Bill Clinton goes on tirade against pro-life students

[Magnetic Poles]

This verse clearly defines "personhood."
Jeremiah 1:5 (KJV)
5: Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
"Thee" is clearly in reference to the personage of Jeremiah.

But it says nothing about if it started at conception or later before birth.

 

[StefanM]

This verse clearly defines "personhood."
Jeremiah 1:5 (KJV)
5: Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
"Thee" is clearly in reference to the personage of Jeremiah.

That may be the case, but it is not clear when one can clearly be called a "person."

In that verse, it says that God knew him before he was formed. Was he a person before he existed?

 

[StefanM]

Life is in the egg. So, life is already in the womb.

That's why I'm against stem cells and destroying the egg.

I would use the term "embryo." Egg includes unfertilized eggs, which are not capable of producing life on their own.

 

[donnA]

A human is a human at conception. What else would they be.

 

[StefanM]

A human is a human at conception. What else would they be.

Human, yes.

The debate of personhood is more vague. That's why I don't think personhood is the best basis for the pro-life position. There are some out there who don't even think newborns are "persons." That's the danger of getting into the personhood debate.

Person or not, it is human life and is not for us to kill.

 

[tinytim]

A human is a human at conception. What else would they be.

Pro-choice advocates! just joking!!!!

 

[sag38]

There has to be something wrong in the mind of anyone who would consider killing the life that is inside of her womb. This argument about when life starts is nothing but a cover up for a depraved point of view. I'll bow out of this debate for it like casting pearls before the swine.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I refer to your post #63 where you disparage those who think premarital sex is not acceptable sexual behavior, that they are "anti-sex" and that such opinion is merely "their boundary." How else am I supposed to interpret that? Please clarify.

Again, quote where I mentioned premarital sex. I did not, so you are exposed as a liar.

 

[tinytim]

It would be so nice to know what Scientists consider to be "life"
That way we could compare a newly conceived human whatchamacallit to the characteristics that scientists use to determine if something is alive....

I wonder where I could find that... OH, I know, I know.. .the internet!!!

And my college Biology book...

Let's see... according to this website http://www.essortment.com/characteristics_rbrc.htm

The following are characteristics of life:

Theme #1 - Cells All living things are composed of one or more cells. Different types of cells have different "jobs" within the organism. Each life form begins from one cell, which then will split. These cells split, and so on. After this has happened several times, differentiation is undergone, when the cells change so that they are not the same thing anymore. Then they are used to begin to put together the final organism, some cells, for example, as the eyes, some as the heart, etc. The only arguable exception to th
is is viruses. They are not composed of cells, but are said to be "living."

Theme#2 - Organization
Complex organization patterns are found in all living organisms. They arrange themselves on very small levels, grouping like things together. On larger levels, they become visible. This also has to do with differentiation, as the cells are organized in a manner that makes sense for the organism after they change to what they’ll be in the final organism.


Theme#3 - Energy Use
All organisms use energy. The sum of the chemical energy they use is called [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]metabolism[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]. This energy is used to carry out everything they do. Autotrophs (plants) use [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]energy[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR] from the sun for photosynthesis, to make their own ‘food’ ([COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]glucose[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]). Heterotrophs (animals and humans) must ingest food for this purpose.

Theme#4 - Homeostasis
All organisms have stable internal conditions which must be maintained in order to remain alive. These include temperature, water content, heartbeat, and other such things. In a way, this has to do with energy use, because a certain level of energy must be kept within the body at all times. For this, obviously, humans must then ingest food on a regular basis. Not all conditions are for the body to maintain itself; though most are.

Theme#5 - Growth
All organisms grow and change. Cells divide to form new, identical cells. Differentiation happens, as well, when cells mutate into other types of cells, making a more complex organism. Organisms growing, changing, and becoming more complex is called development. Single-celled organisms do grow as well, but they will only become slightly larger – this is nearly unmeasurable.

Theme#6 - Reproduction All organisms reproduce in order to continue the species' life. This is combining genetic information (in [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]sexual [/FONT][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]reproduction[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]) or splitting into two organisms (in asexual reproduction) in order to create another of the same [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]species[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]. In sexual reproduction, the new organism will have some characteristics from the mother, and some from father. It may look like either of them, or it may not. In asexual [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]reproduction[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR], the new organism is an exact copy of the first. Sometimes, not every member of a species is able to reproduce. As long as others are (which we know they can, if they still exist today) then it does not threaten the species. (Except for mules, but don't worry about them, they are a bizarre anomoly.)

Wow, according to my observation, a newly conceived human being in their mother's womb has all the characteristics of life...

Now if that "thing" is alive, what is it? Duh... a human being...
And since the Bible says that Humans are the only creature that was made in God's image, and since Humans are the only creatures in which God breathed a soul into... then the human life is sacred...

Even according to the strict scientific method, it can be proven that abortion kills something that is alive....

And that something is a human baby.

 

[Andy T.]

Again, quote where I mentioned premarital sex. I did not, so you are exposed as a liar.

Then what unacceptable sexual behaviors were you referencing in post #63? What else am I to gather that is unacceptable sexual behavior, other than pre or extra-marital sex? Here is what you said, as a reminder:

Now this part is my own opinion, but I think the real reason some Christians are so extreme about this has nothing at all to do with sanctity of life. Rather, some are so anti-sex that they want to force a term pregancy as a kind of punishment for a person having crossed their boundary of acceptable sexual behavior.

