who supports right to choose

[pattygreen 5]

Only she can live with the consequences of her choice.

And live with them she will. Most women, with the exception of a few, live with horrible guilt feelings over their choice of abortion. They know deep down inside, for God gives all mankind a conscience, that what they did was wrong. They will deny what their conscience is telling them because they don't want to admit their wrongdoing and their need for repentance before a Holy God. It is a sad thing to have to live with that burden. But, it isn't necessary to carry it. Our Creator is a very forgiving God. He loves all of us and forgives us when we make wrong choices. All we need do is ask him to.

[Corliss 0]

The death penalty shows us that God cares for us ordinary people, that He wants to protect us and that He wants us all well. Without order and without punishment we would only be creatures lacking responsibility that could do whatever we wanted to each other without being held responsible for anything. We would then live in a world that did not have any morals or ethics. Our value and our dignity would be nonexistent. We would be like animals. It is the order of things and the punishments that proves to us that God values us humans as something. If we were nothing God would not have to care for us. But now God so loves mankind and therefore the capital punishment exists as a defence, as a confirmation, as recognition of the high dignity and value of mankind. The death penalty, more than anything else, confirms that we are moral beings and as a consequence of that we can be held responsible for our actions.

Genesis 9:6

"Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man."

These words are spoken by God. The verse does not only express an permission, but it is a command. It is the first commandment of the Bible that has a common legal character. We find in this verse a "law" draped in a poetic costume that is the basis for all coming laws concerning the capital punishment. It is a foundational principle. And it is interesting to see that the first edict of a legal character is concerning the death penalty. God wants the death penalty for murderers and the reason is clearly declared: "for in the image of God has God made man. One who murders destroys the "image of God" in a fellow man and thereby commits an indirect attack on God himself.

This was not an OT concept that should be abandoned today.

Luke 23:41

"We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."

These words were spoken by one of the criminals who were hanging on a cross next to Jesus. The scripture clearly testifies of the legal conscience that people during all times have had. A death-sentenced criminal confesses that the flogging and the death sentence that was imposed on him were "just". And not only that, he himself felt that he "deserved" death.

Weren't the two men who died on either side of Jesus theives? Were they murderers?

As far as whether or not God calls for capital punishment I think it should be left up to Him. I am not saying that I oppose it on an emotional level because I don't however if you go by Christ's admonition in the story of the woman who was being stoned, then none of us are fit to cast the first stone, or push the button, or drop the trap door, or initiate execution by whatever means. The Bible is full of contradictions.

The crime rate is far lower in countries where capital punishment has been abolished. Fear based ethics are not higher ethics. This type of ethics results in the ones with the power ruling, whether it is physical strength or political power. Power does not equate goodness or separation from animals, in fact the reverse is true.

Corliss

[Corliss 0]

One big difference between abortion killing and capital punishment killing is that one is innocent killing and the other is guilty, deserving killing.

The unfortunate thing is that every year, people are executed who did not commit the crime they were convicted of. If our justice system were fool proof capital punishment might be more just, but since it is not, at least with life imprisonment when a person is discovered to not be guilty, he can be freed, with capital punishment, there is no reversal.

Corliss

[Corliss 0]

Only she can live with the consequences of her choice.

And live with them she will. Most women, with the exception of a few, live with horrible guilt feelings over their choice of abortion. They know deep down inside, for God gives all mankind a conscience, that what they did was wrong. They will deny what their conscience is telling them because they don't want to admit their wrongdoing and their need for repentance before a Holy God. It is a sad thing to have to live with that burden. But, it isn't necessary to carry it. Our Creator is a very forgiving God. He loves all of us and forgives us when we make wrong choices. All we need do is ask him to.

That is why though I am pro-choice, I don't take abortion lightly. Birth control would have been a much better option for the 15 year old who didn't have access to contraceptives or had too much shame and fear to use them. It would be great if everone chose abstinence until marraige but unfortunately even many of the kids wearing the promise rings don't wait.

Corliss

[Corliss 0]

I am not against any birth control that does not destroy the baby. Once the sperm meets the egg, it becomes a life. If there is a birth control that stops the egg from meeting the sperm, it should be used. If it destroys the egg and sperm together after they met, then it should be banned.

