath been in the days of Josiah son of Amon, king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign,
Jer 1:3 and it is in the days of Jehoiakim son of Josiah, king of Judah, till the completion of the eleventh year of Zedekiah son of Josiah, king of Judah, till the removal of Jerusalem in the fifth month.
Quote: Jer 1:4 And there is a word of Jehovah unto me, saying, Jer 1:5 `Before I form thee in the belly, I have known thee; and before thou comest forth from the womb I have separated thee, a prophet to nations I have made thee.' Jer 1:6 And I say, `Ah, Lord Jehovah! lo, I have not known--to speak, for I am a youth.' Jer 1:7 And Jehovah saith unto me, `Do not say, I am a youth, for to all to whom I send thee thou goest, and all that I command thee thou speakest. Jer 1:8 Be not afraid of their faces, for with thee am I to deliver thee, --an affirmation of Jehovah.' Jer 1:9 And Jehovah putteth forth His hand, and striketh against my mouth, and Jehovah saith unto me, `Lo, I have put my words in thy mouth. Jer 1:10 See, I have charged thee this day concerning the nations, and concerning the kingdoms, to pluck up, and to break down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.'
these verses are some of the reasons I am pro-life. another is no matter how bad my life gets, my mother was strong enough to tell my grandfather( my dads dad) no when He ordered her to abort me. these words spoken by Jerimiah are the reason NOT to kill our children in the womb. my third reason is, dare we kill our future? our children are our future just like we are the nations future. my mothers friend had so many abortions, that when she got pregnate with her son, she couldnt find a clinic who would do it. she had the baby, then she had another abortion then she had another baby, born two months early because she couldnt carry the baby to term, her uterin wall was so thin. then she had a histerectemy, she was 21. Pro-choice doesnt allways have to do with the health of the mother. check out the FEMINIST FOR LIFE group
http://www.feministsforlife.org
its a non-christian group that can answer some of your questions.
and you can put this in your report, if you want my proper name to quote me properly, PM me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 1:38 pm
|
|
|
|
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori In fact, the Old Testament treats fetus as mere property. Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
What English translation are you using?
1. "Yatsa" which means literally "come out" or "to deliver" should not be translated as miscarriage. Yatsa is not specific or direct enough to define it as miscarriage.
2. In the beginning of verse 22, men strive together and hit a pregnant woman so that her children come out. It states "but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined." Again, "THERE IS NO HARM" would apply to both the mother and child. "IF THERE IS HARM", then life for life would apply to both the mother and child.
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath.
This argument is irrevenant to the topic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 6:17 pm
|
|
|
|
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori I am pro-choice. 1. America is secular. This means that we cannot force people to follow our religion, and we must abide by the constitution. That Constitution states that everyone born or naturalized in the United States has the right not to be subjected to harm against their will. Any woman who does not wish to carry a child, yet is being forced to, is being violated. However; some will say that a fetus has the right not to be subjected to harm against its will. There are two things wrong with this: A fetus cannot state its will, the mother has to make decisions for it, and fetii have not been born into the United States and are therefore not protected by the Constitution. Furthermore, a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. This means that the only defense against abortion is that a fetus has a "soul" from conception. That defense is obviously religiously based. 2. The Bible does not say that a fetus has a soul from conception. In fact, the Old Testament treats fetii as mere property. Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath: Genesis 2:7 7 the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Clearly, the Bible is not pro-life, and neither is the Constitution.
