Wednesday, September 17: Forgot to mention this. The other day, I listened to a caller on Dr. Laura’s radio show pregnant with a baby diagnosed with a heart defect. The baby likely will be stillborn, she was told, or will die shortly after birth. Specialists offer no hope. The woman and her husband have decided to carry the baby to term.
As heartbreaking as it will be to lose that baby, they want to give their child a chance at life. You never know what can happen. The defect may turn out to be non-fatal after all.
Dr. Laura shared a story about a previous caller pregnant with a child doctors said would die shortly after birth. One doctor suggested she kill…pardon me…abort the baby. A couple years later (or was it a year?), the woman brought her healthy child to the same doctor and said something like, “I wanted you to meet the child you said I should abort.”
——————————————————————————————-
As you know, Barack Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act while a senator in Illinois. The bill, which eventually became law, gives legal protection to infants outside the womb who survive murder attempts.
Depending on which way the wind’s blowing, Obama’s reasons for voting against the measure vary. Despite his “obamobfuscations,” he simply doesn’t care. Women have the right to kill their babies in utero at any time for any reason. Period.
Gianna Jessen (click on image to watch short video), who survived an abortion attempt 31 years ago, said:
“If Senator Barack Obama’s position against born alive protections were in place when I was born, I would not be here today. Senator Obama had the opportunity four times to vote to protect infants born from failed abortions and he chose not to. By voting against these protections, he was basically denying these living, breathing babies their most basic human right.”
(Pick up a copy of Gianna: Aborted…And Lived to Tell About It.)
Attempted Murder by Poison
Jessen’s teenage mother attempted to kill her via a saline solution procedure when she was seven and a half months pregnant. During this despicable procedure, a so-called doctor injects saline into the woman’s stomach, and the solution poisons the baby as he swallows and burns his skin. The baby dies, and the mother goes into labor, delivering a dead baby.
I am woman, hear me roar! Sisters are doing it for themselves! You’ve come a long way, baby. 
Jessen miraculously survived but suffered injuries as a result of the abortion attempt. She developed cerebral palsy. Jessen’s mother put her up for adoption, which she should have done in the first place instead of trying to kill her. Today, Jessen is a Christian and pro-life advocate who has testified before the U.S. Congress and the British House of Commons. Since 2005, she’s run in two marathons.
Questions and Answers
Here’s what I don’t understand about women who abort. The life growing inside them has a soul, the immortal part of our being. You don’t have to be a Christian to understand the concept, because everyone has some awareness of this essence, no matter what they call it. I would be afraid of snuffing out innocent life, knowing the soul of my child still existed. Even if I weren’t a Christian, I’d know instinctively there’d be some kind of reckoning for that action. If I ever came “face to face” with that child, what would I say?
For the record, there is a difference between the state executing a convicted murderer and someone killing an innocent unborn baby. The Bible doesn’t teach that we’re forbidden to kill. The Sixth Commandment forbids murder. Executing a murderer is a just killing, not murder.
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 31 comments }
I think this is the same woman that I remember reading a story about. She testified before Congress about how she’d overcome her disabilities to accomplish all sorts of wonderful things. And the Democrats, thinking only that this was a feel-good story about a handicapped woman (whom they are supposed champion), gave her a rousing standing ovation. Then, she said she survived an abortion attempt, and you could see the anger on the Democrats’ faces.
I’m anti-death penalty for the same reason I’m anti-abortion. I think the Bible prohibits killing. This “Thou shalt not murder” business is a little tiring, since it seems like the only translations that use it are newer ones. The Vulgate, the Roman Catholic Church, the King James Bible, and even Martin Luther himself all wrote of the Sixth Commandment as “Thou shalt not kill.”
But enough about that… it wasn’t the point of my post. I wanted to say that I am in some ways also an abortion survivor. My mother never attempted to abort me, but if she hadn’t been the upstanding Christian woman that she was, she might have.
She was 45 when she had me. I was definitely “a surprise.” She had had various complications during childbirth with my previous two siblings, and that was an entire decade earlier. The doctor was very concerned for her health and, frankly, she was too. More than that, I had a 25% chance of having Down syndrome.