I am against public funded sex education because some of what they teach is not acceptable to me. They may teach about birth control that can kill the baby. They may encourage abortion as a choice a pregnant woman can have. They don't teach abstinance until marriage. But most of all, this issue is for the parents to teach to their children, not the schools. I have always felt that schools should keep to teaching academics only. This is another example of where the gov. takes on the responsibility of the people to do what is expected of them. If the parents knew that their children were not going to learn about sex in school, they would then have to be the ones to teach them about it. But because they think they'll just learn about it in school, they don't ever bring the subject up with them. The government, once again, enabling parents to not be responsible for their own childs sex education. Just like they enable people to be dependant on them for many other things in life that they should take care of themselves.

An appendix is alive as is a tumor, however neither of them are capable of existing independently from the host, neither is the fetus less than 3 months post conception. We don't really know when the soul evolves or enters the body of the fetus. Some religions believe life begins with the first breath. I personally don't know. I do believe that there should be limits on late trimester abortions, because the fetus is viable outside the womb. The second trimester is foggy to me, I am not sure that there is or is not a conciousness at that time. With modern technology some babies who have delivered in the 6th and even 5th month can survive.

This is a very very complicated issue. I envy those who are so clear in their beliefs of right and wrong on this subject, but I am not so clear. As a thinking person, I see too many sides for this to be a really clear cut issue.

Bith control or contraception doesn't kill a baby. That is abortion whether it is chemically induced or surgical.

If we don't pay for birth control and sex education, we pay for the rearing of children with inadequate support systems and we pay through the prison systems. It is all a part of a circle of defeatism.

Corliss

[BJean 16]

patty: "I believe that all men who rape children should not be allowed the priviledge to have sex ever again. They should be surgically castrated after they do their time. No exceptions. If our laws were harder on these criminals, there would be less of them."

Ok and then your next change in the law, following your logic, would be to cut off the hand of a person who writes a hot check.

As someone noted above, capital punishment is not a very effective deterrent to murder. A person in a rage or with a gun in his hand is not usually pondering whether they will be caught, convicted and sentence to death. They're in the moment. A rapist isn't thinking about the consequences of his actions, he's mentally deranged and acting out based on a compulsion.

People must understand that misfits in society need to be treated for whatever problem they need to get resolved. Only until you learn whether they are not able to be helped, do you lock them up and throw away the key. Unless your answer is to just kill everybody who commits murder or rape, simply throwing them in jail only makes them worse. And our jails are already going to be over crowded with all those women who have gotten an abortion, eh?

__________________

[BJean 16]

Corliss you are right on. The best way to prevent unwanted pregnancies is to provide comprehensive sex education to young people and make birth control readily available to them.

[rodriguezequal 3]

Only she can live with the consequences of her choice.

And live with them she will. Most women, with the exception of a few, live with horrible guilt feelings over their choice of abortion. They know deep down inside, for God gives all mankind a conscience, that what they did was wrong. They will deny what their conscience is telling them because they don't want to admit their wrongdoing and their need for repentance before a Holy God. It is a sad thing to have to live with that burden. But, it isn't necessary to carry it. Our Creator is a very forgiving God. He loves all of us and forgives us when we make wrong choices. All we need do is ask him to.

I don't think you are in the position to state that most women live with horrible guilt! You cannot speak for other people no matter how it helps your arguement. I have met many many women who do not regret thier choice. I have however met a lot of women who regret giving their child up for adoption...

[Carrie_C 9]

I am not against any birth control that does not destroy the baby. Once the sperm meets the egg, it becomes a life. If there is a birth control that stops the egg from meeting the sperm, it should be used. If it destroys the egg and sperm together after they met, then it should be banned.

I am against public funded sex education because some of what they teach is not acceptable to me. They may teach about birth control that can kill the baby. They may encourage abortion as a choice a pregnant woman can have. They don't teach abstinance until marriage. But most of all, this issue is for the parents to teach to their children, not the schools. I have always felt that schools should keep to teaching academics only. This is another example of where the gov. takes on the responsibility of the people to do what is expected of them. If the parents knew that their children were not going to learn about sex in school, they would then have to be the ones to teach them about it. But because they think they'll just learn about it in school, they don't ever bring the subject up with them. The government, once again, enabling parents to not be responsible for their own childs sex education. Just like they enable people to be dependant on them for many other things in life that they should take care of themselves.

