ABORTION.......

Good to hear from you, Momma Angel.

I am very excited to hear of your friend's pregnancy. Of course the one within her is alive and deserving of protection.

I know you take care of animals, so maybe you can answer this question.

An D&C abortion is performed by dismembering the unborn in the womb, slicing, hacking it in pieces, ending his existence in a slow, painful, torturous death.

What does the law in your state provide as punishment if one were to put an animal to death in a similar way? Would even a licensed veterinarian get away with calling this a "medical procedure" , or would he face the prospect of jail time ?

[I believe the D&C abortion he was speaking of was on a woman and not on animals.

I talked to my vet and he does not perform abortions on an animal. However, the the mother animal's life is at stake sometimes procedures are performed. Mostly, the animal will undergo anesthesia and then the babies will be surgically removed. He did say, however, this is rather rare, as mother nature seems to take care of this situation for most.

He also stated that sometimes, when he is spaying a female, it may be discovered that she is pregnant. Unfortunately, the anesthesia administered to the mother will have effected the babies and would not be able to survive.

I believe Real Life was speaking of if someone were to slice, hack to pieces, or end an animal's life in a slow, painful, torturous way, thereby causing its death. If I am incorrect in my assumptions, I guess I need clarification on it myself.

And euthanisia? Oh, that's one I don't like. I run a homeless cat shelter. I am a NO KILL SHELTER. I never have a cat euthanized for any other reason than it is in the best interest of the cat and then only on the advice of my vet.

I do not believe in euthanizing animals to control the pet population. I feel it is the pets' owners responsibility to have their pet spayed or neutered, but alas, a very hard thing to instill into the minds of some. Most people don't have it done because of the cost. I'd like to think that is the reason for most not being spayed/neutered. Unfortunately, a lot of pet owners are not responsible enough to do this.

And I really believe Real Life would never ever support euthanizing old people to "what? control that population?"

Thank you all for your prayers for J, D's cousin. He has been through a tough time of it. The following week after his surgery, the doctors requested J's parents to authorize them to discontinue all meds so that his heart would just stop and he would go "peacefully", in spite of his being able to communicate he was thirsty by writing a large 7 on paper. The nurse recognized that he was asking for 7-Up. We couldn't reconcile his being able to communicate and the dr's wanting to discontinue treatment at what we believed was such an early and critical point. His mother never gave them authorization.

Praise the Lord! Last week they were able to get him to a sitting position out of bed for a little while. This week they will transfer him to a facility that has a decompression chamber to help with healing his bedsores. He is paralyzed from the waste down.

His mother J and we want to thank you all for praying for J. She acknowledges that it is only because of prayer that J has done so well. She still has not been able to travel to see him. Please pray that her heart will be comforted regarding that situation. Thank you again for all your prayers.

I can hardly believe this thread is still going!!

There is too much to read it all at the moment.

Have y'all come to any conclusions/ agreements? Or is this a continued
pro-life vs pro-choice discussion?

Just wondering.....

I notice a bit about euth....real life: what did you mean by posting that email about J. ?
I'm not trying to be a jerk, I seriously want to know what you are trying to get across.

And while you are at it, MA...perhaps you can look up what the law in your state provides as punishment for doing this:


"If a man has a stubborn and unruly son who will not listen to
his father or mother, and will not obey them even though they
chastise him, his father and mother shall have him apprehended
and brought out to the elders at the gate of his home city, where
...his fellow citizens shall stone him to death." Deuteronomy 22:18ff

And while you are at it, MA...perhaps you can look up what the law in your state provides as punishment for doing this:

"If a man has a stubborn and unruly son who will not listen to
his father or mother, and will not obey them even though they
chastise him, his father and mother shall have him apprehended
and brought out to the elders at the gate of his home city, where
...his fellow citizens shall stone him to death." Deuteronomy 22:18

Frank Apisa:

Quote:

And while you are at it, MA...perhaps you can look up what the law in your state provides as punishment for doing this:

"If a man has a stubborn and unruly son who will not listen to
his father or mother, and will not obey them even though they
chastise him, his father and mother shall have him apprehended
and brought out to the elders at the gate of his home city, where
...his fellow citizens shall stone him to death." Deuteronomy 22:18

Now Frank, I think we all know the kind of punishment would be prescribed for someone doing this in today's times. So, I am afraid I am going to have to decline here.

Perhaps Real Life can explain it better to you, but I think even he has tried before.

Frank, can I ask why you left this part out of that reference?

"....They shall say to the elders, This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard"

profligate: 1 : completely given up to dissipation and licentiousness

And while you are at it, MA...perhaps you can look up what the law in your state provides as punishment for doing this:

"If a man has a stubborn and unruly son who will not listen to
his father or mother, and will not obey them even though they
chastise him, his father and mother shall have him apprehended
and brought out to the elders at the gate of his home city, where they shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard" and his fellow citizens shall stone him to death." Deuteronomy 22:18

Now Frank, I think we all know the kind of punishment would be prescribed for someone doing this in today's times. So, I am afraid I am going to have to decline here.

Let's admit it, people, hardcore fundamentalists and progressives will never agree on much of anything. This thread can go on for another ten years without one mind being changed. Our best hope is that the fundamentalists do not get to change the laws protecting the rest of us.

My point was that pointing out that punishments accrue is not a reasonable argument in this discussion.

simply is not needed. Whenever I quote the passage, I use the ellipsis (...) to indicate that I have left something unimportant out.

Are you saying that it does make sense to have your child stoned to death if besides being stubborn, rebellious, and unwilling to obey his father...he is also a carouser and a drunkard?

In any case, so that we do not have even a suggestion of something nefarious here, I will revise my question with the ellipsis removed and the wording inserted:

Well, everything else being equal, if the law followed the Bible, considering today's times, there would be a related punishment. A stubborn, rebellious, drunkard, profligate, disobeying son would be given a lethal injection or the electric chair, according to what is used in any particular state.

Momma- Do you think that the above is an appropriate punishment, considering that we live in modern times?

Let's admit it, people, hardcore fundamentalists and progressives will never agree on much of anything. This thread can go on for another ten years without one mind being changed. Our best hope is that the fundamentalists do not get to change the laws protecting the rest of us.

edgarblythe wrote:

Let's admit it, people, hardcore fundamentalists and progressives will never agree on much of anything. This thread can go on for another ten years without one mind being changed. Our best hope is that the fundamentalists do not get to change the laws protecting the rest of us.

The law does not protect the 30 million who are dead thru abortion.

Do you think that the unborn that have been sliced and hacked to pieces in D&C abortions or chemically burned to death in saline abortions or have had their skull punctured and the brains vacuumed out as their arms and legs flailed just outside the mother's body in a partial birth abortion would agree that "progressive" is an accurate label for what you believe?

Careful, your blood pressure is probably at a dangerous level right now

Intrepid wrote:

Careful, your blood pressure is probably at a dangerous level right now

Nope....BP is fine...I'm a strapping young 25 year old.