Bill Clinton goes on tirade against pro-life students

How silly!

Thankfully, views like yours will continue to be in the vast minority.

 

Which part is silly?
That the mother that kills her child in her womb is guilty of murder?
Or that the Dr is an accomplice?
Or that they should be prosecuted for murder?

Noah was laughed at too...

OH, wait... you may have a point...

The Dr shouldn't be just an accomplice.. charge him with murder also!

 

What's the difference between murder and abortion? Less than a foot... the distance from the womb through the birth canal.

Yes, abortion is currently a legal procedure in the US, much to our shame.

I can video myself killing a dog through torture and I would go to prison for a long, long time. I can run a man down in my car and go to prison for maybe five years. Or I can kill and unborn child in a doctor's office and be paid for it.

How anyone, especially someone who professes Jesus Christ as their savior, can stand up and condone the murder of an unborn child is beyond me. I will not question Bill Clinton's salvation as only he and God can be sure, but I am ashamed that he calls himself a Baptist when he says he is saved.

Killing someone, anyone, is murder. There should be no difference whether that person is black or white, rich or poor, young or old... or unborn.

 

Nope. Even with abortion being legal no one is compelled to have one or perform one.

Also, there are lots more issues to consider when voting than just abortion.

 

So what? Even so, no woman is compelled to have one and no doctor is compelled to perform one.

Obesity is also legal but no one is compelled to overeat.

 

Isn't it curious that this verse is found among a number of verses that condemn a litany of sexual sins?

Leviticus 18:19-21
19Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.
20Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour’s wife, to defile thyself with her.
21And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.

The whole chapter deals with sexual sin. Verse 21 is found in the middle of the chapter. It stands to reason that this act of passing seed through the fire to molech as a result of sin, concluding in infanticide after the child's birth.

It is clear that God is concerned about the child even though that child is conceived by an act of sin. The Child is to be taken care of and even nurtured.

In no case throughout the Bible does God give consent to take the life of an unborn child.

Leviticus 20:2-5
2Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones.
3And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.
4And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not:
5Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people.

 

Yep, people say they are for small government, but then want it to step in and make all of our personal decisions for us. Riiiiggghhhhtttt!

 

And you think that the right to choose is going to reduce the size of govt? RIIIIGGGHHHHTTTT!
What is happening now and what will increase by many fold is funding of Planned Parenthood by tax dollars. My income tax will and is being used to help fund abortion clinics for those that can not afford to have one. I will not have my hard earned money be taken away from me with threat of imprisonment to fund the murder of an innocent child.
Eventually even the insurance industry will get involved and the blood of the unborn will run in our streets.

 

Let someone try to kill you MP, and see if you wouldn't side with the law.

What makes you more important than a helpless baby inside their mother?

Why should it be against the law to murder you, but not a baby?

 

YOu may have a point...

After rereading this....

The baby does have a right to make a personal decision... and if it decides to abort itself, we should let it...

But right now, the mother is imposing her decision onto her baby.

 

So if Mary wants to eliminate the baby in her womb that's a personal decision that our justice system should ignore. But, if Mary makes a personal decision to blow her husband away with a shot gun, then it really isn't a personal decision and the government can arrest her and send her to jail. What's the difference?

 

The inconsistancies of the Pro choice people are mind boggling...

But I think it all boils down to this...

"It is ok to do anything you want, as long as I can prosper"

Prochoice people are selfish.

 

The only consistent pro-choice position is that the fetus is not a person.

And, if that is the case, then one should have no personal objection to abortion.

I hear a lot of people, though, who say they are pro-choice but that they would never abort one of their own.

 

Tim, I have gone over this many times, but I will do it once more for your sake. My position is that there is a big difference between aborting a late term fetus and an early term blastocyst. The blastocyst has none of the attributes of being human that you and I have...no nervous, respiratory, circulatory, reproductive, lymphatic or other systems that make a sentient being. It is a mass of undifferentiated cells, whose removal is no worse than the egg expelled every month by every woman, or the sperm cells that are shed by the billions.

I am against late term abortions in all but extreme cases of the mother's health, life, and well-being are at stake.

I do not believe that a human being is present at conception, but develops over the term of gestation, and a case can be made that this is within the first trimester. But within days of conception? No.

So I believe that there is a huge difference in a woman killing her husband, or even a late term fetus, and an early termination of pregnancy by the removal of a mass of cellular tissue that can neither think, feel, or live on its own. That is not a baby. By couching it in terms of "murdering a baby", you are being disingenuous. Such language evokes a cute, cuddly infant, cooing at its mama and daddy. Do you get so emotional over all the billions of sperm that are destroyed?

If you feel as strongly as you do, why not go to a clinic where abortions are performed and offer to adopt the women's "babies" if they will not terminate the pregnancy?

I understand how people who are strongly anti-abortion at any stage feel...but it is easy to give lip service while sitting on the sidelines. It is also easy to use inflamatory language that is unsupported by any facts.

I also realize my views on this are not the majority opinion of those on this board. However, they do appear in line with majority opinion in the country, which is why, despite the rhetoric, neither party is serious about changing the law. Vote for the GOP all you want...they have never acted to change things, even when in control of the Executive and Legislative branches.

 

MP, when does the soul enter the body?

 

The problem with the pro-choice movement is that they do not have such reasoning as their underpinning.

I think at the BARE minimum, elective abortion should be illegal beyond the first trimester. Once you are getting past that, you are definitely looking at more than just a collection of cells, and anyone who denies that fact obviously hasn't seen images of fourth-month fetuses. I think that even in the first trimester they are more developed than some would like to admit.

While I do not favor legal abortion even in the first term, I can at least understand the argument that the blastocyst is qualitatively different. I think that those in favor of abortion should be reasonable enough to advocate that those who choose to abort a fetus should do early in pregnancy before the fetus is significantly developed.

I'm sorry, but if you haven't made up your mind to kill the fetus in the first three months, you've had more than enough time.

 

I am in agreement with you on almost all of this.

 

The Bible says that when the man drew breath from God, he became a living soul, does it not?

 

MP,

Your worldview on this issue is depraved and unbiblical.