Birth control that you are talking about banning is very reliable. If hormonal birth control were banned, there would be a lot more unplanned pregnancies because nonhormonal birth control is not very reliable at all. This would only increase the abortion rate.

Not all parents talk about sex with their children, no matter if there is sex education in school or not. And teaching abstinence until marriage does not work. How many of us can actually say we waited until we were married to have sex?!

[pattygreen 5]

I don't think you are in the position to state that most women live with horrible guilt! You cannot speak for other people no matter how it helps your arguement. I have met many many women who do not regret thier choice. I have however met a lot of women who regret giving their child up for adoption...

I believe that I am in a position to state what I think and know about women who have had abortions because I have heard testimony after testimony from women who have had them and are regretting it and feeling guilty about it. Some right away and others down the road after the fact. I also have a niece who had an abortion at age 18 and is very remorseful over it. My best friend had on when she was younger and wishes she could go back and change her decision. Also, my sister-in-law, who can never have children now, had 3 of them in the early stages of her relationship with my brother-in-law. Then she found out, when she was ready to have them, that she couldn't now for whatever reason. She regrets aborting the 3 that God gave her, cause now she is childless. My own mother gaot pregnant when my youngest brother was 13, and she had an abortion. She, too, regrets it and feels guilt over it still, and that was 30 years ago. So, I believe that I can speak for the many, many people that I know who have had abortions.

[Carrie_C 9]

You actually know that many people who have had abortions?

[pattygreen 5]

{QUOTE] An appendix is alive as is a tumor, however neither of them are capable of existing independently from the host, neither is the fetus less than 3 months post conception.

Neither is a 2 month old baby that lies on a bed capable of existing independantly without it's mom. (the host) Doesn't mean we have a right to kill him.

[rodriguezequal 3]

I couldn't imagine any of your family members or friends telling you that they don't regret it! Just because you sit in a circle of pro lifers and say hey do you regret your abortion doesn't mean you can speak for all women! What do you think they're going to say if they're pro lifers now? Duh! Come on. Just because you talked to 6 women you know and read/heard some testimony from some now pro lifers doesn't mean you can speak for all or even most women!

[rodriguezequal 3]

{QUOTE] An appendix is alive as is a tumor, however neither of them are capable of existing independently from the host, neither is the fetus less than 3 months post conception.

Neither is a 2 month old baby that lies on a bed capable of existing independantly without it's mom. (the host) Doesn't mean we have a right to kill him.

Wrong. The 2 month old doesn't need the host! The 2 month old can survive with anyone taking care of it! The fetus/embryo needs the host

[pattygreen 5]

Weren't the two men who died on either side of Jesus theives? Were they murderers?

As far as whether or not God calls for capital punishment I think it should be left up to Him. I am not saying that I oppose it on an emotional level because I don't however if you go by Christ's admonition in the story of the woman who was being stoned, then none of us are fit to cast the first stone, or push the button, or drop the trap door, or initiate execution by whatever means. The Bible is full of contradictions.

The crime rate is far lower in countries where capital punishment has been abolished. Fear based ethics are not higher ethics. This type of ethics results in the ones with the power ruling, whether it is physical strength or political power. Power does not equate goodness or separation from animals, in fact the reverse is true.

Corliss

No contradiction at all.

It is mainly through the governing authorities that God imposes the death penalty. And it is not the authorities that Jesus is representing at this time. It is only himself as the forgiving Saviour. Therefore the event is not an example of how a legal state is supposed to act. Jesus himself never put on the robes of the authority and he never walked around and sentenced people to different punishments. If he had dressed in the judge’s robe right there and then he would have had to, in the name of justice, also sentence the others to death. But to sentence sinners to death was not part of Jesus’ mission on earth.

It is not possible to use the principle "If any of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone" (v.7) within the judicial system. Since neither judge nor juror is without guilt, trials in themselves would become impossible and no sentences could be imposed. The principle is a good rule to live by, but Jesus did not intend for his words in this context to be included in the judicial system.