The bible is CLEARY pro-life smile "Is a fetus part of the woman's body, so she can do whatever she chooses with it? or is the fetus a separate, distinct human being?" the fetus and the mother both have different genetic codes but that doesnt make the fetus and the mother the same people. It is true that a woman can do whatever she wants with her own body,buuuut it is NOT true that a fetus is just part of the woman's body. In Psalm 139 it mentions that even though King David was in his mother's womb, King David was just David, his own unique person shaped by God for a special role. God is definitely pro-life. We are all unique and different biggrin
Credits: to NIV teen study bible page 736. got everything i just said right from there smile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 10:19 pm
|
|
|
|
sweet_angiel Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori I am pro-choice. 1. America is secular. This means that we cannot force people to follow our religion, and we must abide by the constitution. That Constitution states that everyone born or naturalized in the United States has the right not to be subjected to harm against their will. Any woman who does not wish to carry a child, yet is being forced to, is being violated. However; some will say that a fetus has the right not to be subjected to harm against its will. There are two things wrong with this: A fetus cannot state its will, the mother has to make decisions for it, and fetii have not been born into the United States and are therefore not protected by the Constitution. Furthermore, a fetus cannot feel pain until the third trimester. This means that the only defense against abortion is that a fetus has a "soul" from conception. That defense is obviously religiously based. 2. The Bible does not say that a fetus has a soul from conception. In fact, the Old Testament treats fetii as mere property. Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath: Genesis 2:7 7 the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Clearly, the Bible is not pro-life, and neither is the Constitution. The bible is CLEARY pro-life smile "Is a fetus part of the woman's body, so she can do whatever she chooses with it? or is the fetus a separate, distinct human being?" the fetus and the mother both have different genetic codes but that doesnt make the fetus and the mother the same people. It is true that a woman can do whatever she wants with her own body,buuuut it is NOT true that a fetus is just part of the woman's body.
On the one side you have the idea that a fetus is part of a woman's body; she has the absolute right to hack it off if she wants to.
On the other side, there is the idea that a fetus is a foreign entity. However, the mother has the right to absolute bodily integrity, meaning that she is legally able to eject the fetus at any time, regardless of whether or not it could survive outside of the womb.
Either way, mother has choice.
Quote: In Psalm 139 it mentions that even though King David was in his mother's womb, King David was just David, his own unique person shaped by God for a special role. God is definitely pro-life. We are all unique and different biggrin
Previous Reply:
All this passage states is that God is directly involved in the creation of a fetus and knows its future. This is useless for the anti-choice position, since God creates all living things, including trees and bugs. Plus, just because God is supposedly omniscient doesn't give fetuses any special status—it simply means God already knows whether they will live or die. It is dishonest to conclude from this verse that a fetus is a human being deserving of more protection than women. The passage is poetic prose that anti-choicers have twisted and trivialized by giving it a literal, objective meaning where there is none.
Quote: Credits: to NIV teen study bible page 736. got everything i just said right from there smile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 10:26 pm
|
|
|
|
Reformed Baptist Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori In fact, the Old Testament treats fetus as mere property. Exodus 21:22-25 When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. What English translation are you using? 1. "Yatsa" which means literally "come out" or "to deliver" should not be translated as miscarriage. Yatsa is not specific or direct enough to define it as miscarriage. 2. In the beginning of verse 22, men strive together and hit a pregnant woman so that her children come out. It states "but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined." Again, "THERE IS NO HARM" would apply to both the mother and child. "IF THERE IS HARM", then life for life would apply to both the mother and child.
