OK, I Am Confused. Do Mormons Believe In The Trinity?

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

You do realize, do you not, that the position of the LDS church in this matter is one of prayerful thought: rape is not an automatic reason for abortion, but a reason for humble prayer and study, and a judgment according to the individual case. So is that of the health/life of the mother a matter of calm, prayerful study.

Abortion IS the taking of a human life. We are quite aware of that. However, you present things a little bit ‘off…’ when y’all equate the taking of the life of a child in order to save that of the parent with abortion.

For one thing, it’s not like that. Here’s a situation that is more akin to the real issue: one that I actually read about. Two people were trapped in the rubble of a fallen building. One of them is actually holding up the beam that is allowing the other to breathe. The rescuers show up and discover that the only one that CAN be saved is the one holding the beam; the other cannot be saved at all. the one holding the beam will soon tire or die, and when that happens, the other will be crushed. The other cannot live either way; he cannot be reached, and cannot be freed. The only choice is to save the one and allow the other to die, or to lose both.

So the choice is made, and one life is spared. Is that person guilty of murder because he did not die with the other?

In the case of abortion because of imminent danger to the mother, that’s the situation; if the mother dies, so does the baby. If the pregnancy is not aborted, the mother will die. Either way, the baby will die. This happens rarely, but it does happen.

If it is far enough along in the pregnancy so that the baby has the slimmest chance of surviving outside of the womb, then of course all efforts should be made to save the child–but a child still in the womb of a dead mother is…also dead.

These choices, tragic as they are, are made often enough that it is a real issue. Abortion for frivolous issues is a grave sin. Abortion in an issue such as the above? A grave tragedy that will haunt everyone who has to deal with it, just as the death of any child would.

And with today’s medical advances we hear of case more often that those premature births of to 5 months are living. and healthy so even that case is became more and more unacceptable.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Diana, the Catholic position is that what is morally correct does not change to fit the circumstances. An immoral act does not become moral because the circumstances are difficult.

In the case of knowing one is going to die, you still try to save BOTH. The sin is to intentionally take a life. No one in your scenario pulled out a gun and shot anyone in order to save someone.

 

[RebeccaJ]

They beleived in the Trinity of the Bible, as we do. They did not believe in the Trinity as you understand it.

zerinus

The pseudo-trinity of mormonism.

 

[sweetnay]

You are talking about what is known as ‘late term,’ or “partial birth” abortions. This is not acceptable to the church. Even those who might accept abortion in the early weeks do not approve of partial birth abortions. If my daughter could carry a rapist’s child long enough to require the dismemberment of the fetus to abort it, then she can carry it to term.

you don’t, if you are actually equating a partial birth abortion done in the last three months of pregnancy with a morning after pill, or an abortion done within the first week or so after a pregnancy resulting from rape is discovered. If a rape victim waits that long in order to have an abortion, it’s done for other reasons. I can’t think of any (other than the imminent and certain death of BOTH mother and baby) that would be sufficient.

For me, (and for the church) the requirements for an abortion are: very strict indeed; the life of the mother (not simply the health, but the LIFE) and, on an individual basis, the result of rape or incest…and in THOSE cases only after counseling and prayer about it.

the church does not, and it is incredibly dishonest of you to present our belief as if it does, approve of the sort of thing you are claiming. In the case of rape or incest the decision would be made almost immediately after the pregnancy were discovered. In the case of the life of the mother, if the child were big enough that a partial birth abortion would be required, then the child would be DELIVERED and all attempts to keep him or her alive would be made.

so for you to present as as wild eyed supporters of partial birth abortion and gleeful dismemberers of infants is not only incorrect, it is a particularly nasty bit of lying.

Um, ok. While it probably feels good and all too easy to call me a nasty,dishonest liar (shrug), the thing is–I’m not. I took the following quote from your churches official website–and it mentions nothing, absolutely nothing about what stage of pregnancy preborn murder is acceptable and when preborn murder is not(a logical fallacy to begin with) So there it is, right from your own website-is that “official” enough for you?? By the way, since the “morning after pill” only effectively kills within a couple days of conception, that really doesn’t leave much time for the “holy ghost” to give his bloody consent,soo, let’s see, if you didn’t kill the baby with the pill, then your option is abortion and you must wait until at least seven weeks to even get one of those. You see Dianiad, the preborn killers (abortionists) want to make absolutely certain they have completely killed the unborn child in utero–they are, at this point, unable to assess that before seven weeks gestation, presumably because of size. So what do you think happens to babies who are still too small for partial birth? Hmmmm? Well, their little bodies are sucked to pieces by an aspirator. A high powered vacuum. Still pretty horrific no? I’m aghast at the mental gymnastics you have to do to swallow this garbage. Truly nauseating.

