I know it has been longer than anticipated since I have relaunched the QnA, but this had to be posted. The below video is of Melissa Harris-Perry, an extremely liberal broadcaster who has just been awarded the Maggie Award by, of all groups, Planned Parenthood, for her stance on abortion.
She poses the question, "When does life begin?" in the broadcast. Her answer (in case you were too sick vomiting to remember) "I submit the answer depends an awful lot on the feeling of the parents. A powerful feeling, but not science..."
She continues about the problem being policy makers yadda yadda yadda.
I submit the problem is not listening to your brain before you let words out of your mouth...or letting people speak who can't perform the task adequately for themselves.
So ... the parents ... both?? What if the wife is content but the husband is not? What then? Should we strap the mother to the table and remove the life form??
God says, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you...(Jer 1:5)"
Does that now mean at some point He forgets? I recognize that we live in a world that doesn't acknowledge the sovereignty of God's Word. The problem is that many self-claimed Christians do not acknowledge His Word. Many don't believe in the authority of Scripture (which fathoms me). I hope Harris-Perry is not a believer ... but I hope even more that she becomes one.
I get many of the arguments from secular perspectives concerning things that are only defined within a relationship with God. But this makes no sense. So let me get this straight. Science can determine that there is no creator and can stand as the authority to call a theory (that has not been proven) a law but now cannot determine when a tangible, credible life begins in a woman. Come on!!!
It's quite simple. Life begins at conception. It's the only definition that will hold up. Remember, in case the world checked out, Ariel Castro is being charged with murder for killing an unborn baby. This is going to play out interestingly. Don't you find it somewhat intriguing that the media is quietly stepping around this. They dare not attack the mother for what she's experienced but ... they absolutely disagree in their testimony of what and when life begins concerning this charge. A fetus cannot be murdered because it is not yet considered a life. A wild dog has more rights than an unborn fetus! So Ariel did not consider it a life ... therefore by Harris-Perry's definition, no crime has been committed ... what a foolish person ... what an irresponsible position.
Life begins at conception. Let's argue the merits of destroying unborn life for whatever the reasons (beit rape, incest, health reasons, lack of propriety, laziness, refusal to accept responsibility for acts committed, etc). I will still stand that until a baby is born suicidal, we must assume their desire to live as evidenced in 100% of births ... but leave the argument on a table of facts.
That's my take anyways...
Got Questions??? Don't be confused ... LEARN STUFF
Ask your question in the question block ... see the answer on future episodes ...
AUDIO EPISODES COMING SOON!!!!