1cf9e63024b26265e304…

You might call it thin, but it is what I believe. I also believe you and your pastor are adding words to the Bible–and we all know what the Bible says happens to people who do that.

jim m on April 15, 2008 at 1:24 PM

You’re still showing your ignorance. “The bible” never said anything about adding words to “the bible” because “the bible” wasn’t “the bible” as we know it back then. The book of Revelation (not “the bible”) says not to add or take away anything from the book of Revelation (not “the bible”).

You might call it thin, but it is what I believe. I also believe you and your pastor are adding words to the Bible–and we all know what the Bible says happens to people who do that.

jim m on April 15, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Funny. I never added one word to the Bible. I simply listed references. But you keep on projecting, big guy, it’s amusing.

You’re just like every other person who tries to fit the square peg of the Bible through the round hole of his beliefs – you will fall short in the end.

Also King David in 2 Samuel 12: 16-23 stated clearly he would see his dead baby in heaven. So the question isn’t exploitive.

wepeople on April 14, 2008 at 8:33 PM

It’s also pertinent that David was referring to a child who had been born, then died, rather than an aborted/miscarried fetus.

I don’t think God or the Bible supports abortion or infanticide. However, it is pretty difficult to conclusively prove that the Bible indicates that life begins at conception. Some of the above referenced verses seem to make a distinction between the value of a born person and fetus (or even a slave or free, for that matter).

The principle of valuing human life is easier to promote than the dogmatics of current conservative prolife rhetoric.

And yes, I’m prolife, FWIW.

But I guess you’re a good Christian because you insult people with different views, Al. Or don’t you believe those parts of the Bible?

And Fossen, the problem with the verses you quote is that they don’t specifically address the point we’re discussing. “Before you were born, I knew you”, for example, doesn’t say anything about abortion but only that God has a plan at some point in pregnancy.

You might call it thin, but it is what I believe. I also believe you and your pastor are adding words to the Bible–and we all know what the Bible says happens to people who do that.

jim m on April 15, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Let me get this straight. You’re telling someone who can read the Hebrew version that he needs to read “several different translations” of the Bible?

That’s a good way to announce you’re a troll.

jim m on April 15, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Actually, jim m, your knowledge of Bible versions is suspect. Go read up on the history of the RSV and get back to me. It’s a flawed text.

Note that you’ve hung your entire belief on one verse, and you have to stretch and twist your interpretation of the translation of it in order to make it work.

I, on the other hand, have listed a HOST of verses upon which to rest my case that the Bible is against killing unborn children. Your argument is thin and weak at best, and is nowhere near convincing.

fossten on April 15, 2008 at 10:07 AM

I hate it when people try to quote scripture to support horrible things.

pedestrian on April 14, 2008 at 6:07 PM

That makes much more sense. I haven’t watched the video, and I was assuming the question was aimed at the child.

The workers just didn’t know what was going on.

thuja on April 14, 2008 at 6:32 PM

Come on. The girl is 14.

Um, couldn’t the 21 year old have adopted the 14 year old?

jim m on April 14, 2008 at 7:01 PM

Doubtful, but I suppose remotely possible.

Even so, the warning signs were all there, and Planned Parenthood did nothing and actually helped erase the evidence of rape.

A 14-year-old girl cannot legally consent to sex. Even if PP assumed she got pregnant from a teen her own age, it’s still suspicious enough to report.

why you people insist on beating this dead horse, when you know you’ll never get anywhere with it, I’ll never know… I suppose you would much rather little girls be getting back alley abortions. because no matter what you say or do, abortions will keep happening. you cannot and should not enforce law on the human body. you open pandora’s box, if you do…

Kaptain Amerika on April 15, 2008 at 1:51 AM

The answer is that it is not a privacy issue, it is a human rights issue – the child has a right to life just like you. Go back into contemporaneous reports on slavery before the civil war, and you will see all kinds of arguments for why slavery is ok. The republican party was formed to argue for human rights for everyone, and are not doing their job if they continue to allow this killing to continue.

jim m on April 15, 2008 at 9:52 AM

1. There is no indication in the Hebrew that the baby was miscarried

2. Even if miscarriage is what is meant, the intent was not to abort baby but harm woman

3. Literal translation: “Child brought forth”

4. Notice that the fetus is referred to as a “child” second most common word for child in OT cf: of Moses in Ex 2:3-10

Your knowledge of the Bible is lacking.

See: Gen 25:21-22; 2 Ki 19:3; Ruth 1:11; Job 3:3; Gen 5:3,4,28-30; 12:12; Lk 1:43; Rev 12:5; Rom 9:11; Lk 1:41,44; Lk 1:36; Acts 7:29; Lk 1:36 and 1:57 together

Why shouldn’t we just break the United States apart into several countries like the EU which provides for a common defense, a common currency and business flows and little else?

jim m on April 15, 2008 at 9:47 AM

We used to have this setup. It was called “The United STATES.” Now it’s just one big fedgov.

New American Standard Bible (NASB), Exodus 21:22-25:

And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no [further] injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any [further] injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

Why shouldn’t we just break the United States apart into several countries like the EU which provides for a common defense, a common currency and business flows and little else?

why you people insist on beating this dead horse, when you know you’ll never get anywhere with it, I’ll never know… I suppose you would much rather little girls be getting back alley abortions. because no matter what you say or do, abortions will keep happening. you cannot and should not enforce law on the human body. you open pandora’s box, if you do…

Kaptain Amerika on April 15, 2008 at 1:51 AM

Ridiculous talking points.

We already enforce laws on the human body. Ever hear of prostitution being illegal? How about illegal drugs? Selling your own organs is also illegal.

What about the body of the baby? Isn’t that supposed to be protected?

Isn’t it true that half the babies aborted are females? Aren’t they future women? What about their bodies? Don’t they have a right to say what happens to them?

What about the FACT that scientists have determined that the baby is NOT part of the mother’s body?

If a mother has a male fetus in her womb, is she now part female and part male?

Don’t spout talking points, it only makes you look stupid when they are exposed as folly.

So you think laws against pedophilia are useless and shouldn’t be enforced?

-Mary Bell

The workers just didn’t know what was going on.

thuja on April 14, 2008 at 6:32 PM

Really? A 14 year old girl walks in to get an abortion and they didn’t figure out she had to have had sex to need one?

PP knew she was pregnant and knew she was 14. That’s enough to notify the authorities.

Gimme a freakin break.

but that charge seems a little thin.

Don’t be ridiculous Ed, PP knew his age because they saw his driver’s license. They just didn’t care.