So again I assert: playing bingo will get you barred from the temple-but a playful abortion will not. somethings wrong here…

…And to whomever brought up the kennedys, wasn’t Romney a hard core, pro death even pro stem cell research before his change of heart? Was the LDS callin’ him out on that?

"Abortion

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in the sanctity of human life. Therefore, the Church opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience, and counsels its members not to submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions.
The Church allows for possible exceptions for its members when:
• Pregnancy results from rape or incest, or
• A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy, or
• A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.
The Church teaches its members that even these rare exceptions do not justify abortion automatically. Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons involved have consulted with their local church leaders and feel through personal prayer that their decision is correct.
The Church has not favored or opposed legislative proposals or public demonstrations concerning abortion. "
*

 

[Irish_Kathy]

With the book of mormon it is usually with intent. Did you have a sincere wish to find out that it were true? And how did you go about doing it? Now I have read the diary of saint faustina. But it was a diary not from the early forties. She died in 1938. Now the question about this diary is: did she actually see these visions of the child and adult Jesus or were they imaginings? But I did like the diary. It showed a very spiritual young nun/mystic who actually enjoyed life when not writing such serious things in her diary.

Hi Why Me

In the first place, you’re right that I got the date of Faustina’s death wrong. But I still find it far more of a accurate spiritual text than The Book of Mormon. And yes, I do believe she actually did see the visions she clamed in her diary. Also, she went through a whole array of psycological tests, and she passed every one. Also, there may have been people who doubted her in her lifetime, but they came to believe in her after her death, much like St. Therese.

In the second place, my intent with having a copy of the Book of Mormon is similar to that of Fr. Mitch Paqua. He supposedly, in fact, has a copy of the Book of Mormon with several notes inside that discount many of the claims made about it. I would truely like to take a look at his copy for myself.

 

[Stephen168]

To Parker and others here who see no danger in LDS revelation, let me point out a major danger. The Highest act of Satanism is to kill as innocent a child as possible (Preferably in the womb). **This ritual entails Praying and receiving a so–called 'super–natural instruction to kill a child, **

You do realize, do you not, that the position of the LDS church in this matter is one of prayerful thought: rape is not an automatic reason for abortion, but a reason for humble prayer and study, and a judgment according to the individual case.

Interesting. Mormons pray for the order to kill.

 

[Stephen168]

However the Mormons Holy Ghost through President Gordon B. Hinckley in 1998 publicly announced the current position of the LDS Church on Abortion; “While we denounce it, we make allowance in such circumstances 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 serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But such instances are rare, and there is only a negligible probability of their occurring. In these circumstances those who face the question are asked to consult with their local ecclesiastical leaders and to pray in great earnestness, receiving a confirmation through prayer before proceeding.” (Exact quote from The Ensign Nov.1998 pg.71 see also The First Presidencies General Handbook of Instructions pages 10-4 & 11-4)

Abortion IS the taking of a human life. We are quite aware of that. However,….

I see the Mormon Church’s irrational thinking has now justified killing human life.

 

[Irish_Kathy]

Did I miss something. How did this discussion go from discussing the Trinity to discussing Abortion anyway? On a personal level, it saddens me that a religion that supposedly values family could, in any way, justify abortion. There are even stories of children who were born as a result of abortion and became valuable members of society.

 

[Scriptorian]

I see the Mormon Church’s irrational thinking has now justified killing human life.

Okay, how in the world is this subject even being perpetuated?

No matter what stance you may have heard on here or elsewhere, the Mormon Church does not condone, recommend, contemplate, approve of, continue, or stand by the practice of abortion. Any argument to the contrary is simply false. To say we condone the killing of innocent children is a sick and twisted perversion of the truth and I am not surprised to see that the accusation came from “Mormonpro.” Do not be sucked into his/her manipulations.

Do we advocate abortion for cases of incest, rape, and life-threatening pregnancies? No, but we tolerate it because we know that agency (or free will) is as important as life itself. We would much rather a mother choose adoption. But once a choice has been made, a person does not have the right to choose the consequences as so many in society would want you to believe. Pro-choice simply means the choice of consequences, which is against the laws of God. We are not pro-choice.

Do not accuse us of killing children. We do not. Do not accuse us of being pro-abortion. We are not. Do not accuse us of advocating abortion of any kind. We do not.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Okay, how in the world is this subject even being perpetuated?

No matter what stance you may have heard on here or elsewhere, the Mormon Church does not condone, recommend, contemplate, approve of, continue, or stand by the practice of abortion.

