JG-TC.com > Opinion > LETTER: Save innocent babies, rather than whales

TODAY'S HEADLINES

SPECIAL SECTION

ONLINE POLL

ONLINE EXTRAS

Shop Smart, Shop Local

SITE TOOLS

OTHER LINKS

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Lee Enterprises

Wednesday, February 11, 2009 9:46 PM CST
LETTER: Save innocent babies, rather than whales

KIAH WHITE, Toledo

Human life begins at conception. As soon as the sperm meets the egg there is a burst of blood. A human life, not a blob of tissue, immediately begins to form. Many believe abortion is OK, that it is just getting rid of an inconvenient problem. One of the sickest methods of abortion is partial birth abortion.

Partial birth abortion is preformed during the last trimester up to the ninth month. This procedure causes much pain to the baby, as the baby is a human being and feels pain just like any normal person.

A baby has a heart and a heartbeat from the beginning. Even in the womb a baby begins to develop a personality, their own personal fingerprints, and their own character. Babies in the womb can kick, hiccup, suck their finger, and even dream. Who are we to destroy their life and future before they even have a chance to live and take their first breath of air? As free Americans we have the constitutional rights of freedom of religion, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However we do not have the freedom to choose to end a person’s life, no matter how inconvenient that life may seem. There are no excuses and no justifications for abortion.

We are so concerned with protecting our rights, preserving endangered species, saving the environment and economy, we forget about those who don’t yet have a voice to speak out. You can make a difference, vote pro-life, and petition, write those elected into office, and if you pregnant right now you can choose not to have an abortion.

In “Horton Hears a Who,” Horton says, “A person’s a person no matter how small,” no matter how small and irrelevant a baby may seem they are a living human being. Now is the time to stand up and fight for the unborn, and keep the partial-birth abortion banned. Murder is to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously, the same definition applies to abortion. Abortion is wrong, instead of “save the whales,” its time to “save the innocent babies,” before another beating heart is stopped.

KIAH WHITE

Toledo

Add your comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Not already registered?
Then click Here.

Comment policy:

JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.

In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.

We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.

No comment may contain:

* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.

If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.

elbert wrote on Feb 12, 2009 8:14 AM:

" IAH WHITE

Thank you for your letter and the statement of your position on abortion. Based on your statement, I hope that you will join others in supporting making available contraception to all who want it so that abortions will not have to occur. And, in those cases where the someone wants to choose abortion because, for whatever reason, they do not want to carry the fetus to term, I hope that you and all those who oppose abortion will step in and offer to adopt the child so that the child will not be brought up in a home where the child is unwanted and therefore subject to child abuse. Afterall, those opposed to abortion should not only be concerned about whether the child is born, but rather should be concerned about their whole life.

Thank you for your opinion "

Locke wrote on Feb 12, 2009 1:29 PM:

" Human life begins at conception? Oh really? When then, did the Almighty Himself, made Adam's physical form and then add unto it a soul. Sounds like you know more than God.

Did you know, partial birth abortions are illegal?

Here's a little lesson -- American's don't have the Constitutional right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. See, that is from the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration has no legal bearing on our government, which is in fact prescribed by the Constitution.

We do not have the freedom to end another's life? As a single being, I do have the right in self defense. Collectively, we do have the right when it comes to war and capital punishment.

I am glad you think that in the case or rape or incest, there are no excuses and no justifications.

And no, abortion isn't murder. Murder is an illegal killing -- abortion is legal, in case you forgot, therefore it can't be murder, now can it?

No facts, no substance, only rhetoric spewed from a point of view -- good job. "

Becky wrote on Feb 12, 2009 3:38 PM:

" Partial birth abortion is only done on .02% of abortions and it's pretty much illegal everywhere unless the mother's life is in danger in which if she dies, the baby will too. It is also done when the baby is too malformed and is already in very much pain and has no hopes of surviving past few minutes/hours maybe out of the womb.

