T
triumphguy
Guest
I’m sure if killing mothers-in-law was allowed there would be thousands of forums devoted to this cheery cause too!
No I’m not serious: I’m being satirical in order to make a point!!!
- Status
No I’m not serious: I’m being satirical in order to make a point!!!
C
chipeto
Guest
Please do spell out for us the argument that you are making.
I think you would benefit from reading Psalm 137 in its entirety. Only this time, instead of hunting for nuggets to support your position, anything that can possibly be interpreted in a way that will support the contempt you feel, try to see it with a sympathetic eye. Sit, with the author, by the waters of Babylon and eat the bread of sorrow with him. Put yourself in the shoes of that very imperfect man and feel his grief and rage and pain. Then you will have actually read it, instead of merely worshipping it and finding within each unsavory line an edict from God.
F
ForGood
Guest
Just when I think I’ve seen it all. I agree, talk to her in a couple of years when the gravity of what she has done sinks in. It’s already there, she just doesn’t realize it yet.
T
triumphguy
Guest
In other contexts you would be asking us not to take the bible literally, but here you do!
Here is what Jerome’s Biblical commentary says:
So it’s not really an affirmation that infanticide is OK is it.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
What studies? Source, please.
N
newprestonpete
Guest
"Most ethical and humane for ALL parties involved"
I’m sure this wasn’t the most ethical & Humane solution for the unborn baby.
I’m sure this wasn’t the most ethical & Humane solution for the unborn baby.
H
Hokomai
Guest
Hmmm. How did you know what my position was? In fact it is this: those who quote the Bible in an attempt to describe their belief in an all-powerful, all-loving God, who cares for each f us from the moment of conception have some problems. Some Bible passages give this impression. Others (Ps. 137), or the account of the destruction of Jericho are diametrically opposed. Since I take believe in no god(s) I do not think of anyone’s god as ‘false’. But I do think that if your God approves of Ps. 139, then this god must not in logic be the God of 137. And yet this is what the Church teaches. I do not mind ayone believing in either of these gods. I do mind them telling me that they re the same, without convincing reconciliation. The efforts I have seen to this point do not convince me. I cannot object to you seeing that view as ‘contempt’, since that is your honest view. But I do think it is an unusual definition of ‘contempt’, which is wide enough to encompass almost any expressed disagreement.
H
Hokomai
Guest
triumphguy;9662951]
I think in context (approval of the genocide of Jericho etc, it is approval of the infanticide of the children of enemies, although I readily agree, not of all or any children.
You have me muddled up with a Christian liberal. It is like calling a BSA a Kawasaki! I think both literal and non-literal interpretations of the Bible stand or fall as interpretations on whether they interpret correctly what the writer was trying to say. In this case, I think the writer of 137 most likely really did think it would be a happy man who literally killed his enemies’ children. This is born out by Biblical support for genocide elsewhere.
.
I think in context (approval of the genocide of Jericho etc, it is approval of the infanticide of the children of enemies, although I readily agree, not of all or any children.
T
triumphguy
Guest
Oh - so Atheists want us to take the bible literally then
And I think you can blame the psalmist rather than God for the sentiment in ps 136 (ps 137 is the protestant version)
H
Hokomai
Guest
Well speaking for me alone, I rather prefer a discussion with a non-literalist as it is possible to engage on a rather more complex level. On the other hand I do find the belief of the literalist more interesting, because they have to believe such implausible things and it is always fascinating to me to see how people do this. In fact I have wondered if there are two sorts of belief: one that requires the suspension of acceptance of normal observation; and one that depends on incorporating ‘the real world’. If there are, there is no reason why a person could not have both, and flit back and forth between them. But they could still be different patterns of thinking. I did not know the psalms were numbered differently in Catholic/Protestant Bibles. I will have to find out why.Oh - so Atheists want us to take the bible literally then
J
JerBear_Meaux
Guest
She doesnt seem to be aware of all the effects the abortion would have on her as a mother,
Does any one know if she is a christian? shes not morally obligated to feel guilty about taking the life of the child she had conceived if she isnt a christian because non-christians
dont necessarily have a reason to feel guilty in regards to their actions and morality they dont know better.
should we as christians even worry about this lady who has elected to have an abortion, we have our own problems to worry about its not our job to correct people who are non-christians we are just called to the conversion of nations and the baptism of souls.