Footnote from PCAN:
Some conservative Biblical scholars have disputed the translation of the word "miscarriage" in the Exodus 21:22-25 passage, claiming it means "premature birth." This is indefensible, however. First, the original Hebrew word is "yatsa" which literally means to "lose her offspring". Second, premature births in the ancient world resulted in almost certain death for the fetus/infant, since only modern medicine can save premature babies. Third, other scholars have shown that the passage was derived directly from more ancient pagan laws, which clearly referred to miscarriage. The Code of Hammurabi (209, 210) reads: "If a seignior struck a[notherl seignior's daughter and has caused her to have a miscarriage [literally, caused her to drop that of her womb], he shall pay ten shekels of silver for her fetus. If that woman had died, they shall put his daughter to death." Hittite Laws (1.17) read: "If anyone causes a free woman to miscarry [literally, drives out the embryo], if (it is) the 10th month, he shall give 10 shekels of silver, if (it is) the 5th month, he shall give 5 shekels of silver..." (Bowen Ward, 1987) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 11:13 pm
|
|
|
|
promised_child Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori promised_child Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori Furthermore, in Genesis, man does not live until he takes his first breath: Genesis 2:7 7 the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Clearly, the Bible is not pro-life, and neither is the Constitution. from The Pro-Choice Action Network: This passage allows only for the punishment of a man who injures a woman causing her to miscarry. However, a careful scrutiny of these verses uncovers a startling revelation. A miscarriage is punishable only by a fine, yet if there is any further harm, such as the death of the woman, the penalty is life for life! The implication of this passage is clear—the life of the unborn child is not accorded anywhere near the same status as the life of the woman. To put it another way, the man who causes a woman to miscarry is guilty not of murder, but a misdemeanor. Quote: With the second quote I could see the argument, but I think it might be taking it a little too far. Adam was formed from the dust. Not from a womb. The circumstance is different. Also from The Pro-Choice Action Network: The Hebrew word for human being or living soul is nephesh, which is also the word for "breathing." Nephesh occurs over 700 times in the Bible as the identifying factor in human life. Obviously, fetuses do not breath and therefore cannot be considered as human beings according to the Bible. Here is another verse that reinforces this conclusion. God says: "Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live." (Ezekiel 37:5) Quote: Needless to say, I would disagree with the statement that the Bible is pro-choice ^^ The Bible talks about how we were formed by God while still in the womb Quote: For you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb Pslams 139:13 Also how the unborn child is still included in the sins of the world Quote: Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me. Psalms 51:5 PCAN: All this passage states is that God is directly involved in the creation of a fetus and knows its future. This is useless for the anti-choice position, since God creates all living things, including trees and bugs. Plus, just because God is supposedly omniscient doesn't give fetuses any special status—it simply means God already knows whether they will live or die. It is dishonest to conclude from this verse that a fetus is a human being deserving of more protection than women. The passage is poetic prose that anti-choicers have twisted and trivialized by giving it a literal, objective meaning where there is none. Quote: Also, in Job 31:15, Psalms 22:10, Isaiah 44:32, 24; and Jeremiah 1:5 talks about God's protection of the development of the unborn child. Please read PCAN on the Bible. http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/bible.shtml
The hebrew word translated "breath" in Ezekial 37:5 is
Quote: rûach roo'-akh From H7306; wind; by resemblance breath, that is, a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions): - air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit ([-ual]), tempest, X vain, ([whirl-]) wind (-y).
From http://www.rcrc.org/pdf/RCRC_EdSeries_Fetus.pdf:
Long before the abortion debate, scholars of the Old Testament agreed that the most important word describing a human being was nephesh, a word that occurs 755 times in the Hebrew Bible. As E. Jacob puts it, nephesh is "the usual term for man's total nature," and the defing characteristic of a nephesh is breath. In fact, Jacob argues that the etymology of nephesh goes back to a root word that means "to breathe".
The classic text is Genesis 2:7: " the LORD God formed the earth creature of dusyt from the earth and breathed into its nostrils the breath of life, and the earth creature became a living nephesh. The language suggests a potter molding a vessel of clay- the form is made from the dust of the earth. But not until the form breathes is it a nephesh- as Hans Walter Wolff puts it, "a living being, a living person, a living individual."
Another text that makes clear the relationship between nephesh and breathing is the story of the son of the widow from Zarephath (Kings 17:17-24). The son became ill and we are told that "there was not breath in him" (v. 17). The widow accused Elijah of bringing about her son's death (v. 1 cool , whereupon Elijah prayed to Yahweh God, asking why He had slain her son (v. 20). Elijah beseeched, "let this child's nephesh return to his inward parts" (v. 21). The prayer was answered; "the nephesh of the child returned to his inward parts and he lived" (v. 22). As Wolff comments, "Living creatures are in this way exactly defined in Hebrew language as creatures that breathe."
