XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion, us.issues.abortion   
   From: junegill@btinternet.com   
      
   "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   news:7943568.0402290301.3643086e@posting.google.com...   
   > "junegill"  wrote in message   
   news:...   
      
   [snip]   
      
   > > 1  Do you consider that the blobs on tampons, which every sexually   
   active   
   > > woman finds once in a while, are children?   
   > >   
   > Well, I do not think it would be possible to explain to adulterous   
   > people what a child is.  There is no reason to try that I can see.   
   > People who commit adultery are going to have problems that they would   
   > not have if they lived moral lives.   
      
   Are you insinuating that I have committed adultery?  That is a very serious   
   allegation about a woman who has been married as long as I have.  Would you   
   have the nerve to say that in person to my husband?   
      
   The example you give is not   
   > relevant because it does not relate to the deliberate killing of   
   > children by abortion.   
      
   Of course it's relevant - they are the same things that have been   
   spontaneously aborted as those that are aborted by human intervention, or   
   are they only children when it suits your agenda, so that a full-term   
   stillborn is not a child?  Now, since you claim to be the only one who knows   
   what is and isn't a child, answer the question.  Are those blobs children?   
      
   > > 2  You're very fond of quoting the Bible: have you never read Exodus   
   > > 21:22-25?  It seems that God does not take such a dim view of foetuses   
   dying   
   > > ... just a paltry fine as a penalty.   
   > >   
   > The law was given to protect the life of the person who strove with   
   > the husband of the wife who had a miscarriage because of their fight.   
      
   So obviously the offender's life was more important than that of the foetus,   
   right?  Face it - that's the only reference in the Bible to miscarriage, and   
   it clearly shows that the death of a foetus wasn't considered to be a big   
   deal.   
      
   > Otherwise, the husband would probably kill that person.  There were   
   > also cities to which a person who killed someone by accident could   
   > flee until the accidental killing could be resolved in a court.   
   > People back then often responded by taking the life of whoever had   
   > offended them.   
      
   But this was after the commandment to not murder, so they clearly didn't   
   think that anyone causing the death of a foetus, ie abortion, was a serious   
   crime.   
      
   > > 3  If Jesus were around today, do you think He'd be doing what you're   
   doing   
   > > to try to stop abortions?  I think He'd be much more likely to persuade   
   a   
   > > woman to carry to term by supporting her financially until such time as   
   she   
   > > could support herself and her child, so it makes one wonder why all   
   > > Christians aren't doing just that.  Think about it: in a population of   
   about   
   > > 280 million, around 86% claim to be Christian, which is about 240   
   million.   
   > > You'd think that 240 million would easily be able to financially support   
   > > just one million women and their children per year for a few years,   
   wouldn't   
   > > you?  That would really cut down on the number of abortions.   
   >   
   > Well, I made the offer of taking care of any child you pro-abortion   
   > people decide to let live.  So far, the number of children you have   
   > decided to let live instead of killing by abortion seems to be zero.   
   > Robert B. Winn   
      
   I haven't decided anything - they can all live as far as I'm concerned; it   
   has nothing to do with me (nor you) if a woman decides to abort.  As to you   
   taking care of anyone's child, what makes you think that the state would   
   consider you fit to do so?  I didn't say that that's what Jesus would   
   probably do - in your shoes, He'd be more likely to sell His computer and   
   other non-necessities in order to give the money to the woman and her child.   
   Why aren't you doing that?  Have you forgotten Jesus' admonition to the rich   
   young man to sell all his possessions and give the money to the poor?  Don't   
   claim that you're not rich - compared to the poverty in third-world   
   countries, you're very rich indeed, no matter how little money you have.  It   
   seems that you're not prepared to walk the walk.   
      
   --   
   June G   
   # 364   
   http://uk.geocities.com/junegill@btopenworld.com/webpages/index.html.html   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)