Comments on: Abortion: The Holocaust of our Day

By: J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:27:04 +0000

I wrote about these issues in my post on “institutionalized death.” There I show some of the philosophical and empirical proof of life at conception. http://jwwartick.com/2010/01/17/the-triumph-of-our-era-institutionalized-death/

By: Karen

Karen — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 01:06:26 +0000

my bad, I meant to direct this statement to desciple. I hope that was clear but I just wanted to be sure. we each have our views so I think its best we leave it at that.

By: J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:51:28 +0000

Scientifically and philosophically there is no way to give a cutoff point other than at conception.

By: Karen

Karen — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:40:24 +0000

Aggh! not the ants again! lol
I hope you saw my earlier reply to you under your original reply on this topic from me.

By: J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:30:22 +0000

Karen,

One thing to note with the commandment is that it is translated from Hebrew. The Hebrew word used for “kill” is ratsach which is only specifically used for premeditated murder.

If the Hebrew word were a different one, like harag, then the usage would be much more broad. But the word used with the commandment is specifically murder.

You asked what the difference is between killing and murder. Well, I kill ants all the time. Do I murder them? Clearly there is a difference between the words.

But again, I don’t want to get too sidetracked. The issue is: what is the unborn? If the unborn is a human person, we cannot kill them, because that would be murder.

By: Karen

Karen — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:21:00 +0000

So I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this.

By: Disciple

Disciple — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:05:51 +0000

Karen, I am afraid that these arguments do not hold water. Murdering a child is not an option and certainly based on what you imagine might happen to the child later on. Surely you would not even treat a dog that way. I am being a realist here, not basing my argument on imagination or a roll of the dice or what might happen down the road. I am not responsible for what might happen. I am absolutely responsible for what I choose. There is no dodging that truth or reality or responsibility.

The argument that a baby actually endangers the mother’s life is one that people often trot out. I don’t see any facts to back it up. And nowhere did I even remotely imply that the child’s life is more important than the mother’s. You are the one claiming that one life is more important than another. I certainly do not believe that you are less and not more important than anyone else. Period. All human life is equally valuable. If the decision ever does have to be made to save a mother’s life, say she has cancer and the uterus would have to be removed and that would kill the baby — well, brace yourself. I think she could choose to have her uterus removed. And that would result in the death of the baby but it is not direct murder, which abortion is. She has other responsibilities and she would have to make this decision. But the removal of a cancer-ridden uterus is not an abortion and would not be murder, even though the child would die as a result.

As I said, not all killing is murder.

Bringing in the argument about the death penalty is a red herring. It is a discussion that is worthwhile but is not related to the subject at hand, which is abortion. If someone comes at me with a gun and threatens to kill me and I kill him first, I have defended myself. I have not committed murder.

Yes, a life is a life is a life. More to the point, a human life is a human life is a human life. By your own admission. So killing the child by murder is not an option. A life is a life, after all.

By: Karen

Karen — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 21:18:34 +0000

Sorry, I got all ranty, you know me! I hope my other post is a litte better written. as far as the 2 yr old/rape victim scenario, I think more realistically the mother would only end up resenting the child, not killing it, but I kinda get the point. Adoption is an option and no, abortion shouldnt be used just willy nilly as birth control, but I am pro-choice. All I meant by my opening comment was if ever I got pregnant, I have ever intention of carrying to term. If there were some reason that I had to give up my child for the greater good, then of course I would, but I would do my damndest to make sure the baby went to a good home and not into a life of foster care where they’re bounced from home to home. im personally unsure of where I stand on exactly when a fetus is decidedly a person. Does it begin at conception or a few weeks in when they develop its first heartbeats? my honest answer…I dont know.
I’ll try to keep the posts on the topic at hand, but you know im so completely random lol

By: Karen

Karen — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:39:04 +0000

Disciple, Like I said, I know not all orphans have it rough. Many babies are placed with loving families, there is even the option of being a serrogate. I am not suggesting that abortion is the option above adoption. I was simply saying, many orphans have it rough. I am glad you had a good outcome after being put up for adoption, but I certainly hope you’re not turning a blind eye and ignoring all the tragic stories of those many many other children who didnt have it so great, going from foster home to foster home, unable to trust anyone and turning to lives of crime and drugs, just because your experiance turned out brilliantly. Im not making this stuff up either you know. It does happen.
I also know medical science has come a very long way but like I said, if my doctors inform me that my life and my babys life are in jeopardy, well, call me crazy or selfish but i’m going to go with the option that is medically best for me. Yes, it would be incredibly heartbreaking. Im not talking about a late in the stage pregnancy. Im mainly referring to a high risk pregnancy. Also, would you deny a child of it’s mother if the mother went through with said pregnancy and she ended up dying during premature birth?

“If you can’t carry to term, the baby can still live.”
So you’re saying the infants life is more important than mine?
The old lady kicked the bucked, but who cares, she popped that baby out so it’s all good!
I respect that you stand by your views on this, but I would like to think that you would respect the same for me, even though we are on opposite sides of the fence.
And not all killing is murder? How do you figure that? If im correct, one of the 10 commandments is Thou shalt not Kill. Now, I take that to mean..well, uh..Killing. To take someone else’s life, to snuff them out, to push up the daisies for them. Killing innocent people? Since 1973, 138 people in 26 states have been released from death row with evidence for their innocence.
There is no way to tell how many of the over 1,000 people executed since 1976 may also have been innocent. Courts do not generally entertain claims of innocence when the defendant is dead. Defense attorneys move on to other cases where clients’ lives can still be saved.*(information taken from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org) So its okay to kill THOSE people because they MIGHT have commited some crime? DNA testing/evidence has ALSO come a long way. I am against the death pentalty because to me, it’s just legalized murder.The only difference here is that a single person isnt the one doing the killing. Oh no, for this, the human being on death row gets an entire audience. How quaint.
And its true you know. I mean, the inmate is dead. Why bother persuing his/her innocence? Yet another person on your dung heap.
Like I said before, a life is a life is a life.

By: J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:02:41 +0000

So again, the focus is: what is the unborn? If they are a child, then we cannot be permitted to kill them.