-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
U.S. Senator Says He Would Practice Civil Disobedience If Obama Repeals Abortion 'Con
- Thread starter Revmitchell
- Start date
Revmitchell said:
He has the right to civil disobedience, but also the responsibility of paying for his acts of disobedience.
He might accomplish more if he tried to change laws to try to stem the flood of OBGYNs leaving the field because of law suits. Too many Americans have the idea that if their baby is not perfect when born it must be the doctor's fault and they then sue him/her.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is interesting that those who claim to want to keep medical issues between a woman and her doctor all of the sudden want to bring the government into it.
It just shows more of the blatant hypocrisy.
If you don't want the government in the examining room, then you have to stay out. You can't pick and choose.
It just shows more of the blatant hypocrisy.
If you don't want the government in the examining room, then you have to stay out. You can't pick and choose.
Palatka51 said:
Seems y'all miss my point entirely. Just because something is law does not make it just or right. If that were true than the Nazi's could not have been punished.
However, even if a law is unjust or wrong, as long as it is a law and a person breaks it they bear responsibility to the government for breaking that law ... until it, the law, is changed.
In time the law may be changed and no one would then suffer, justly or unjustly.
Being willing to suffer the consequences is a way of attempting to have the law changed.
Hope this makes my point more understandable.
windcatcher
New Member
If Rosa Parks was within her moral rights to do what she did...... and I believe she was........ then a doctor refusing to do an immoral practice to remain within his moral rights is also correct....... regardless of what the government says. If criminally charged and a jury trial ensues...... then there are 12 juror-judges seated on behalf of the people to judge both defendant and plantiff...... the accused and the law.
windcatcher
New Member
Pastor Larry said:
!Who is the 'you' which must stay out of the examining room?
The examining room is where doctor and patient relate.
If by 'you' you mean the government stays out..... then I better understand your statement. If by 'you' you mean the individual and collective opinions of us..... then this is part of free speach...... the error is in thinking that every poll question desserves a new law or position and policy, or that laws based upon 'majority' polls are correct or necessary.
Professionals should be protected from forced perfornance of acts which he considers immoral.
What is blowing my mind is that "Christians" are supporting these "leaders of change". Then the fact that they don't understand why we will not vote for any candidate that is an enabler to murder, regardless of their position on the economy, is equally confounding.Andy T. said:
Crabtownboy said:
If that was your point then why did you feel the need to add...
"He might accomplish more if he tried to change laws to try to stem the flood of OBGYNs leaving the field because of law suits."
It sounds as though you think that he would be accomplishing more by changing the laws to reduce law suits than he would accomplish by protecting doctors against being forced to perform abortions against their will.
That to me seemed to me to be the point of your original response.
Now, I agree with CTB on one thing:
In the Scriptures, when it comes to the point of "we ought to obey God rather than man" (and forcing OB's to do abortion is crystal clear issue where disobedience is the right thing)...the Christians who were arrested accepted their punishments. They fought within the context of their legal rights (see Paul and his appeal), but they didn't resist arrest, or lie to the authorities, etc.
So...should OB-GYN's balk at being forced by our government to kill babies? Absolutely.
BTW...I like how Aaron put it: "acts of faith." May God give these people courage to stand up to government-endorsed murder.
In the Scriptures, when it comes to the point of "we ought to obey God rather than man" (and forcing OB's to do abortion is crystal clear issue where disobedience is the right thing)...the Christians who were arrested accepted their punishments. They fought within the context of their legal rights (see Paul and his appeal), but they didn't resist arrest, or lie to the authorities, etc.
So...should OB-GYN's balk at being forced by our government to kill babies? Absolutely.
BTW...I like how Aaron put it: "acts of faith." May God give these people courage to stand up to government-endorsed murder.
windcatcher
New Member
There is an unfortunate area where undue influence can be exerted upon the moral choices of professionals...... That area is in the state practice acts/laws which determine the criteria by which a doctor.... and other similarly licensed professionals qualify to practice and how such is examined. From there one finds what education, both class and clinical experience is required.... and whether there's any room for opting out of procedures into learning options for those with moral scruples. Most, if not all, college and universtity systems take tax dollars from the state: We have positions of interest regarding these question without the added influence of being a member of a profession: We pay the taxes which fund most higher education institutions; we pay the taxes which help fund the loans and the grants for school on which students depend; our taxes supplement the uncovered administrative expenses which exceed the examining fees, the registration and licensings fees and other practice fees extracted by boards and committees of professional examiners and boards of regulation; and, as citizens of our state, these practice acts are intended to serve our good and confidence and protect us from the unqualified and unsafe practice of people posing or not proofing as professionals.
