Florida woman forced to give birth to a baby that will die immediately

U started this like Ricky Bobby. With all due respect, then stated something that you knew was offensive to the poster you replied to. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but at least make an effort to not be disingenuous.

 

Dude, you’re way off.

 

I should have added a bunch more 9’s to plank. My bad!

I haven’t been to mass since I was largely self determinate (15 or so) so my recollection of deadly sins is confined to the movie seVen…

 

Or maybe sometimes she’s forced against her will.

 

I’m with you. There has to be a way to help out the moms. I’m all for abortion when it’s forced pregnancy.

 

Then you are pro choice, because denying women the choice in the first place IS forced pregnancy/birth.

 

How do you know your particular interpretation of Christ is the correct one?

Do you believe your interpretation of Christianity should be enshrined as US law?

 

I am pro choice.
I only get frustrated about how we as a society serve it up all too easily. I think we need to think about the messages we send our youth, like my stance about the teen porn books.
If we say, oh well, they’ll learn about it anyways…we are condoning it and we make it less special.
In a way, we, as in the adults, could be accused of encouraging unwanted pregnancies.
This bothers my conscience.

 

I believe my interpretation of Christ is correct. It is founded in the scriptures, which is the only source we have to know anything about Christ. I quoted Matthew 16 earlier because it is the clearest statement we have directly from Christ that goes straight to the heart of this issue.

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” -Matthew 16:24-28
​

You look at that statement..."deny himself"..."take up his cross"..."lose his life"...these are hard things to do. And Jesus says the word "cross" because the cross was a symbol of suffering and death. It was the worst most torturous death a person could suffer.

And when I hear the argumentation from the other side on this issue, what I hear is "But that is too much suffering. You are a bad person if you think someone should suffer that much." But if you actually form an opinion of Jesus based on what He said, He compared the experience of being His disciple to the Roman gory practice of crucifixion. What Jesus is saying in that statement is obedience is going to require suffering and self-denial, and if you are not willing to do that then you are in danger of losing your soul on the day of judgment. That is what Jesus taught. And that is the most direct response to people who complain about the costs of obedience and say they are super confident Jesus would not ask a woman to suffer like this woman has suffered. They just do not know the Christ of scripture if they think Christ would never ask anyone to suffer.

Now to your second question...I have said this before: if I was benevolent dictator you'd have so much freedom you wouldn't know what to do with it. I believe the purpose of government is to punish injustice between people. I believe that is what Romans 13 is driving at. So that mainly involves the 2nd half of the 10 commandments. Murder, Theft, Lying, and Regulating Marriage and Divorce. Abortion falls under the category of murder, which you believe is wrong. If you think murder is heinous and wrong, but you relax your standards towards the unborn then that to me is little different than carving out an exception for a racial group you don't like. If you believe something is wrong, then hold to it universally. I oppose abortion because murder is wrong. That does not involve creating a theocracy. It simply involves being consistent across the board in the moral principles we believe in rather than making exceptions to them when it serves our self-interest.

 

Let Me Google That

 

There is some good news at hand

Americans’ belief in God hit an all-time low about 6 months ago — here's why

We don’t care….

 

Said it many times before including in a couple of earlier posts in this thread. It goes without saying that reducing unwanted pregnancies would reduce the need for elective abortions. Multiple studies have also indicated that the most effective way to reduce unwanted pregnancies is through comprehensive sex education and the easy availability of contraceptives. Although certainly not true across the board a significant percentage of the so called prolife advocates are religious fanatics who believe that sexual intercourse outside of marriage is immoral and even within marriage should be primarily for procreation. They generally oppose making contraceptives more available and believe that sex education if it is to be taught at all should be limited to abstinence as the only acceptable form of contraception outside of marriage. There is also a considerable overlap between persons opposed to abortion and those opposed to providing assistance to low-income mothers and their children.

 

You are advocating giving keys to the car to kids without a license. And if we educate earlier, then the earlier younger kids will know about it and find that it’s accepted and normal. Hint, it leads to even greater unwanted pregnancies.
It’s careless and it’s putting too much trust in kids who have poor to non-existent discipline and self control.
You’re argument is saying their going to do it anyways.
Sad.

 

There is logic to this, but this isn't what happens at all. When kids get a proper education, they are more likely to make wiser, more educated choices. From this study:

A consistent finding from observational studies that rely on regression analyses of survey data is that comprehensive sex education is associated with lower pregnancy risks, a later age at first sex, and an increased probability of contraceptive use (29–31).​

 

interesting discussion, but not sure about that comment


“These data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.”

Abstinence-Only Education and Teen Pregnancy Rates: Why We Need Comprehensive Sex Education in the U.S

“Researchers at New York University studied teen pregnancy rates over a 20-year period, from 1996 to 2016.

Their results found when the federal government funded more comprehensive sex education programs, the teen pregnancy birth rate lowered by 3 percent.

In 1991, teen pregnancy rates in the U.S. hit their peak, recording about 61.8 births per 1,000 females.”

https://thehill.com/changing-americ...hensive-sex-education-programs-can-lower/amp/

 

Have you ever stepped inside a typical Florida public school? The kids are mostly dumbasses with little ambition, no manners and no self control.
No study you can show can sway me from common sense.

 

I'm a product of Florida public schools. K-11. Even when kids seemed disinterested or unruly, a part of them is still listening. And when every study produces the same result, that comprehensive sex education reduces unwanted pregnancies, maybe you should reconsider your position?

 

When theory and reality disagree, double down on the theory and insist that is the reality that is incorrect?

 

Abstinence-only education is very effective when delivered on a daily basis over 10-15 years. Schools only deliver sex education once or twice a year. Schools shouldn't waste time on abstinence-only education, and should entirely focus on comprehensive sex education which can be very effective even when only delivered once or twice a year.

If we really wanted to reduce abortions, we would have mandatory comprehensive sex education 2-4 times each year with free and easy access to contraceptives. But the people who say they want to reduce abortions insist on sex ed that increases abortions. Weird.

 

I won’t. I think we already have a loose and carefree environment in schools. I have little faith in those studies and even less faith in the educators in these dumps.