Posted on 07/25/2004 10:03:03 PM PDT by Coleus
Do you believe it was God's will that a man and wife be incapable of bearing children?
Let's face it, God's original plan was corrupted long ago.
I know Petronski you didn't say any of the above, but heck, I hit the reply button to your post anyway. Jwalsh07 is not here at all of course, but I always like to ping him when I go over to the dark side.
We never did it because we had moral objections to it and we knew that there were millions of children (already born) that needed parents.
We are so happy that we choose adoption instead.
I know you've said you're done, and I won't respect a response, nor is it my intent to egg you on.
I'll merely point out that either there is some ascertainable standard, some fixed point in time, when human life begins, or it is a moveable event. And if it is a moveable event, we had all better be wary about who is empowered to do the 'moving' of that event.
Some people think that rape and plunder are okay during times of war. Some religions teach that various classes of people can be reduced legally to servitude, or that it is okay to marry multiple wives.
Shall we rescind our laws in these areas since some people claim they are subjective from their point of view?
Scientifically, there is nothing to tell us that a fertilized ovum is not a new human being. It has human DNA, so it is certainly not a fish or a tree; it is living, so it isn't a rock or a blob of protein, and it is not alike to the woman within whose body it resides, so it is not part of the mother. Everything we can empirically see about it says it is a seperate human being - merely at a different stage of development than you or I.
The real subjective judgement seems to me to be able to claim there is some time where a fine line can be drawn on a human life where we say this side of it has legal protections while that side of it does not.
It is telling regarding liberalism and the abortion ideology that human corpses are treated with greater respect and given more legal protection than live unborn humans inside their mother's wombs.
You can be thrown in jail for dismembering a corpse, but you will be applauded as a progressive visionary for dismembering a baby in the womb.
Simply because they are a rejection of God's will, God's plan and exclude the Creator absolutely?
If God is the one who creates the souls, how is any soul created that is ~not~ his will?
This is an honest question from someone who has a hard time understanding why evil is often successful.... Why innocents are allowed to suffer. I can accept to a certain degree that God has more of a 'hands off' approach than I would wish regarding what His creations ~do~ in life, but I'd have to think if He is really sovereign, then NO ONE could create a life that was outside His will. If it ~is~ done, doesn't it go without saying that it is His will being done?
Again, I am for protecting unborn children, you think disposing of them as garbage is okay. How is it that you can convince yourself that it is I and not you who is the fanatic?
Our free will after creation is one issue people grapple with. Creation of a new person is another. If all people have a soul, then doesn't creation of a new person require God? Alternatives: We do not have a soul till God puts it there, We can create souls independent of God's will (where does it come from in that case, and is it still sacred?) OR God creates the soul, so nothing lives unless he wills it.
All humans have souls. God gives them a soul. If someone wants to create a life while shutting out God, that does not mean God does not infuse a soul. It means the persons involved have said to God they wish to be a god as well. It violates the first commandment.
"If all people have a soul, then doesn't creation of a new person require God?"
Yes.
"We can create souls independent of God's will"
Nope, only God creates a soul.
"God creates the soul, so nothing lives unless he wills it."
Yep. Remember, God has an ordaining will and a permitting will.
Thanks for your input. I think we'd be foolish to claim to be able to explain these concepts so easily.
A human egg in a petri dish is just that.
IVF would be morally acceptable if they'd only fertilize one egg at a time.
The point is God does allow evil. He will not interfere with our free will, even if we commit evil. God's permitting will allows all types of suffering and evil. Why? Because we choose evil over good many times.
If God did not allow us free will, we would not truly be able to love Him. We would be mere robots.
Egg does not equal embryo.
No, it would not. It would still be intrinsically evil. Many want to separate love and reproduction.
Is a day-old embryo a human baby or not? >>
A human egg in a petri dish is just that.>>>
You are confusing a 23 chromosome haploid cell (egg) vs. a 46 chromosome diploid, new human embryo (human child as we all once were when created), there is a big difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.