A mormon contemplating abortion goes to their bishop, for approval. A mormon who does not would be excommunicated. Any argument to the contrary is simply false. To say we condone the killing of innocent children is a sick and twisted perversion of the truth and I am not surprised to see that the accusation came from “Mormonpro.” Do not be sucked into his/her manipulations.

Do we advocate abortion for cases of incest, rape, and life-threatening pregnancies? No, but we tolerate it because we know that agency (or free will) is as important as life itself. We would much rather a mother choose adoption. But once a choice has been made, a person does not have the right to choose the consequences as so many in society would want you to believe. Pro-choice simply means the choice of consequences, which is against the laws of God. We are not pro-choice.

Do not accuse us of killing children. We do not. Do not accuse us of being pro-abortion. We are not. Do not accuse us of advocating abortion of any kind. We do not.

I don’t know if you realize all the contradictions you have going here in this one post.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Did I miss something. How did this discussion go from discussing the Trinity to discussing Abortion anyway? On a personal level, it saddens me that a religion that supposedly values family could, in any way, justify abortion. There are even stories of children who were born as a result of abortion and became valuable members of society.

post 749

A conversation about mormons and their witness of the holy ghost. mormonpro brought up the witness they get from their holy ghost that it is ok to have an abortion.

 

[Stephen168]

I don’t know if you realize all the contradictions you have going here in this one post.

I think Scriptorian gave a very Mormon response.

No matter what stance you may have heard on here or elsewhere, the Mormon Church does not condone, recommend, contemplate, approve of, continue, or stand by the practice of abortion.

A mormon contemplating abortion goes to their bishop, for approval. A mormon who does not would be excommunicated.

The new virtue was even included.

Do we advocate abortion for cases of incest, rape, and life-threatening pregnancies?

Did we advocate the holocaust?

No, but we tolerate it because we know that agency (or free will) is as important as life itself.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Yeah, that is what I saw. With the addition that “free will is as important as life itself”, yet, the will to live is forcefully taken. This requires the view that the unborn is not yet a life. Mormons seem to have a switch, they call the “holy ghost”, that declares the unborn a sacred life sometimes, but can switch to indicating that it is not.

 

[ParkerD]

Yeah, that is what I saw. With the addition that “free will is as important as life itself”, yet, the will to live is forcefully taken. This requires the view that the unborn is not yet a life. Mormons seem to have a switch, they call the “holy ghost”, that declares the unborn a sacred life sometimes, but can switch to indicating that it is not.

Rebecca,
If anyone said anything about the “Holy Ghost” being involved when an abortion was sanctioned, then I would say they were mistaken. What has been said is that the prospective mother is allowed to think about her situation without having the additional trauma of thinking that if she thinks she cannot handle carrying the baby to term and signing the adoption paperwork, she will bring guilt upon herself. She already is going to think God abandoned her by “allowing” the crime against her to happen. In your belief system, apparently she would have to deal with the double trauma of thinking, “I am trapped by this situation which God has let happen.”

If that prospective mother is mature enough and really does have the Holy Ghost with her in a comforting, consoling way, she will probably think that she can handle the trauma of carrying the baby. I loved the story that was shared about the mother who carried the baby and all involved are now happy with no regrets and with the feeling of God’s love. One who has been subjected to the grossly wrong crime we are talking about, is a victim, has done no wrong, and should not be made to feel that she has done wrong or has to suffer in any way for the crime. Period.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca,
If anyone said anything about the “Holy Ghost” being involved when an abortion was sanctioned, then I would say they were mistaken.

“Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons involved have consulted with their local church leaders and feel through personal prayer that their decision is correct.” (newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/public-issues/abortion)

What has been said is that the prospective mother is allowed to think about her situation without having the additional trauma of thinking that if she thinks she cannot handle carrying the baby to term and signing the adoption paperwork, she will bring guilt upon herself. She already is going to think God abandoned her by “allowing” the crime against her to happen. In your belief system, apparently she would have to deal with the double trauma of thinking, “I am trapped by this situation which God has let happen.”

In my belief system, one life is not greater in value to God, than the other. Both are equally deserving of being treated with dignity. In my belief system, treating human life with dignity means that you don’t intentionally take that life.

What you are proposing is that it is ok to say to a victim of sexual assault, that it is now ok to further that assault. Extend it to an unborn life. This is a double trauma.

If that prospective mother is mature enough and really does have the Holy Ghost with her in a comforting, consoling way, she will probably think that she can handle the trauma of carrying the baby. I loved the story that was shared about the mother who carried the baby and all involved are now happy with no regrets and with the feeling of God’s love. One who has been subjected to the grossly wrong crime we are talking about, is a victim, has done no wrong, and should not be made to feel that she has done wrong or has to suffer in any way for the crime. Period.

Are you then not making a victim, an unholy sacrifice, of the unborn?