I think any liberal woman probably would have gone through with the abortion. To be honest, many conservative women might have too, since my mother’s life was certainly at risk. However, I obviously don’t have Down syndrome. My mother is still alive and well (even though it was a rough delivery). And I’m thankful to her for not taking the easy way out. She is too, and tells me so.
Jay,
Assuming for a moment that you are correct and it’s ‘kill’ and not ‘murder,’ how do you reconcile God’s demand for killing in various instances?
I don’t know how to reconcile a lot of God’s commands from the Old Testament. It’s not that I don’t believe they are right. God can do whatever He wants; He’s God. If we’re talking about war here, I think that’s a tricky subject.
Certainly a person has a right to kill if their life, the life of their family, or the lives of their fellow countrymen are at stake. It’s justified, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t sin, and I think you’ll find that many soldiers pray for forgiveness for the lives they took, even if they think it was justified.
And God forgives those sins, too, so I don’t think there’s a problem. I really don’t want to get into a debate about this. My only point concerning the whole “kill/murder” issue was that it’s not as clear cut as some Christians say.
Thanks for sharing the difference La Shawn between killing and murdering. How can anyone begin to compare an innocent unborn baby to a convicted murderer?
If killings were always wrong, then God would never have justified wars in the bible, and other “killings.”
Great story on Gianna Jessen, and yours too Jay!
Jay,
The problem is that it IS pretty clear cut. But since you don’t want to debate, I won’t press it. I pray you continue to grow in your study of Scripture.
Gianna Jessen was on Hannity and Colmes last night. Alan tried to tell her that she was mistaken about Obama and the legislation he backed. She stuck to her guns, but the clock ran out on her while Alan was still making things up.
Not that Alan has any trouble being an ideologue, but looking Gianna Jessen in the face and trying to “spin” the facts is a real stretch.
On another note, abortion and capital punishment are only related in that both cause death. Any liberal opposing capital punishment must, logically, oppose abortion. But one opposing abortion is not trapped, logically, into opposing capital punishment. The great Nat Hentoff is a liberal who opposes abortion and he writes persuasively about it.
Gabe: It’s not that I don’t want to debate. It’s just that this isn’t the forum for it since we’d be off topic. You can find my e-mail through my blog and we can talk there if you’d like, but this post was about abortion. I was trying to speak of my story concerning it, and I shouldn’t have brought up the whole “murder/kill” issue. For that, I apologize.
However, when entire religious traditions (such as the Roman Catholic Church), translations (such as the King James Bible), and thinkers (such as Martin Luther) disagree with the idea that it’s “murder” instead of “kill,” that does mean that the issue is up for debate, and is by no means clear.
It occurred to me one day that abortion really amounts to taking out a hit job on your own child. You pay some abortionist to ‘rub out’ the life. Nothing good about that.
“The Sixth Commandment forbids murder.”
—Are you serious?
Where does the bible give Christians the authority and judgment to kill another person?
You see this is where people become annoyed with Christians—and for good reason. Christians pick and choose whatever part of the bible is convenient for them and their argument. Again, credible biblical scholars and religious leaders do not struggle with this issue.
When I meet Christians who are against abortion and for the death penalty, I question their sincerity and their understanding of their faith–but this is what happens when you follow a “man-made” document and not your heart.
I just wish Christians were more like their Jesus.
The formula is simple, and Christians had it right when they were wearing those bands that asked, “WWJD?”
Ford–
What Jesus would do is chastise those who would condemn the innocent. “If your brother sins, chastise him.” People do not become annoyed with Christians for good reason–they hate Christians because Christians tell them the truth.
You question the faith of others because they don’t tell you what they want to hear. This is what happens when you follow “your heart” and not Scripture. Our human hearts are sinful. When we follow our hearts we will always do wrong. What Jesus would also do is chastise you for following your heart instead of the Lord’s teaching.