 

[I Am Blessed 24]

I will..

The woman has committed murder, and the doctor is an accomplice to murder...
And in a state that has capital punishment, they should be given the death sentence for murder.

Now you will ask how I can support capital punishment if I am pro life...

I am for the protection of INNOCENT life.. .
A person that kills another is not innocent.

I will go on record for that.

And any politician that supports the woman's right to murder their baby does not deserve to serve the public.

If someone was running for office, and defended Michael Vick's actions and said it was OK to kill dogs... the public would be outraged...

But when it comes to Human babies, it's OK?

America cares more about animals than it does babies....
And that is abominable.

We have Christians in pews decrying churches that are welcoming and affirming... saying "what sinners those churches are!!!"... but the same Christians that decry these churches, will go out and vote for people who support the Gay lifestyle!!! Amazing....

Practice what you preach... if you are against the homosexual lifestyle, don't vote to support it...
If you say Abortion is murder, don't vote for candidates that want to keep it legal...

It is hypocrisy to do so....

I will even say this... a person that claims to be a Christian and will say that abortion is murder and that Gays should not be married, if they vote for a pro abortion, pro gay candidate... THEY ARE HYPOCRITES.

And anyone that thinks it is OK to murder babies is not a Christian.

I know that is harsh, but God commands that we practice what we preach.

Tim: Sometime I wish you would tell us how you REALLY feel... :laugh:

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Then what unacceptable sexual behaviors were you referencing in post #63?

I know exactly what I said. I wasn't specifically addressing premarital sex, nor was I advocating nor condemning such. I am making an observation that over history, the church (both Catholic & Protestant) has had a problem with sex as anything but a means of procreation. From Augustine to the persecutors of Margaret Sanger, to denying anasthetics during labor & delivery, the church has been in the forefront of demonizing the act of lovemaking and all for making painful the resulting pregancies because "God ordained it".

You went down a path of false accusation. Repeating them doesn't make them true.

 

[tinytim]

Tim: Sometime I wish you would tell us how you REALLY feel... :laugh:

If I did sometimes, I would probably be banned!!! :laugh:

 

[Dagwood]

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.

Very well put; I agree wholeheartedly! :thumbs:

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Very well put; I agree wholeheartedly! :thumbs:

Thanks, Dagwood. I would also like to point out, that the only person I called out on this thread had repeatedly and continually beat his strawman to death. I have tried to maintain civility and respect to others, despite the tone and passion by some. In any case, I hope it got people to think a little bit.

 

[Dagwood]

Thanks, Dagwood. I would also like to point out, that the only person I called out on this thread had repeatedly and continually beat his strawman to death. I have tried to maintain civility and respect to others, despite the tone and passion by some. In any case, I hope it got people to think a little bit.

I don't say much here because it is impossible to reason with most people when emotions run so high.

It is funny thought that now I will probable be castigated because I don't stand with the majority here in Conservative -ville, but in reality, I have never had anything to do with any abortion period. Just because abortion is not an important issue with me is enough to be called a murderer. How silly!

 

[just-want-peace]

Secondly, I think your big talk would change if the situation actually occurred. I doubt you would e clammoring for your son's execution even if he killed a clerk at 7-11 during a robbery. So' while you are trying for logical consistency...sorry, but I don't believe you would react that way.

Hmmmmmmm!! Clinton IS believable, but Tim is NOT????
Curiouser & curiouser are the opinions emanating from this thread!!

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I have never had anything to do with any abortion period. Just because abortion is not an important issue with me is enough to be called a murderer. How silly!

Likewise. I have been married to the same girl for 34 years, had 3 kids with her, and never had any personal involvement with an abortion. That said, I still have my opinions, and as you can tell, not afraid to challenge to prevailing winds. :thumbs:

 

[Andy T.]

I know exactly what I said. I wasn't specifically addressing premarital sex, nor was I advocating nor condemning such. I am making an observation that over history, the church (both Catholic & Protestant) has had a problem with sex as anything but a means of procreation. From Augustine to the persecutors of Margaret Sanger, to denying anasthetics during labor & delivery, the church has been in the forefront of demonizing the act of lovemaking and all for making painful the resulting pregancies because "God ordained it".

You went down a path of false accusation. Repeating them doesn't make them true.

False assumption on my part. For that I am sorry. I honestly couldn't think of any other behavior other than pre or extramarital sex. The aspect you mention did not cross my mind. But now that you mention it, you tipped your hand in different manner. Since you disparage those who think abortion is not acceptable for birth control (since they oppose all b.c.), does that mean you think abortion is o.k. as mere birth control?

And your defense of M. Sanger is quite disturbing, but quite telling based on your depraved and unbiblical worldview.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

False assumption on my part. For that I am sorry. I honestly couldn't think of any other behavior other than pre or extramarital sex. The aspect you mention did not cross my mind. But now that you mention it, you tipped your hand in different manner. Since you disparage those who think abortion is not acceptable for birth control (since they oppose all b.c.), does that mean you think abortion is o.k. as mere birth control?

And your defense of M. Sanger is quite disturbing, but quite telling based on your depraved and unbiblical worldview.

Margaret Sanger was terribly persecuted for merely distributing information about how women could avoid pregnancy. There are portions of her lifestyle that I have issue with, but the former is where I defend her.

As to disparagement, what are you talking about? As I am against abortion as a routine and regular method of birth control, I don't get your drift? I truly don't know what lines you are reading between to get some of this stuff.