This week for the Christian Views Symposium (sponsored by Cross Blogging, the letter "A", and the number , Lennie asks quite a question.

Now, I'm going to provide my answer to this one. However, the more I see, read, and talk to people, the more I realize that most people are completely locked into one point of view on this issue and NOTHING will change their view.

Ok, that's fine. If you've already got a position, and you're not interested in changing your position, it's a (somewhat) free country. If your position is opposite mine, please don't take this time to rant and rave and tell me how wrong I am. Count me in the camp of having made my mind up and you're not going to change it.

This issue is quite a sensitive one, and by answering the question, I'm probably going to lose some readers. Well, if that's the case, then that's the case. Blogs are about opinions, so I'm giving mine. I might regret posting this, but what they heck, right?

Ok, on to the question (with lots of context about it here):

1. If a fetus (baby) is incapable of living outside the womb, do you believe that it is okay to have the choice to abort it? Please explain.

2. If your answer was noÂ… is there ever a time when the choice to abort is okay? Please explain.

That's not my job, nor your job (even if you're a medical doctor reading this). I do not believe humans are supposed to determine life and death in that manner. How can anyone really know that it really is incapable of living outside the womb?

I have seen and experienced death and abortions up close and personal. I have had close friends who have been faced with this exact decision. I have a couple of very close friends who had a baby that was put on life support as soon as it was born. And I have killed other men.

It is indeed somewhat true when those who say if you haven't experienced it, you do not really know how you will react. I honestly believe that when the creator decides that he wants a life, he's taking it.

I do not know what it could be like as a doctor, who supposedly agrees to do all he can to save life, to decide to kill life. It absolutely baffles me. I cannot imagine sitting in an office and telling someone, "Gee, maam, I think you should let me kill this baby of yours."

As for question #2, I certainly cannot think of any time.

The classic line that the liberals hold strong faith to is the "for the health of the mother."

Now this evokes images of a woman being killed by her baby in a violent manner. Of course, the liberals typically interpret "health of the mother" to be physical, emotional, and financial -- so literally if a woman could not financially "afford" a baby, to many of those who use this line, that's a valid reason.

There are so many couples who want children who cannot have them -- if one person cannot afford or desires a child, why kill it when it could bring so much joy to another?

Incest? Who are you to judge what one's "quality of life" will be?

Rape? That's the only case where there might be some argument and you might be able to convince me.

I am in the camp that believes life begin at conception. If you don't want to have children or even worry about abortions, why not try not having sex until marriage? Just a thought.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:15 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 620 words, total size 3 kb.