I am opposed to both abortion and the death penalty, but make no mistake here. Scripture forbids killing the innocent. It does not forbid executing the guilty. My opposition to the death penalty is libertarian, not faith-based–as is my opposition to abortion.
And how can anyone possibly justify the position that abortion is acceptable but the death penalty is not.
Sorry Jay, as with any person who wants to avoid adding to Yahweh’s words, when engaging in the type of debate that you say you’re not interested in, you need to learn some basic Hebrew.
“Ratsakh” is the word used in Deuteronomy 20:13. That word is the same one used for manslaughter, stoning (not mandated in Torah) and taking the life of a slave unjustly.
There is NO justification for terminating the life of a soul after conception, but Father Yahweh will allow it, as there is also TONS of Halacha against physicians being forbidden from interceding on behalf of ANY patient (born or unborn).
This is Yahweh’s law and it applies to all of mankind and it will never ever stop applying to all of mankind.
Let me clarify what I wrote above.. Father Yahweh respects the field of medicine and those called to heal with human hands, and…well it SHOULD be a physician’s call, outside the mother’s own WORDS that should determine what should happen in cases of problematic pregnancies.
I don’t consider “to save the life of the mother” a case of abortion because it derails and is an affront to the calling of the physician.
In cases of rape or incest, there is still no provision for that in Torah, but I do understand where MOST people might not want any part of a child born due to rape. I think people are flat out deceiving themselves and being phony if they say they have no qualms about this scenario, especially if the person happened to be of another race. People who say otherwise are flat out liars – period.
In any case, Father Yahweh still has made no allowance for that, nor for that if incest.
I do have to bring this up, because it was just mentioned–”I do understand where MOST people might not want any part of a child born due to rape.” That is actually NOT the case–MOST women who have been raped and have conceived a child because of it WANT the baby and do NOT want an abortion. However, they are pressured from all sides to abort “the rapist’s baby,” and assured that they will “feel better afterwards” and can “go on with their lives” as if “nothing had happened.”
Abortion doesn’t wipe out the rape. It just wipes out any real chance of dealing with the rape, as well as the one chance that something good might be retrieved from an evil experience.
Go to this website for more information:
http://www.afterabortion.org/
If I may, I’d like to recommend the following interdenominational guide written by Father Frank Pavone on “Voting With a Clear Conscience”
http://www.priestsforlife.org/vote/voting-with-clear-conscience-interdenominational.htm
Belloc–That link didn’t work.
During the 1970s and 1980s I recall how the MSM of the time loved to frame the abortion debate as war between women and men. A woman was usually chosen to represent the pro-abortion side while a man was almost always chosen to represent the anti-abortion side.
Women such as La Shawn or Gianna Jessen were rarely (if ever) given a chance to voice their opinions. Their views did not fit the Narrative, which is that opposition to abortion is anti-woman. The times (thanks be to God) are indeed a’ changin’.
[i]Where does the bible give Christians the authority and judgment to kill another person?[/i]
Assuming we are talking about Christians acting in the capacity of government, Romans 13:1-5 by way of Deuteronomy 1:9-18.
I’ve already covered the basic precepts behind my position. If you have another interpretation that draws from Scripture, please illuminate us. Otherwise, your hemming and hawing about what “credible Biblical scholars” thinks is so much lip service.
If you can explain how God could provide for a death penalty in the Mosaic Law to be judged by men, reaffirm the God-given right of a government to use “the sword” to punish and still come to the conclusion that the modern death penalty is un-Biblical, I would surely change my position on the matter.
and the mother goes into labor, delivering a dead baby.
My mother had to do that with my stillborn sister after something went wrong in the 8th month (I don’t know what; I was six) and that’s the saddest thing I can imagine having to do.
I’ve never understood how a fully-informed woman could do that on purpose. *shudder* Vile. I assume this is why people fight so hard against abortionists being required to fully-inform women…
The most inspiring part about Gianna’s story to me is that she was able to forgive her birth mother. I don’t know if I could.
#14 THEBIGDODDY says:
Is this gleaned from faith and scripture or do you have some unique power that backs up this proclamation?
