-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Kisses, we already had that. The laws we've had in place for many, many years are such that you could receive all of the healthcare you needed. You couldn't get cosmetic surgery, but if your health or life were threatened, then hospitals couldn't refuse to give you medical care. They can't charge you interest on your bills either. You can already receive as much healthcare as you need. The problem is paying for it. But if you're able to receive it, what's the problem? The only problem is debt. And that's not life-threatening. In fact it's not even house-threatening or property-threatening. You set up a payment plan (free of interest) to pay the care provider a set amount each month depending on your income. That's a very merciful system in my opinion.
This "Affordable Care Act" has little to do with making healthcare better available. Why? Because healthcare has always been available - even if you could't afford it. And let's not overlook the fact that the federal government can't lawfully force you to buy a product, so the Affordable Care Act had to be passed as a tax. Otherwise it couldn't legally be made a law. So I ask you: how does a tax make healthcare more affordable? Something fishy is going on. The way it functions is: if you don't buy a product, then the government charges you a fee. Sounds a little like the federal government is trying to force you into buying a product, right? That's illegal.
Sure, we didn't have a great system before. Sure, it had abuses and problems. But it worked. Healthcare was available. People could get it. Making healthcare more available so people don't die from a lack of healthcare was never the issue then. So what were liberals crying about?
This "Affordable Care Act" has little to do with making healthcare better available. Why? Because healthcare has always been available - even if you could't afford it. And let's not overlook the fact that the federal government can't lawfully force you to buy a product, so the Affordable Care Act had to be passed as a tax. Otherwise it couldn't legally be made a law. So I ask you: how does a tax make healthcare more affordable? Something fishy is going on. The way it functions is: if you don't buy a product, then the government charges you a fee. Sounds a little like the federal government is trying to force you into buying a product, right? That's illegal.
Sure, we didn't have a great system before. Sure, it had abuses and problems. But it worked. Healthcare was available. People could get it. Making healthcare more available so people don't die from a lack of healthcare was never the issue then. So what were liberals crying about?
I mean, don't get me wrong. I'd love to save money on my health care. But I'd feel a little guilty about forcing people to pay for the health care that I can already receive so that I could buy that pack of cigarettes or that new flat screen. It's not exactly Christ-like. But it is socialism. And it sure would be fun, just as long as my tax bracket wasn't the one that was increased.
K
As I've argued, it's NOT murder, or at least not to the same extent as murdering something else, and there are times where abortion is the more moral and lesser of two evils. Are you vegan? Do you support murdering animals? Did you know that pigs and cows are far more sentient than fetuses or zygotes and they have higher pain receptors and actual have social bonds and memories.... By comparison, it's less moral to kill an animal than it is ending the growth of a zygote.
I don't want to jump all over you today. I apologize if it's starting to seem that way. So I'll just state my beliefs on abortion (and this is fast getting off the track of this thread, I know):
A zygote may not be a person, because the word person carries with it cultural implications. And a zygote/fetus is not the mother's body either. In fact the zygote/fetus has to be protected from the mother's immune system, because the mother's body recognizes it as a foreign creature growing inside the mother. Is this creature a chicken? No. Is it a pig? No. This being - that is separate from the mother's being - is human. So the question is not one of species but of maturity. It is a creature. It is a human. It is a human being that is in the process of maturing (much like a baby; much like a child). And killing it - whether or not you could define it as murder - could be literally defined as killing a human being. And that's why I will never be pro-choice except in the case of saving the mother's life. If you're going to kill a human being, you better have a really good reason to do so. And saving the life of another human being is the only morally satisfying reason for me.
A zygote may not be a person, because the word person carries with it cultural implications. And a zygote/fetus is not the mother's body either. In fact the zygote/fetus has to be protected from the mother's immune system, because the mother's body recognizes it as a foreign creature growing inside the mother. Is this creature a chicken? No. Is it a pig? No. This being - that is separate from the mother's being - is human. So the question is not one of species but of maturity. It is a creature. It is a human. It is a human being that is in the process of maturing (much like a baby; much like a child). And killing it - whether or not you could define it as murder - could be literally defined as killing a human being. And that's why I will never be pro-choice except in the case of saving the mother's life. If you're going to kill a human being, you better have a really good reason to do so. And saving the life of another human being is the only morally satisfying reason for me.
K
Hope you didn't think I was jumping all over you either. It's human gene material, yes. It will turn into a fully developed human if allowed to continue growing. But it doesn't have a heart beat, a brain, or anything...(depending on the week of abortion) it's not sentient. Since it's not sentient, and pigs are, at this stage, if you were to kill anything, the zygote would be more moral to kill than the pig. (I personally don't like the idea of killing anything, unless absolutely necessary or for survival, etc...) So, comparing the stages, pigs have more feelings, can feel pain and emotion, they are smarter than dogs, they can learn, they can suffer. A zygote can't do any of that. I can't see that as a "murder" any more than it's murder to drive your car and you hit a bug and it splats on your windshield.
