Should a couple be allowed to abort a child just because it is not the desired
gender? No. It is like asking -- Should a child be allowed to get rid of a
parent because the parent is not the child's gender?
There is absolutely nothing anyone could say that could justify this type of
abhorrent action! Just horrible.
Thanks for the clarification, rightascension.Everyone hear that? By
self-righteous moral decree, from hereon forward no one ought be granted an
abortion lest rightascension approve of it. It shall no longer be known as
"pro-choice" but rather "pro rightascension's choice".
Stalwart Sentinel,Do you then approve of gender-based abortion?
Twin Lights, It doesn't matter whether you, I, and the doctor
"approve" of the abortion per our personal moral convictions; it is a
decision for the individual/couple.
Abortion is taking an innocent life - is the motive important? Babies have a
right to life; no abortions except for incest or rape.
Abortion is wrong. There are rare exceptions, but they are not for gender
selection, convenience or any number of sad justifications for murder.
PLM/Nan BW - Both of you list "exceptions" for abortion, so in those
cases does God simply not consider the fetus to be alive? How and why does God
pick and choose? And how is it that you both "know" which specific
abortions God decides to "look the other way" on? Or, if rape/incest is
involved, is the baby no longer an "innocent life" therefore making it
worthy of termination? I'm sorry but either all abortions are
murder/taking a life, no exceptions, or none of them are. You cannot simply
drift between "murder" and "exception" based on your personal
belief that the manner of conception, etc... matters. Further, if
you're LDS, like I am, you are unfortunately mistaken to "believe"
abortion is murder.
A child is not a choice. This is tantamount to murder. Have the child and let
it out for adoption, then have another if you wish. It is appalling to think of
the trite reasons people have for doing abortions.
Stalwart is correct: This is the logical result of the "right to
choose".If a couple can abort a baby because they can't
afford it, or because it's too inconvenient, or because they "just
don't want it", then why can't they abort a baby because it's
the wrong sex?
Sounds like a hate crime to me.... What's next? We'll
have better and better technology to see what the genes before the baby is
born.Oh... This baby isn't going to be that smart or that that
athletic. Better abort. Pretty soon they'll be deciding on
made to order kids. Just get rid of the rest... :((((.
Pro-choice somehow means letting doctors making a choice of moral conscience.
Those on the political right (like the Christian Concern) find this news
abhorrent for all the wrong reasons. Abortion of female fetuses ought not be
wrong because of some archaic, sexist, white-knight protection of the female
gender. It's wrong simply because abortion is wrong.What's interesting here is the news' potential impact on the
political left. What's going to happen when a woman's "right to
choose" (which the left has worked so hard to pedestalize) so obviously and
disparately impacts other females? Technology has finally caught up to
abortion. It now reveals its irony: A woman's "right to choose"
means passing along that same right to fewer future women. Priceless!
LOGIT: You took the words right out of my comment. Abortion has already
lessened the communityof Liberals, why not women. And if you don't
believe it's true, just look at China, where the more wealth go into
the back country of China to buy girls to be raised for their son's future wives.
In parts of British Columbia, Canada, while pregnant women do have ultrasounds
during their pregnancies as per the general practice, they CANNOT be told the
baby's gender. There are good reasons for that. Particularly in the lower
mainland of B.C., there is a very large east Indian population. It is common
knowledge that a male baby is prized over a female baby in the culture. Ergo,
NO ONE, no matter what race they are, are told what their baby's gender is,
because it is simply unconstitutional to take the baby's life based on
gender. Therefore, my daughter and my son had to wait until their children were
born to find out what gender they were, JUST LIKE I, AND WOMEN THE WORLD OVER
HAVE BEEN DOING FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS!!! It didn't hurt the parents one
iota. They were glad that those parameters were in place.
Stalwart Sentinel-Church doctrine is clear on the matter. No need
for debate. From True to the Faith:"Latter-day prophets have
denounced abortion, referring to the Lord’s declaration, “Thou shalt
not . . . kill, nor do anything like unto it” (D&C 59:6). Their
counsel on the matter is clear: Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints must not submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange
for an abortion. If you encourage an abortion in any way, you may be subject to
Church discipline.Church leaders have said that some exceptional
circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of
incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent
medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by
competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby
to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not
automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should
consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and
receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer."
Feminists have reached the pinnacle of hypocrisy and horror in claiming to
advance women's rights while at the same time mandating the homicide of an
unborn human for THE SOLE REASON that she is female.
1.96 - Church doctrine is clear, unfortunately not clear enough for you to
correctly comprehend. Our Church views some instances of abortion unfavorably
b/c it is viewed as an attempt to avoid consequences of a decision, not because
it is murder. 1 - D&C 59:6 has footnotes, one of them relating
to the word "like". All references, Ex. 22:19; Lev. 18:22; 1 Cor. 6:9;
1 Tim. 1:10., are referring to sexual impurity, not killing. When reading the
scripture in entirety with footnotes and punctuation, the "nor do anything
like unto it" is exclusively referencing adultery. 2 - When
describing exceptions, the phrase "such as" suggests the list is not
exhaustive. As I noted above, each scenario ought be the exclusive decision of
those involved - not for the masses to determine. 3 - As you note,
an "approved" abortion is discussed w/ ecclesiastical leaders and God
via "earnest prayer." This automatically implies that God can
"okay" an abortion. So, is God sanctioning the murder of an innocent
unborn child? That must be the case if your perspective is to remain
consistent. Please, explain your inconsistency or explain why God inspires us
to murder His innocent, unborn children.