Does any one know if she is a christian? shes not morally obligated to feel guilty about taking the life of the child she had conceived if she isnt a christian because non-christians
dont necessarily have a reason to feel guilty in regards to their actions and morality they dont know better.
should we as christians even worry about this lady who has elected to have an abortion, we have our own problems to worry about its not our job to correct people who are non-christians we are just called to the conversion of nations and the baptism of souls.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
I think the guilt,regret,shame that a woman who has had an abortion experiences, extends beyond the"moral obligation" to have these feelings.It is a “human” response regardless of ones’ faith or lack therof.Abortion goes against our very nature.
J
JerBear_Meaux
Guest
i dont believe a woman can actually be beyond herself in feelings, she would have no reason to feel guilty regarding her decision if she wasnt aware of any negative consequences regarding her aborion.I think the guilt,regret,shame that a woman who has had an abortion experiences, extends beyond the"moral obligation" to have these feelings.It is a “human” response regardless of ones’ faith or lack therof.Abortion goes against our very nature.
S
SaintPatrick333
Guest
What studies would those be? A good number of women who have vigils outside abortion clinics and protest abortions are women who have had abortions at least once in their life and came to understand the horror of their choice. The pro life movement is headed by the courageous women who have learned from their horrible mistake of having an abortion, and are working, some of them tirelessly, to help other women from making the same evil choice.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
:confused…My point was religion is not the sole reason for a post abortive woman to have negative feelings re the abortion. We are hard wired as woman to intuitively nurture, that is part of our unique quality as women.While she may not recognize those negative feelings right now,sometime down the road,maybe when she first experiences the love she has for a future baby,she most certainly will have regretover her past decision. Or she could continue to stuff her feelings down for years …but they are there
J
JerBear_Meaux
Guest
is it possible for someone to be hardwired to do anything if they dont understand the reason why they do anything? im not a person that totally agrees with the idea of a person being wired to do anything whether by emotions or through the different aspects of the mind, i believe we were given the ability to weigh different aspects and come to a conclusion through morality and this allows us to draw closer to god, so i dont believe that:confused…My point was religion is not the sole reason for a post abortive woman to have negative feelings re the abortion. We are hard wired as woman to intuitively nurture, that is part of our unique quality as women.While she may not recognize those negative feelings right now,sometime down the road,maybe when she first experiences the love she has for a future baby,she most certainly will have regretover her past decision. Or she could continue to stuff her feelings down for years …but they are there
those negative feelings could have evolved outside of her emotions through her mind, and that those feelings are what causes the guilt that would lead to some one to confess.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
R
revert_jen
Guest
Real research psychologists do not take self-report data literally. All self-report data says is what people want the world to think. It is not a measure of reality or of truth, even if it is completely anonymous, which it rarely is. (I don’t mean that people’s names are published, but that the people are seen to the researchers.) In addition, two of the articles you cited were published by groups with a bias, who then complained about the bias of some researchers. Pot? Meet kettle.
In any case, none of the three articles said “Studies show that the majority of women do not regret their abortions.” The first said that there was no very good evidence that people became mentally unealthy (after 90 days or two years) after their abortions, and that they said they were happy with their decisions. The second, from the surely neutral journal Contraception
said that the best studies, according to their criteria, and given the set of studies they started with (who knows how they selected it?) did not show “negative mental health consequences.” The third, by the well-known neutral organization the APA 
rolleyes, again only speaks of mental health problems, not regret.So, if you want to say that studies don’t show that having an abortion makes you crazy, that would be supported. But two of the the studies you cited don’t mention regret, and the only way the other one can measure regret is an unreliable method (self-report).
The reason that people tend to believe the people who say they do regret the abortion is because it’s harder to imagine why someone would misrepresent themselves about that, and almost impossible (from a psychological standpoint) to understand why they would bother fooling themselves about it. But it’s quite easy to see why people would misrepresent or fool themselves into saying that they made the right decision. It’s not scientific data, I totally agree. But scientific data is not the only data that can be correct, and since it is now almost impossible for a person to make it through school as a psychologist and remain neutral on the issue of abortion, one might feel that “scientific” data on that subject is a bit suspect.
–Jen
J
JerBear_Meaux
Guest
yea sorry thats probably because it is not easy to understand. but whether or not they have the ability to feel guilty or not i guess doesnt matter because i dont think she was aware of how the abortion would affect her.
- Status