Now, I think it's irresponsible for women to just go and use abortion as a sort of birth control technique. There are far better ways to avoid getting pregnant and other methods of contraception. But, I won't fault them for getting an abortion either. This planet is FAR too over populated and it's getting dangerous. I'll still think shes irresponsible, but she is the one in control, and if she decides to get an abortion, the earlier the better.
I'm not sure if you ever responded the other day to my moral scenario where you can tell throughout the pregnancy (and this hypothetical situation is a case where the parents actually really want to keep the kid, let's presume) so you can tell that the kid is missing something important and it will absolutely die and suffer in a matter of minutes or hours post birth. In this sad and horrible circumstance, even the parents that REALLY wanted to keep their baby....they should abort. It is irresponsible to keep it with these circumstances. All they are doing is causing harm to the baby and themselves. The faster they can end this pregnancy and move on with their lives and try again to have a baby, the better. No need to put themselves through this horrible situation, nor the baby.
Now, I think it's irresponsible for women to just go and use abortion as a sort of birth control technique. There are far better ways to avoid getting pregnant and other methods of contraception. But, I won't fault them for getting an abortion either. This planet is FAR too over populated and it's getting dangerous. I'll still think shes irresponsible, but she is the one in control, and if she decides to get an abortion, the earlier the better.
I'm not sure if you ever responded the other day to my moral scenario where you can tell throughout the pregnancy (and this hypothetical situation is a case where the parents actually really want to keep the kid, let's presume) so you can tell that the kid is missing something important and it will absolutely die and suffer in a matter of minutes or hours post birth. In this sad and horrible circumstance, even the parents that REALLY wanted to keep their baby....they should abort. It is irresponsible to keep it with these circumstances. All they are doing is causing harm to the baby and themselves. The faster they can end this pregnancy and move on with their lives and try again to have a baby, the better. No need to put themselves through this horrible situation, nor the baby.
K
I care about all life. I go out of my way not to even step on insects. It is because I care that I support abortion, especially in certain circumstances. I even made the comparison with zygotes and full grown pigs with memories, emotions, and pain receptors. They are more sentient than the zygote or the fetus in comparison. And I'm working hard to become a full vegan because of the fact that I care about other lives, not just my own. I wouldn't care about being vegan if I just cared about me.
S
Kisses1990, the reason that human abortion is evil is nothing to do with sentience. As a Christian you should realise that, really. The reason that human abortion is evil is because every human being is created in the image and likeness of God, and each human being has an immortal soul. Animals are not created in the image and likeness of God, not do they have immortal souls. A human being is a human being when they are 100 years old, 20 years old, 6 months old, or two days old.
"For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb...
Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be."
Nor is level of pain experienced by the victim a measure of morality. I can put someone under anaesthetic and kill them, and they will feel nothing. That doesn't make it ok. Nor does the amount of consciousness equal value of life. A sleeping person does not have less value than an awake pig. I know none of this will change your mind, but it needs to be said.
"For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb...
Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be."
Nor is level of pain experienced by the victim a measure of morality. I can put someone under anaesthetic and kill them, and they will feel nothing. That doesn't make it ok. Nor does the amount of consciousness equal value of life. A sleeping person does not have less value than an awake pig. I know none of this will change your mind, but it needs to be said.
You see, I might be more inclined to agree with you if I were an atheist. But it's the killing of a human being that I can't quite wrap my head around. And even some atheists will agree with that logic as the Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League demonstrates. I'm sure that a zygote would make a pretty tiny splat on my car's windshield. A fetus would make a little bigger one. A baby a really big one. But what's in question is not the size of the human being but the nature of it. God has made humans in his image. And I think it's God's love and respect for humanity - his special creation - that our actions should align with.
you don't have to believe in "unrestricted murdering of babies" to think that the US, as a secular country, is better off allowing abortion in a clinical setting than outlawing it altogether, so that when it takes place - because it will take place regardless of law - it is done in the safest conditions possible.
just because the law doesn't condemn someone for having an abortion, you are not compelled to have one yourself.
it's been mentioned already that there has been no shortage of republican congressmen, judges and presidents elected or appointed since Roe V. Wade, many of them elected solely on the basis of what they care to publicly state about abortion -- and yet nothing has changed. the ruling is not overturned. a Republican president is not going to overturn Roe v. Wade. voting on that issue alone is worthless at best, and falling prey to deception at worst.
and Trump? Trump is pro-abortion too. he's on record. so if abortion is the only thing you care about, you're a hypocrite to support Trump.
tax dollars belong to the whole nation.
are you against public schools? police? firemen? free healthcare for veterans? public roads? 911 service? national parks?
all these things are paid for - and free for you to benefit from - by "other people's money"
i'm going to assume you're not a hypocrite, and let you know how appalling it is to learn that you are against police! and assume that you think that only people who can afford private schools should be allowed to learn how to read and write! wow! you're nuts, man!
are you against public schools? police? firemen? free healthcare for veterans? public roads? 911 service? national parks?
all these things are paid for - and free for you to benefit from - by "other people's money"
i'm going to assume you're not a hypocrite, and let you know how appalling it is to learn that you are against police! and assume that you think that only people who can afford private schools should be allowed to learn how to read and write! wow! you're nuts, man!