I'm befuddled by people who find the idea of aborting a baby based on
gender abhorrent, yet, somehow they feel that simply killing a baby just because
it's a baby is somehow more acceptable. It's like the case about a
year ago where the boyfriend fed his girlfriend the day after pill. The man was
being prosecuted for murder (and rightly so) but it leaves one asking why is it
is legally ok for the mom to kill a baby without the dads permission but
it's not ok for the dad to kill his baby without the moms permission. We
live in a messed up world.
So... Aborting an unwanted baby is okay, but only if its not based on the
gender? I hope this leads them to embrace the truth that all baby killing is
@ Stalwart SentinelUnfortunately, you employ the same false
dichotomy as those you oppose. Life is more complex. Abortion can be murder, or
at least unethical, in certain circumstances but not in others.Consider three instances of a man stabbed to death. The action in question
(the stabbing) could have different levels of moral culpability. One case could
be first degree murder, another manslaughter, and another legal (and merciful)
euthanasia. The moral action is the same in each case, as is the consequence (a
man stabbed to death), yet we judge each case radically differently.A woman might have any number of legitimate reasons that excuse or mitigate an
abortion. "Gender selection" is not among them. For one thing, it is
arbitrary and serves no reasonable purpose (like preserving one's own life,
sparing a damaged fetus unnecessary pain, etc.). More severely, it is sexist and
perpetuates the oppression of women. It tampers with the human genome, placing
political ideology above random natural selection. Such reckless arrogance could
have profound repercussions for our species.I respect women's
right to choose, but all rights have limits. Abortions performed solely to
gratify and to magnify white patriarchy are outside those limits.
@ Stalwart SentinelYour last comment implies that you believe God
and murder are incompatible. Presumably, your argument goes like this:
"abortion is not murder because God sometimes approves abortion." This
is a classic example of circular logic.More seriously, God's
approval of murder (at least in Christianity) is fatal to your assumption. God
clearly endorses the murder of the wicked (1 Nephi 4; Nephi slays Laban). But he
also condones the murder of the innocent (1 Samuel 15:3, "but slay both man
and woman, infant and suckling..."). You might admonish me to
keep scripture in context, which proves my point. Moral decisions must be
considered in context. For God, sometimes murder is sinful but others times it
is not. Likewise, sometimes abortion is murder (or unethical) but other times it
is not.So with all due respect, the burden is not mine to reconcile
the mysteries and contradictions of God. If you wish to rely on God for your
moral framework, you must deal with the fact that God does approve of murder,
even of innocent children.An abortion to save a life very well may
be moral. An abortion to ensure a white, heterosexual baby boy is not.
It is obvious from certain comments that truly anything can be debated and
justified under the guise of moral relativism to rationalize away accountability
and consequence.Aborting a baby because of gender is certainly
murder in the eyes of God. That life would have been a physical vessel for one
of God's spirit children if it was not for selfish motivations. It denies
one of God's spirit children the privilege of progressing here on earth and
thwarts the heart of His plan.Then, there was the argument that
selective abortions create an all or nothing proposition. No abortion even
under the most extreme circumstances of danger to the mother is an easy decision
to make or live with afterwards. This is not just for those who esteem the
sanctity of all life. Moral relativism makes life outside the womb somehow more
tangible. For those who face such an awful decision from dire
health reasons to the mother, it may be the ultimate test of sacrifice. The
trading of one life for another is not just selectivity with what types of
abortions are "permissible". Rather, it is a whole different case than
all the other types.
Stalwart SentinelChurch leaders, like God, respect our free will as
to not create overly detailed rules concerning abortions, except to say they are
only justifiable in cases of imminent danger to the mother or situations of
rape, incest, etc. That is a minimum guideline to protect from temptations that
can lead to hasty decisions and a lifetime of regret.This is not
advocating selective abortion. Rather, free will is required to decide in
extreme cases. Such decisions should be made carefully and prayerfully
according to God’s laws and counsel.When the mother’s
life is in jeopardy, then both lives must be considered. With rape, pregnancy
resulted when free will was taken from the mother through a very grievous sin.
These situations are so personal that only direction from the Lord can provide
any certainty.The Lord has said, "For behold, it is not meet
that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the
same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no
reward.” Why then should God’s laws be spelled out so
exact that we could not exercise free will?
Other cultures have had practices of killing off female infants and this is
widely seen as barbaric. Now the left has set up a system that is
so concerned with the mother's rights that we have the same barbaric
practice in modern society. Funny how things come full circle. I will wait to
see what justifications are put forth for this inhuman behavior by the extreme
left. It will be interesting to see how they try to twist logic this time....
RE: EternalPerspective, “God’s counsel.” God is
the creator of the unborn. Psalm 139:13-16 (NLT) You made all the delicate,
inner parts of my body and knit me together in my mother’s womb. Thank you
for making me so wonderfully complex! Your workmanship is marvelous--and how
well I know it. You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion, as I
was woven together in the dark of the womb. You saw me before I was born. Every
day of my life was recorded in your book. Every moment was laid out before a
single day had passed. God has plans for the unborn. Jer 1:5
(AMP)Before I formed you in the womb I knew, and approved of you and before
you were born I separated and set you apart, consecrating you; I appointed you
as a prophet to the nations.Jeremiah is not referring to
pre-existence of man but rather the foreknowledge of God. Before He was born,
God knew He would be a prophet. God who gives life to the dead and
Calls into Being things that were not.(Romans 4:17 NIV)