Why am I Pro-Life?

[RomeoGrrl]

Hi. I know you're pro-life, but are you specifically anti-choice? The reason I ask is a story that reinforces my belief women should be allowed to make this choice, as horribly sad as it is:

An adult woman, engaged to be married, long struggling with alcoholism, gets pregnant while on birth control - i.e. she did all possible to prevent pregnancy. She drank heavily until learning at 5 weeks of the pregnancy. Doctor says profound deformation and disability are virtually certain.

[zachpmorgan]

Howdy. A few questions:

World population is increasing exponentially. What do you think is the optimal number of humans here? Do Christian Armageddon prophesies have anything to do with your answer?

Should there be a law against abortion? What's the appropriate penalty for a woman or girl having an abortion? Is it the same as the penalty for murder? Should the penalty change as the population increases exponentially?

Thanks.

[ockteby]

I can only answer for myself in the faith I have that the ages are predestined regardless of what transpires in those ages. All is a simple act of faith. Each person must chose for themselves. Only God through Jesus has all the answers, and we all being terminal will have all the answers one day.

[WCFieldsGhost]

I don't understand the point here as well. That the body is complex does not imply anything about a "pro-life" position. Our eye is not as good as that of an eagle, or as good as the Hubble space telescope. Our brain's neocortex is superior to that of other animals, but we also have a now useless tail bone, that if you fall and break it while iceskating can cause a lot of problems (there are a myriad of other design problems with us as well).

Again, (?).

[ockteby]

You are correct the human body is not always perfect, but I believe God created the Heavens and the Earth and Eagles with fantastic eyes. I do not think an Eagle will win the Nobel Price in Physics. As a believer in Pro-Life I believe life begins at conception. My video is primarily a God creation video, and the faith I have that He created it all.

Thanks for your comment on this video.

Frank

[alwerks1]

Nope!  It's 23 for the boys and girls.

[Chomuno]

In one hand I loved your sailors'song, on the other hand you are disappointing me. How can people think like that?

[Bozeman42]

This video is a faulty paraphrase of some science with religious propaganda inserted. There are in fact 46 (23 pairs) of chromosomes in humans. The apes with whom we share closest common ancestory have 48. We lost 2 when one of our pairs fused with another pair.

Speaking of unbreakable species is nonsense. So is speaking of skill in creation of humans. Your sermon writer doesn't know his science, or he denies it.

Sorry, but this is utterly unconvincing.

Be well.

[TussiesCut]

Unless I am mistaken I think the sermon Ockteby is taking his text from was in 1957. Some at that time were using 48.

46 - 48 or what ever, most people in this country believe God created Man, Monkeys and Apes regardless of the science.

[Bozeman42]

Well, 48 is wrong in any case. Most people may, but if you ask most people who study the topic you will get a different answer.

[Bozeman42]

Most people in this country don't understand the science.

[Bozeman42]

You are correct that 48 was around at that time. 46 was cutting edge.

[Amiduffer]

You should have listened patiently, instead of having a pavlovian knee-jerk reaction. This a sermon given by a Christian minister to a congregation. Not a science teacher. Kepler, in writing about his work in discovering the secrets of the solar system, used platonic solids, music, and religeon in order to get across his discovery. If only more preachers spent more time on such subjects.

[ockteby]

God Bless You, Drew

Frank

[Bozeman42]

I did listen patiently. Yes, it's a Christian minister who inserts falsehoods to promote his views. I don't like that. That is a mis-use of science. Unbreakable species? That is a lie. Also: Kepler's use of platonic solids and music... was nonsense. It was wrong. He was trying to impose his aesthetic views onto the facts and he failed. Kepler's math was right, but his solids, music, and religion weren't part of his lasting contribution to understanding.

[Amiduffer]

So, in other words, you haven't read anything that Kepler actually wrote. Shame on you. You must be an Aristotelian.

[Bozeman42]

Please, refer me to something that remains of his solids in our understanding of the solar system.

[Amiduffer]

His use of nested solids to describe the ratio of the distances between each of the planets was far superior (and quite poetic) to any of the, then existing views of Brahe, Copernicus, and Ptolemy, as long as he remained within the bounds of perfectly circular orbits.

[Bozeman42]

Saying that the solids are wrong does not equal earth centric thinking. Nice zing, but no substance.