Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: AppyPappy

There needs to be absolute clarity for this to be a meaningful discussion. Here is the official UMC position on abortion:

“The beginning of life and the ending of life are the God-given boundaries of human existence. While individuals have always had some degree of control over when they would die, they now have the awesome power to determine when and even whether new individuals will be born.

Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion. But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother, for whom devastating damage may result from an unacceptable pregnancy. In continuity with past Christian teaching, we recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures. We cannot affirm abortion as an acceptable means of birth control, and we unconditionally reject it as a means of gender selection.

We oppose the use of late-term abortion known as dilation and extraction (partial-birth abortion) and call for the end of this practice except when the physical life of the mother is in danger and no other medical procedure is available, or in the case of severe fetal anomalies incompatible with life. We call all Christians to a searching and prayerful inquiry into the sorts of conditions that may warrant abortion. We commit our Church to continue to provide nurturing ministries to those who terminate a pregnancy, to those in the midst of a crisis pregnancy, and to those who give birth. We particularly encourage the Church, the government, and social service agencies to support and facilitate the option of adoption. (See ¶ 161.K.)

Governmental laws and regulations do not provide all the guidance required by the informed Christian conscience. Therefore, a decision concerning abortion should be made only after thoughtful and prayerful consideration by the parties involved, with medical, pastoral, and other appropriate counsel.

From The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church - 2004. Copyright 2004 by The United Methodist Publishing House. Used by permission.”

http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1732


8 posted on 01/22/2008 6:33:11 AM PST by Deut28 (Cursed be he who perverts the justice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Deut28; AppyPappy; Gamecock

This current position of the UMC represents a gradual restricting of our abortion statement over the years. The goal of conservatives, of course, is to have it become an entirely pro-life statement. As it stands on the positive side, the language says that we (1) believe in the sanctity of unborn life, (2) that abortion is only for extreme circumstances, (3) that it should not be used for birth control or gender selection, (4) that we reject partial birth abortion.

On the negative side it: (1) uses the expression “unacceptable pregnancy,” (2) accepts abortion for “fetal abnormalities,” (3) calls for government to “facilitate” the legal option of abortion.

In short, it speaks out of both sides of its mouth. At very best it is a Rape/Incest/Life of Mother/Fetal Abnormality position.

This is unacceptable to me. At a minimum we should support no more than violent rape and life of mother.


11 posted on 01/22/2008 8:43:41 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain! True Supporters of Our Troops Support the Necessity of their Sacrifice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Deut28
Thanks for this clarification...BUT

We call all Christians to a searching and prayerful inquiry into the sorts of conditions that may warrant (insert whichever intrinsically evil act whose restriction you find most inconvenient).

The commandments still apply. THOU SHALL NOT MURDER...no matter the "sorts of conditions" which are "prayerfully" searched for.

12 posted on 01/22/2008 8:52:41 AM PST by Faraday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Deut28
unacceptable pregnancy.

I never knew what the official position of the Methodist church was on anything, grew up in that church. So I am surprised to read that.

I left the Methodist church after my 17-year-old daughter got pregnant in the 80's, and two peoples' opinions who meant the most to me, both raised Methodist, said if it was their daughter, they would get her an abortion. One has since recanted, and the other is deceased, good friend, I miss her.

It was one of those split-second moments; if the Methodist church produces this kind of thinking, I've got to get out of it. So I did, but have happy memories of my childhood there. My daughter still goes there, brought me communion last Sunday. I said I couldn't take communion from any other church even though I'm a lapsed Catholic, not that lapsed. That made me feel conflicted, refusing it and my daughter's thoughtfulness. I told her to take it instead, then she could have double, but she gave it to the baby. I can't get it through her head about the bible and unconfessed sins and receiving communion unworthily, although none of us is ever really worthy.

Later I learned that Sarah Weddington was a Methodist minister's daughter.

So I joined another church. It hasn't worked out, but did help me form a better moral compass overall, I think.

It's sad. Methodists tend to be nice people, and I'm sure it varies around the country, but the one I left is way too liberal on everything, like a prominent Dem candidate can go there, but never heard of a prominent GOP in attendance, not to say it never happened. It's mostly about feeling good. About what, I don't know, never heard a sermon that had much substance to it, maybe a couple, but then we weren't regular church goers.

Heh, the pastor who baptized my father, me, and my sister wrote a letter to Playboy Magazine after he left and took a pastorate in Worcester, MA. Yeah, my ex subscribed to that, and I was more liberal-minded back in those days. I was surprised to see a letter from him in there, wouldn't have a Playboy in the house now. Some guy gave me a copy when I was divorced, and my father saw it. He got onto me about it, and it really sank in. He wasn't religious outwardly at all, probably had trouble with it and tended toward agnosticism.

I took some positive and happy memories with me. I had memorized a few scriptures from the KJV which have been sustaining. The first bible verse I ever heard in Sunday school that stuck was the one where the men carried the litter of the sick man and had to take the tiles off the roof to get him to Jesus who healed him. I believe it to this day.

We had a nice youth group. Not knowing any differently myself, they brought in a hypnotist for entertainment and whatever educational value that would have. I didn't fall under the spell fortunately, and now I look back and wonder if any parents knew or cared. I doubt I ever even told my parents about it and have no clue what their reaction may have been if I had. I don't believe hypnotism is a good thing because it puts you under the control of another human for however long or briefly.

Back to my italicized words. Unacceptable. What does that mean? Funny way of wording it.

18 posted on 01/22/2008 9:40:39 AM PST by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson