Planned Parenthood Plans 40 Days of Prayer (L)

[Hoovie]

Aquilla and jFrog,

How do you feel about Child Euthanasia for those gravely ill and those suffering from significant birth defects? If you are aggressively in favor of leaving the option open (like abortion), do you feel it should be legal only with parental consent or even in the absence of parental consent?

"Child euthanasia is a controversial form of non-voluntary euthanasia that is applied to children who are gravely ill or suffer from significant birth defects.
Some critics[who?] have compared child euthanasia to infanticide. Others, such as Joseph Fletcher, founder of situational ethics and a euthanasia proponent, proposed that infanticide be permitted in cases of severe birth defects. Fletcher says that unlike the sort of infanticide perpetrated by very disturbed people, in such cases child euthanasia could be considered humane; a logical and acceptable extension of abortion.[1] American bioethicist Jacob M. Appel goes one step further, arguing that pediatric euthanasia may be ethical even in the absence of parental consent.[2]

Legalization may also have the added benefit of reducing abortion (if that is a positive)

"having these options would save some families from years of emotional and financial suffering; it might also reduce the number of late abortions, "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_euthanasia

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Aquilla and jFrog,

How do you feel about Child Euthanasia for those gravely ill and those suffering from significant birth defects? If you are aggressively in favor of leaving the option open (like abortion), do you feel it should be legal only with parental consent or even in the absence of parental consent?

"Child euthanasia is a controversial form of non-voluntary euthanasia that is applied to children who are gravely ill or suffer from significant birth defects.
Some critics[who?] have compared child euthanasia to infanticide. Others, such as Joseph Fletcher, founder of situational ethics and a euthanasia proponent, proposed that infanticide be permitted in cases of severe birth defects. Fletcher says that unlike the sort of infanticide perpetrated by very disturbed people, in such cases child euthanasia could be considered humane; a logical and acceptable extension of abortion.[1] American bioethicist Jacob M. Appel goes one step further, arguing that pediatric euthanasia may be ethical even in the absence of parental consent.[2]

Legalization may also have the added benefit of reducing abortion (if that is a positive)

"having these options would save some families from years of emotional and financial suffering; it might also reduce the number of late abortions, "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_euthanasia

My general principle would be opposition. Could I find exceptions if I really tried possibly...

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I never said nor implied that thigh = womb. I said that it was a euphanism for her female parts... surely you won't make me spell that out any clearer here on the forum?

You didn't ? Let's see exactly what you said:

Originally Posted by jfrog

You're husband is wrong. Even the word thigh in that passage is a euphemism for the womans privates...

Looks like you said and implied exactly that! I don't know what else this could imply....

Originally Posted by jfrog

EDIT: While that wasn't in my earlier thoughts it may very well be the case. I may retract this statement so don't fret over it too much yet...

Are you backpedaling frog?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

I don't know what translation Aquila posted here.

But let's go back to the KJV and compare translations:
Numbers 5:11-31

¶And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

12 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him,
13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner;
14 And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled:
15 Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance.
16 And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD:
17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water:
18 And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:
19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:
20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:
21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;
22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.
23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the LORD, and offer it upon the altar:
26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;
30 Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the LORD, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law.
31 Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.


to be continued....

It seems to me that this passage can only be truly interpreted when considering the below two questions...

1: What about the curse of the bitter water makes her unable to conceive seed? (vs 27,28)

2: What does the phrase "thigh to rot and belly to swell" mean? (vs 21)

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

You didn't ? Let's see exactly what you said:



Looks like you said and implied exactly that! I don't know what else this could imply....



Are you backpedaling frog?

I had no intention for privates to mean or imply womb. However, upon second inspection the phrase used in the verse may very well mean womb which was why I made my edit. So yes I am potentially backpedalling into the position that the phrase in question means womb. Once I'm there for sure I will gladly address your post with that in mind

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by jfrog

It seems to me that this passage can only be truly interpreted when considering the below two questions...

1: What about the curse of the bitter water makes her unable to conceive seed? (vs 27,28)

2: What does the phrase "thigh to rot and belly to swell" mean? (vs 21)

I think the answer to these 2 questions is that the process in question made the woman sterile. This explains both the "thigh to fall and belly to swell" phrase and also answers the question of why it mentions she will be able to conceive if innocent (as if implying that she wouldn't if guilty).

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I think the answer to these 2 questions is that the process in question made the woman sterile. This explains both the "thigh to fall and belly to swell" phrase and also answers the question of why it mentions she will be able to conceive if innocent (as if implying that she wouldn't if guilty).

If I am right and this does result in a process of sterilization then abortion is implied for some of the women who cheated would surely be pregnant and making the woman sterile while pregnant is going to have the result of destroying the unborn inside her.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by jfrog

My general principle would be opposition. Could I find exceptions if I really tried possibly...

OK, fair enough.

So general opposition, with possible exceptions... this pretty much mirrors your position on abortion.

Noble? Ethical? Not so much.

Pro-life? Nah.

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I think the answer to these 2 questions is that the process in question made the woman sterile. This explains both the "thigh to fall and belly to swell" phrase and also answers the question of why it mentions she will be able to conceive if innocent (as if implying that she wouldn't if guilty).

Question number 1 is answered right there is verse 19.
19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:

This passage just says this method was to be used if the husband became suspicious and jealous of his wife. God will reveal if the woman has committed adultery or not.

20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:
21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;
22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.

27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.

So if the woman has committed adultery, God will cause the bitter water to go into the bowels. This suggests that something will take place within her bowels that will display these signs to the priest that she is guilty of adultery.


If she is not guilty, then the bitter water will not display these signs. Simple as that.

29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;


These passages are not a justification for abortion in todays world or even back then. Not then, not now...not even remotely. It was a process used only for the law of jealousy--to prove whether or not the wife is faithful to her husband.

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by jfrog

If I am right and this does result in a process of sterilization then abortion is implied for some of the women who cheated would surely be pregnant and making the woman sterile while pregnant is going to have the result of destroying the unborn inside her.

I will give you one thing here. I would think that if a woman was with child by another man who was not her husband, it would be revealed by God through this process of the law of jealousies. Not a process that the priest would use to intentionally abort the baby. If she was guilty and IF she was with child, this most likely would destroy the unborn. And if she was not with child, it will surely destroy all her chances of ever conceiving. Women in those days looked forward to having children, even begging their husbands to "give them a child". But, to imply that this is a method the priest will do for a willful abortion as we know the term today, is not factual and grossly out of context with this passage. Lost of an unborn baby would be the result of her sin.

I would think that this would be more of a punishment to the woman. This would be an act of God, not a willful I-don't-want-this-child type of mentality that drives women today to have abortions.

Question here for you.

With the exception of enemies and war, can you find any scripture in the bible where God condoned the killing of the unborn in the womb for such reasons as women use now?

And just because you say Christian people never had funerals for miscarriages and erroneously think that they did not think the baby was real, does not mean that God does not consider even an embryo is not human.

You see, when it all boils down to the nitty-gritty, it's not about what we think, but it is all about what God thinks. It doesn't matter what our circumstances are , do we have the God-given right to snuff out a life? There are a lot of things that God leaves within our power to choose, but is taking the life of an innocent one of them?