It is this interconnection between nephesh as the living person and as breath that informs the miraculous vision of Ezekiel- the vision of the dry bones: "And as I looked, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them; but there was no breath in them" (Ezekiel 37: cool . Ezekiel calls for breath to come, and we are told that "the breath came into them, and they lived..." (Ezek. 37:10).
Quote: Quote: Jer 1:1 Words of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah, of the priests who are in Anathoth, in the land of Benjamin, Jer 1:2 unto whom the word of Jehovah hath been in the days of Josiah son of Amon, king of Judah, in the thirteenth year of his reign, Jer 1:3 and it is in the days of Jehoiakim son of Josiah, king of Judah, till the completion of the eleventh year of Zedekiah son of Josiah, king of Judah, till the removal of Jerusalem in the fifth month. Jer 1:4 And there is a word of Jehovah unto me, saying, Jer 1:5 `Before I form thee in the belly, I have known thee; and before thou comest forth from the womb I have separated thee, a prophet to nations I have made thee.' Jer 1:6 And I say, `Ah, Lord Jehovah! lo, I have not known--to speak, for I am a youth.' Jer 1:7 And Jehovah saith unto me, `Do not say, I am a youth, for to all to whom I send thee thou goest, and all that I command thee thou speakest. Jer 1:8 Be not afraid of their faces, for with thee am I to deliver thee, --an affirmation of Jehovah.' Jer 1:9 And Jehovah putteth forth His hand, and striketh against my mouth, and Jehovah saith unto me, `Lo, I have put my words in thy mouth. Jer 1:10 See, I have charged thee this day concerning the nations, and concerning the kingdoms, to pluck up, and to break down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.' these verses are some of the reasons I am pro-life.
Jeremiah is not relevant, as it deals with a specific case not relatable to that of the population of a whole; a prophet.
Quote: another is no matter how bad my life gets, my mother was strong enough to tell my grandfather( my dads dad) no when He ordered her to abort me.
So, it was her CHOICE to keep you? Isn't that all the more reason to celebrate?
Quote: these words spoken by Jerimiah are the reason NOT to kill our children in the womb. my third reason is, dare we kill our future? our children are our future just like we are the nations future. my mothers friend had so many abortions, that when she got pregnate with her son, she couldnt find a clinic who would do it. she had the baby, then she had another abortion then she had another baby, born two months early because she couldnt carry the baby to term, her uterin wall was so thin. then she had a histerectemy, she was 21.
Anecdote=/=Rule.
I don't agree with that kind of abortion either, if for no other reason that it puts a drain on society and puts the mother at extreme risks. Use a condom (For God's sake? XD ).
Quote: Pro-choice doesnt allways have to do with the health of the mother. check out the FEMINIST FOR LIFE group http://www.feministsforlife.org its a non-christian group that can answer some of your questions. and you can put this in your report, if you want my proper name to quote me properly, PM me.
I couldn't find any answers after 20 minutes on their site. Link. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 26, 2007 8:56 am
|
|
|
|
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori Footnote from PCAN: Some conservative Biblical scholars have disputed the translation of the word "miscarriage" in the Exodus 21:22-25 passage, claiming it means "premature birth." This is indefensible, however. First, the original Hebrew word is "yatsa" which literally means to "lose her offspring".
I guess there is a "conservative" side of Hebrew? :laughs: My creditable sources for Hebrew shows that "yatsa" means "to go out, come out or to cause to go." Yatsa does not define the condition of the child.
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori Second, premature births in the ancient world resulted in almost certain death for the fetus/infant, since only modern medicine can save premature babies.
This is irrelevant to the debate. I would like to see a source for such claim.
Kuroi Kokoro no Mendori Third, other scholars have shown that the passage was derived directly from more ancient pagan laws, which clearly referred to miscarriage.
Is "other scholars" are the ones who failed to show credibility? The Jews separated themselves from Gentile nations. The "possible link" is nothing but a theory that even Jews will deny. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