Palatka51 said:
Legally her incarceration was per the law. Morally her actions were justified.
She paid the legal price by going to jail which is the same as anyone here would have to do. The moral cause has to be worth the civil price. I am glad to see them stand up for what they believe.
I didn't say "you" must stay out of the examining room. The "you" is the person who wants the government out of the examining room. That is a frequent pro-choice argument ... that the government should not interfere between a woman and her doctor.
Those people who believe that the government should not interfere should also believe that the government must stay out of this.
It has nothing to do with free speech (perhaps the most overused and abused political argument of all time). It has to do with logical consistency of belief, not with what someone says.
windcatcher
New Member
No? Well this was your quote:Pastor Larry said:
Sorry..... but if it'd been a little clearer than mud as to who the "you" is in your statement. You used 3 promouns spelled y-o-u in your two sentences. Thus I was asking you essentially what do you mean?
It's a lot clearer and makes sense now that you said its the pro chice crowd for all three "you" 's.
I suggest that you rethink free speech....... Your speech may be free but it is nought until it makes sense to another..... whether or not they agree with what you have to say. On the other hand..... if free speech was so free then why are some books censored and destroyed shortly after leaving the press: Why.... for a valid example.... is Professor's Quigley's book, incomplete in its printed version, and of the complete books originally printed... the books were destroyed and the plates AND manuscript broken or 'lost' ....... except for the copy which his widow possessed? If city buses sell advertising space.... why can't advertising be bought displaying the ultra sound of the baby in the womb, or a perfectly formed though early staged baby? Or why don't professors and doctors.... accademicians with prior good standing as people of good judgement and well expert credentialled in knowledge and experience...... keep their job when, in the practice of fairness, they openly acknowledge that while they may not care for religion or believe in God, still they think good scientific disscussion of evolution and beginnings will have to include and confront the possibility of intelligence in design. View the documentary "EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed!" and then lets' talk about free speech......
.........Or rather........ lets don't. I'm getting tired. Those who should know better regarding the value of life..... don't and I wont persuade them. Those who believe in socialism, are still caught up in the false belief system of their own idealism that many can create a utopia: They may recognize the need for God in their own lives but somehow it doesn't translate to an understanding that their faith in human nature is falsely placed: Human nature with out God gets progressively worse and the strong take advantage of the weak. Nothing I say or do can change their minds; the socialists will remain socialist and compromised Christian..... and help build the very society which will one day enslave us all who don't conform.... first the most resistant and fundamental.....but eventually to those who are marginal in their identification with Jesus and the Word. I'm tire of defending the constitution. I'm old and tired, sick and discouraged: I'm tired of people who try to see more than one side and exercise some balance....people very much like me...... and trying to be one of them.... until I find at some point I can't be: I'm not. There are some things which are absolute and I'm not helped by balance or compassion or moderations..... for those who exist on the other side don't care for such. They are as stubbornly set in their worldly compromise and they will pimp their beliefs and their faith and their futures and those of their loved ones to the world systems designed by man..... and folks like me will get out attention, when they need someone to blame and 'those Christians' seem fair game...... not because we wronged anyone..... but because we were warning..... its a matter of blaming the messenger. I'm tired of thinking about the future of my aged parents, the future of nieces and nephews .....who's children may not have the freedom to own and read a Bible.....much less sit in the freedom of a congregation of people and listen to the teachings, testimonies, and convictions and directions taught by those in their midst. I'm tired of taking the defense.... both confronting the objections from without....... and those from within the camp. The latter being a particular discouragement, even more so when I see it between 2 or more others that I am sympateco with than when it happens to me. I'm drained. I'm tired of tryign to stay on top of what is true...... and finding it can all be an illusion...... except for the one I find which never fails me. I'm tired............ and I'm beginning to feel more and more that I really don't know 'what the good fight' is........ and maybe that really goes for most of us!
billwald said:
baloney................