Heliotrope writes:
“Is this gleaned from faith and scripture or do you have some unique power that backs up this proclamation?”
Sheesh Heliotrope…of all that I wrote, this is what you focus on?
My answer is:
BEHAVIORS…and yours is no exception.
It seems that as you’ve apparently been around, that you don’t know that.
Does anyone know where Gianna’s mother is these days?
Having had a child raped, this I know; 1. the agony of watching our child suffer was almost unbearable 2. Not for one moment did we contemplate destroying an unborn child, should the gift of life be handed to us. Our daughter felt strongly that taking the life of a child would not erase the horror she endured but would simply compound make a tragic situation more tragic. 3. We did consider adoption and felt good that our suffering might bring someone else immense joy.
I agree, women should not have abortions, because it is murder. But it’s their choice as long as it remains legal. That’s between them and God.
What I believe we seldom bring up is that by themselves, laws do not actually do anything concrete. Making abortion illegal will not magically reduce the number of abortions to zero. Not even tough, frequent, intensive enforcement of the laws will reduce the number to zero. The law does not really restrict the choice of carrying out any act, legal or otherwise – it *may* restrict the range of means by which such acts are carried out.
Singapore, for instance, has the toughest laws and regulations on practically everything. Singaporeans are tightly regimented people. But once they’re out of the island nation, watch out! Malaysia does have copyright laws and enforces them, but you can still pick up pirated DVDs just about anywhere.
What laws do is provide a snapshot, a kind of insight into the ‘moral’ fibre of the people who promulgate them. The Syariah laws tell you what kind of religion Islam is, for instance, and what kind of person Muhammad was. You can learn a lot about how ancient Sumerians thought by studying Hamurabbi’s laws.
Similarly, should anti-abortion (except for lifesaving) laws pass (or gay marriage, or whatever), you can tell generally whay the public is thinking and what their value systems are.
Unless it’s judicial activism, but that’s a different story.
iow, should anti-abortion pass, we’re actually saying to women that “if you want to get an abortion, you have to face criminal prosecution ie face the consequences of your actions.” Let the doctors continue performing them – you may need to save some mothers’ lives.
THEBIGDODDY: Perhaps I misread your comment in #14. (” …I do understand where MOST people might not want any part of a child born due to rape. I think people are flat out deceiving themselves and being phony if they say they have no qualms about this scenario, especially if the person happened to be of another race. People who say otherwise are flat out liars – period.”)
I read your comment as saying that a woman who is raped has “qualms” about carrying a child that was violently created. Then, you appear to say that the “qualms” would be even greater if the rapist were of a different race. You then say “People who say otherwise are flat out liars – period.”
Therefore, I read you as saying that these “qualms” and higher order “qualms” in the case of different races are fact and so say otherwise automatically makes one a liar.
I do not know on what authority you make that detemination. That was my question.
I do not believe that any insemination due to rape is greeted with immediate joy. I do believe that many women who believe in life will accept the fact of the pregnancy and move forward to careful prenatal care and a safe delivery. The child is innocent in all cases. Since the child is genetically half of the mother I would imagine that many women would raise the child with great love and affection.
I read the “qualms” as ranging from dread to abortion to suicide. I read the mention of a “different race” as being prejudice which increases the “dread.” Then I read that if I disagree, that I am a liar.
Color me a liar. Certainly, some people would fit your statement, but not all. In fact, among those who are pro-life, I do not think it would be many.
Among the liberal elite, perhaps you are correct. I do not see very many different race couples among them. But I have a large circle of mixed race families in my life. My grandchildren attend a school where over 40% of the children come from parents of different races. I feel that your opinion is insular, at best.
One of my closest friends in high school was born with significant congenital heart defects – two, in fact, which somehow managed to cancel each other out. Even so, by the time I met him he had had numerous surgeries and was in fact not expected to live out his teens. Many a parent, given that prognosis, might have chosen to abort him.
I am eternally grateful his parents did not. And he did, in fact live out his teens – and is now 35.
