Posted on 03/06/2014 9:14:17 AM PST by SeekAndFind
“In the end I think we will have to conclude a child is a gift from god whether he or she is the product of rape or not.”
A great many victims of rape have conceived a child, and have chosen to nurture and sustain it’s life, and to love it. May God bless them.
Pro-choice is a morally neutral term, its objective consequence depending entirely on the nature of the act that is chosen. Advocates of legal abortion abuse it to shield their evil intent.
“It is never mentioned anywhere in the Bible, to keep a child from a woman who was raped!”
Sola Scriptura.
More nonsense.
You’re using an obvious false teacher of God’s word to attack followers of Christmas. Shame on you.
Nonsense,
Heretic
Abortion is not an eraser.
Ever.
“You would make a woman walk around for 9 months pregnant and force her to raise a rapists child?”
First, you would murder the innocent baby because the baby’s father was a rapist?
Second, no one is telling a “woman she has to spend the next 18 years raising a child she didnt want.” She can place for adoption. . .the innocent baby lives, a loving family has a child and the biological mother knows she is not a murderer.
RE: Do Protestants consider the Didache: Sacred Scripture?
Based on my conversations with Protestant Scholars, they consider the Didache a good SUMMARY of what Scripture teaches.
I was hoping my sarcasm wouldn’t need a tag.
“Why does the baby have to pay the ultimate price for the sin of its father?”
As a man and someone who will never be in this predicament, It’s hard to know the right answer to this. However, consider this:
In cases where the rape involved a physical assault, clearly the woman is justified in taking the life of the rapist to prevent the rape. If the woman is raped and conceives the child of the rapist, is the pregnancy not a continuation of the assault? One could argue that it is, since he left part of himself inside of her and it is growing as the cells divide.
That said, why would she NOT have a right to terminate the assault using deadly force?
I specifically said a physical assault. There are many kinds of rape.
My point is simply that relying solely on Sacred Scripture opens up these challenges based on rationalization and justification.
In order to defend what you think is obvious Christian teaching on abortion, you are forced to rely on Christian Tradition and Teaching found in sources other than Sacred Scripture.
If a person will not obey scripture, what makes you think he will obey what Christian Tradition teaches?
Interesting thought, but consider the implication. . .using your logic, the child can be killed post-birth because the child is the result of an ongoing assault. Sins of the father onto the son kind of thing.
“have you ever considered the hundreds of thousands wanting to adopt a child?”
Very few people (including blacks) will adopt a black baby.
No need to rely on tradition. God has commanded us to not murder.
Pretty simple. Unless of course a person seeks to use it as disinformation to attack followers of Christ.
You would kill a defenseless baby?
No.
One could argue that it is, since he left part of himself inside of her and it is growing as the cells divide.
Once again, No.
The child is not the father, it is not the mother, it is it's self. The baby is not a clone even if it was it is not "him" but it's self.
Genetic guilt is a superstition that should be discarded.
This is the same argument that a woman has the right to abort because the child is her. It is morally and scientifically wrong.
Agreed. It’s a hard thing, but adding murder to rape doesn’t make it easier. That child has done nothing wrong. That child is the neighbor we’re supposed to love as ourselves. There are waiting lists for adoption.
“using your logic, the child can be killed post-birth because the child is the result of an ongoing assault”
Nope, once the child is born the assault has ended. The woman would also not be justified in killing the rapist after the fact.
I guess that is my point, this pastor is obeying Scripture.
He is using it to defend his position. What can any Protestant do to stop him? He is using Scripture to formulate his “Christian” teaching. Sure, they will scoff at him and call him names, but they are missing the point. According to him, he is obeying Scripture.
This is the problem with Sola Scriptura and why we have so many Protestant Denominations, each teaching whatever they read or don’t read in Scripture.
Surely, this isn’t what Christ intended for his Church. There has to be an Authority here on earth to preserve, protect and provide the True Teachings of Christ to each and every generation. This Authority can only come from Apostolic succession. Otherwise, the True Teachings of Christ will continue to be distorted by subjective interpretation.
yes I love killing defenselss babies!!
idiot
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.