Are you not proposing that the unborn life has become something less. Something deserving of death?
**
Is it ok to take a life in order to not suffer?**

 

[ParkerD]

“Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons involved have consulted with their local church leaders and feel through personal prayer that their decision is correct.” (newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/public-issues/abortion)

In my belief system, one life is not greater in value to God, than the other.

Are you then not making a victim, an unholy sacrifice, of the unborn?

That last sentence was composed of your words, not mine. You read what I had to say. God does not sanction either rape or incest, ever. A conception in those cases was allowed by God, but was not sanctioned by God. Not one whit.

To use the word sacrifice, a religious word, to describe that particular awful circumstance which has happened in our society because people have fallen prey to the father of all lies, shows the heart of the person using the word, and shows no regard for true sacrifice either Biblically or the new sacrifice of a “broken heart and a contrite spirit.”

 

[RebeccaJ]

That last sentence was composed of your words, not mine. You read what I had to say. God does not sanction either rape or incest, ever. A conception in those cases was allowed by God, but was not sanctioned by God. Not one whit.

To use the word sacrifice, a religious word, to describe that particular awful circumstance which has happened in our society because people have fallen prey to the father of all lies, shows the heart of the person using the word, and shows no regard for true sacrifice either Biblically or the new sacrifice of a “broken heart and a contrite spirit.”

You said:

"…should not be made to feel that she has done wrong or has to suffer in any way for the crime. Period. "

You are making abortion into a sacrifice, in order to remove suffering. Because you think God would want it that way. Thus, it is unholy because I don’t believe you can prove that God asks us to kill the unborn, for any reason.

So yes, it is offensive. When is your church going to stop approving it?

You didn’t answer my question.
**
Is it ok to take a life in order to not suffer?**

 

[RebeccaJ]

That last sentence was composed of your words, not mine. You read what I had to say. God does not sanction either rape or incest, ever. A conception in those cases was allowed by God, but was not sanctioned by God. Not one whit.

God has never sanctioned murder.

This line of thinking, I hope you realize, is saying that the child itself is unholy, rather than the act of killing it.

 

[Stephen168]

That last sentence was composed of your words, not mine. You read what I had to say. God does not sanction either rape or incest, ever. A conception in those cases was allowed by God, but was not sanctioned by God. Not one whit.

To use the word sacrifice, a religious word, to describe that particular awful circumstance which has happened in our society because people have fallen prey to the father of all lies, shows the heart of the person using the word, and shows no regard for true sacrifice either Biblically or the new sacrifice of a “broken heart and a contrite spirit.”

I think the point Mormonpro was making was that the Mormon Church has fallen prey to the father of all lies in regard to abortion. If human life can be killed because it was conceived out of rape or incest, then by what reason could you ever tell a woman it was not OK to kill?

 

[ParkerD]

You said:

"…should not be made to feel that she has done wrong or has to suffer in any way for the crime. Period. "

You are making abortion into a sacrifice NO, in order to remove suffering THAT WAS CAUSED BY CRIMINAL ACTION. Because you think God would want it that way. NO–BECAUSE GOD DID NOT SANCTION THE CRIMINAL ACTION WHICH HE ALLOWED BECAUSE HE ALLOWS HUMANKIND THEIR AGENCY. Thus, it is unholy FOR YOU because I don’t believe you can prove that God asks us to kill the unborn, for any reason. GOD ALLOWS AGENCY, PERIOD. HE OF COURSE DOES NOT ASK US TO KILL THE UNBORN.

So yes, it is offensive TO YOU. When is your church going to stop approving it? THE LDS CHURCH DOES NOT APPROVE IT–IT ALLOWS IT WITHOUT CAUSING GUILT FEELINGS FOR THE VICTIM OF THE CRIME.

You didn’t answer my question.
**
Is it ok to take a life in order to not suffer?**

I personally don’t think that it is, but I have never been such a victim–have you? I absolutely will not judge the person whom you have so casually judged. I have not been in their shoes, nor have my children nor anyone I know personally.

God created this world and the plan of salvation knowing full well that humankind were capable of horrible acts. God wants us to love others including the unborn, but He does not force us to do so nor does He force absolutely innocent victims of criminal acts to feel guilty for the crime committed against them. Period. His perfect plan is for every single one of His spirit children.

Every child who dies goes to the celestial kingdom–heaven–without question. IF the unborn in the first trimester had the spirit within their body, then I would suppose that that child has gone to the celestial kingdom. If the spirit had not yet entered into that body, then God’s plan for His spirit child has not been interrupted at all, BECAUSE HE DID NOT SANCTION THE CONCEPTION OF THAT UNBORN CHILD. HE DID NOT SANCTION THE COMMITTING OF THE CRIME.