It amazes me how many people that go to school to be OB’s and help bring life into the world are quick to urge a woman to abort whenever there’s a problem.
A friend of mine recently had a baby who needed a pacemaker immediately after birth. The high risk doctors encouraged her to “terminate.” They’ve had their little boy home for about a month now.
Even if he would have died, you can’t tell me a doctor would have been right to tell someone to abort. Pregnancies only last nine months at most either way.
Judy–
The reason they do is that they are no longer allowed not to.
You are no longer allowed to become an OB unless you are willing either to provide an abortion or send a child to be aborted.
Choice.
Yeah, right.
On the topic of abortion, even many people who defend the possibility of legal abortions, they say they are not pro-abortion, but they don’t want to punish women who are in this difficult situation. In Germany a curious thing has happened. Something that reflects that legal abortion affects adversely to the country. And also that the change is possible: you can promote a culture of life with the support of the citizens, when really there is a real wish of avoid abortions. Since the liberalization of abortion in this country, the number of abortions is officially four million. For that reason, among others, children are seen as an unintended effect of having sex. Many people thought it was necessary to promote greater social acceptance of children in an aging society. And civil society acted, without waiting for action by the State to promote births. They joined several media organizations in a campaign. Interestingly, after the campaign, the birth rate has risen in Germany. The video is exciting. Look here: http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=SztG8JpxvHY
Santiago Chiva (Granada, Spain)
heliotrope says:
“I read your comment as saying that a woman who is raped has “qualms” about carrying a child that was violently created. Then, you appear to say that the “qualms” would be even greater if the rapist were of a different race. You then say “People who say otherwise are flat out liars – period.”
Therefore, I read you as saying that these “qualms” and higher order “qualms” in the case of different races are fact and so say otherwise automatically makes one a liar.”
TBD says:
Yes..MOST white conservative Christians would be liars, if they said they would not be mortified exponentially had their child been raped and impregnated by a non-white male.
heliotrope:
“I do not know on what authority you make that detemination. That was my question.
I do not believe that any insemination due to rape is greeted with immediate joy. I do believe that many women who believe in life will accept the fact of the pregnancy and move forward to careful prenatal care and a safe delivery.”
TBD:
We dissent there. I don’t believe that even the most pro-life woman who is classified as I said before will wholeheartedly accept that scenario. If they didn’t abort it, that baby could not be born quick enough so it could be sent off to an adoption agency.
heliotrope:
“The child is innocent in all cases. Since the child is genetically half of the mother I would imagine that many women would raise the child with great love and affection.”
TBD:
Your selective faith in people perplexes me, heliotrope.
heliotrope:
“I read the “qualms” as ranging from dread to abortion to suicide. I read the mention of a “different race” as being prejudice which increases the “dread.” Then I read that if I disagree, that I am a liar.
Color me a liar. Certainly, some people would fit your statement, but not all. In fact, among those who are pro-life, I do not think it would be many.”
TBD:
“If you could hang with having your daughter raped and impregnated by a “black” man, then more power to you, heliotrope. You’re not a typical conservative white male, and I would consider that quality in you stratospheric in it’s exceptional-ness”
heliotrope:
“Among the liberal elite, perhaps you are correct.”
TBD:
What the hell ever, heliotrope. You all kill me acting like white christian conservatives are so accepting and loving and magnanamuous towards non-whites. You’re NOT. In that vein, MOST are just like lawless heathens in their lack of charity towards people of other ethnic persuasions, though obviously YOU and JB must be truly exceptional people. I applaud you for that. You ARE exceptions, apparently, even amid much of the questionable things I’ve seen coming from your cyber pseudonyms. Good for you, my brother!
heliotrope:
“I feel that your opinion is insular, at best.”
TBD:
Well I can see why YOU might say that, if what you’ve written about your circle of influence is true. Again, you’re obviously an exception. You can take that for what it’s worth to you.
Purely by their BEHAVIORS, I don’t trust much of what contemporary Christians say or do. Sorry.
Comments on this entry are closed.