Posted on 12/19/2011 1:34:47 PM PST by surroundedbyblue
This is the season of the year when Salvation Army volunteers are on the streets and outside stores ringing their bells to encourage donors to fill their red kettles with money for the poor. The longtime Christian organization provides food, shelter, elderly services, disaster relief, prisoner rehabilitation and many other forms of aid.
But it also has adopted a position statement that is a step toward abortion, and pro-life leaders are expressing alarm at what they see developing.
In its statement on abortion, the Salvation Army says: "A number of biblical and theological principles underpin The Salvation Army's position on abortion. …
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Feminist ideology contends that all sex is rape, and by extension, all pregnancy equates to rape as well.
So long as feminists can successfully demonize men, they will be able to successfuly demonize pregnancy, by extension, as well.
The wrongness of abortion is determined by the Right to Life of the baby.
Typical pro-abortion lie.
Someone else can raise the baby.
Both are dead ends.
If you're going to argue theology with Catholics, please study more than Maria Monk and JaxChix comix.
However, in a very few special instances (such as when a baby is a rodef, a "pursuer" who is about to kill the mother, and has not yet arrived at the point of "ensoulment") abortion is actually mandatory (after "ensoulment" abortion is forbidden even to save the mother's life and is murder).
What a load of hooey.
Let G-d's holy laws determine right and wrong in all issues.
Piffle. You cannot defend mandatory abortion from God's laws.
Apology accepted. Please disregard my last post.
The Salvation Army was founded in London and is still headquartered there.
The wrongness of anything is determined by Divine decree.
The right to life of the baby is also determined by Divine decree.
Too bad I didn’t know this last week. I put $20 in the red kettle.
Never again.
G-d's Laws are the one and only source of morality and ethics. Most of the time abortion is strictly forbidden. Like capital punishment, it is mandatory only in a miniscule number of cases. But in either case G-d's Laws determine what must, and what must not, be done. To erect a moral system in regarding to anything (murder, abortion, theft, homosexuality, "social justice," etc.) apart from G-d's Laws is to open the door to an independent, secular morality.
My remark about the old Protestant prejudice did not come from He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. It is actually something I once heard (a long time ago).
Thank you for your mechilah.
>> So your philosophy is that the RAPED WOMAN is merely a toaster that pops out a baby,
Giving attention to the moral disparity in resolving degenerate impregnation with the interests of the noob shouldn’t be framed as an attack against the mother.
If you’re going to support abortion you’re going to have to leave FR. Continue doing so, you’ll be shown the door.
Abortion is intrinsically evil. It is never permissible, in any circumstance, let alone "mandatory." Capital punishment is permitted in scripture. It is not intrinsically evil.
Your reading of God's Laws is faulty. I think you are confusing the principle of double effect (a medical procedure to save the life of the mother is morally licit, even if the secondary effect is the loss of the unborn child) with "abortion." A direct abortion is never morally licit, in any circumstance, and no appeal to some fringe interpretation of "G-d's Laws" will ever change that concrete reality.
We donated last week end. I’m very sorry to hear this news.
Your reading of God's Laws is faulty. I think you are confusing the principle of double effect (a medical procedure to save the life of the mother is morally licit, even if the secondary effect is the loss of the unborn child) with "abortion." A direct abortion is never morally licit, in any circumstance, and no appeal to some fringe interpretation of "G-d's Laws" will ever change that concrete reality.
My "reading of G-d's Laws" is not "faulty." Yours is at variance with Halakhah--both Jewish and Noachide.
I have said several times that abortion is mandatory in only a miniscule number of cases, when the child is a rodef ("pursuer," a Halakhic term referring to someone who is "pursuing" another person to kill him), and when ensoulment has not occurred. After ensoulment the child may not be aborted even to save the mother's life.
Your position is based on Catholicism, "natural law," and rationalism. Mine is based on Theonomic positivism--what is right and what is wrong depends solely on Divine decree, and nothing else.
And where in "G-ds Laws" do you find this idea of ensoulment?
And is there any broad consensus among Jewish scholars, orthodox, conservative, liberal, on your assertions regarding ensoulment? (There is unanimity among the orthodox Christian Churches on abortion, so I trust the orthodox Christian Churches more than your rabbinical tradition on this subject.)
If I recall correctly, ensoulment takes place at different times for Jews and non-Jews. For non-Jews it takes place (I think, though I'm no expert) three months after conception. An unwarranted abortion prior to this is a great sin, though it is not murder and is not a capital offense. After this time abortion is murder and a capital offense (and I think is forbidden for any reason). For Jews ensoulment happens much later, since an unwarranted abortion is not a capital offense until after the baby's head has emerged from the birth canal. At this point the baby may not be killed for any reason. As you can imagine, all this is a very esoteric, mystical field, and I am far from being an expert. I have only the most elementary knowledge and could be wrong.
And is there any broad consensus among Jewish scholars, orthodox, conservative, liberal, on your assertions regarding ensoulment? (There is unanimity among the orthodox Christian Churches on abortion, so I trust the orthodox Christian Churches more than your rabbinical tradition on this subject.)
Only "Orthodox Judaism" is Judaism. What the other so-called "branches" have to say is of no consequence whatsoever.
Your rejection of immemorial Sinaitic Tradition is the original Protestant Revolt on which all chr*stianity is based, so I understand where you are coming from.
So, ensoulment happens at different times for Jews and non-Jews? WHERE is this specifically in Scripture?
An unwarranted abortion prior to this is a great sin, though it is not murder and is not a capital offense.
So, does this make first trimester abortion of non-Jews acceptable under Judaism?
For Jews ensoulment happens much later, since an unwarranted abortion is not a capital offense until after the baby's head has emerged from the birth canal.
So, extremely late-term abortion is okay for Jews?
Your rejection of immemorial Sinaitic Tradition is the original Protestant Revolt on which all chr*stianity is based, so I understand where you are coming from.
So, rejection of abortion is somehow a "revolt" against Judaism?
Are you for real?????
So basically, you’re making a case that abortion is ok at different points throughout gestation for different people??
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is my understanding that Judaism and Catholicism are in agreement regarding abortion, but I am not a Jew.
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.