If you feel that a zygote is human life, so be it. That is your choice. And by the way, the republicans will NEVER overturn Roe v Wade because it gets you to vote for them at every election. They could have overturned it while they had control of all 3 branches of govt but they didn't even try. Know why???? Because they really, really don't care about it. They just use it to pull at pro life advocates such as you and get your vote. I totally underestand your wanting to stop abortion but it will never happen. Even if it ever becomes illegal again. It would just force women to try to do it themselves or go to a dirty back alley butcher. Both ways it mames and kills women by the thousands each year. The women are human lives too you know. "

father bob wrote on Feb 12, 2009 3:40 PM:

" kiah white.....you are just another cornfield genius led around by your nose.

get a grip and do some actual thinking of your own. if you need an intervention to relieve your situation, there are people to help.

i suggest you get out into the real world and see what life is actually about. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 12, 2009 9:37 PM:

" Dear Locke,

Since you're the self-appointed Constitutional Law Scholar in here, be a lad and explain something for me:

24 State Fetal Homicide Laws define a fetus as a person and a separate homicide victim. This gives the fetus legal rights distinct from the woman who was attacked.

These laws imperil abortion rights by giving personhood and rights to fetuses.

When a law exists that recognizes fetal rights, it creates a legal contradiction. Because if a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, why doesn't it have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother?

Could you explain this, Locke?

Or this above your pay-grade? "

ed miller wrote on Feb 13, 2009 10:48 AM:

" father bob wrote on Feb 12, 2009 3:40 PM:
" kiah white.....you are just another cornfield genius led around by your nose."

And you are just another disillusioned liberal with nothing constructive to contribute so you just hurl insults at everyone. "

The Question wrote on Feb 13, 2009 11:09 AM:

" Save bicycles, not paper clips. "

Full of flame wrote on Feb 13, 2009 11:10 AM:

" Abortion is murder! There is no getting around that fact. God created Adam,he had a soul as soon as God breathed life into his body. As soon as you are conceived you have a soul. Abortion is not self defense, it is only the cowardly way out of responsibility. Abortion is one of the biggest issues in the "real world"! There is no ignoring the fact that millions of innocent lives are taken every day, whether by partial birth abortion or a "legal" abortion. Also no one ever can know more than God, he knows everything. Get with it people! "

Full of flame wrote on Feb 13, 2009 11:29 AM:

" Duh! Of course partial birth abortion is illegal! It's murder it should be illegal. But there is a threat of it becoming legal. That is way action must be taken to prevent this. "

Full of flame wrote on Feb 13, 2009 11:37 AM:

" Dear Becky, of course womens lives are human lives too. How do you think they got here though? Their mothers chose not to have an abortion. Think about it!No matter how malformed a baby might be that does not give anyone the power to destroy their life, even if that life will only be for a few brief moments. "

TommyTutone wrote on Feb 13, 2009 1:45 PM:

" I respect your opinion, but it's kind of hard to take a letter on abortion seriously when it starts quoting Dr. Seuss. I'm also uncertain why the whales have to go. Why couldn't we save both? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 13, 2009 3:18 PM:

" ("Why couldn't we save both?")

Because Liberals value all life,

as long as it doesn't cramp their life style for nine months.......... "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 13, 2009 3:24 PM:

" The Liberal Stand:

"We MUST grant Constitutional Rights to....

TERRORISTS!"

"Babies?

PFFFHHHT yeah right!"

"Give me a break."

*yawn* "

AllYouNeedIsLove wrote on Feb 13, 2009 4:45 PM:

" It was a better argument than the other abortion letter, but I still think it is up to the mother, and this is also by law. It is the same with gay marriage- they can have civil unions, but they cannot have gay marriage. No one can have it all ways. "

Locke wrote on Feb 13, 2009 7:34 PM:

" You're right, it's above my pay grade. I'll let God speak for me, okay? I'll raise your bet.

- Exodus 21:22-23: If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury to the mother, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury to the mother, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot...

- Genesis 38: In this story, Judah mistakes Tamar as a prostitute, and orders her to be burned to death, despite the fact she is three months pregnant. If her twin fetuses had been considered persons, the law would have delayed her execution at least until her twins were born.

- Leviticus 27:1-7: When Jehovah gave monetary equivalents to the value of people of certain age groups, the lowest values were given to children between the ages of one month and five years. Boy babies were worth five shekels, and girls were worth three. Below the age of one month, they did not even merit a price.

- Numbers 3:15: For census purposes, only male babies older than one month were to be counted. Below this age, they were not considered persons to be counted.

- Numbers 5: According to this passage, the Lord instructed Moses that a husband who suspected his wife of sleeping with another man could take her to the priest for a test that would either confirm or deny his suspicions. The test involved his wife drinking a cup of "bitter water," which consisted of holy water mixed with the dust of the tabernacle floor. If the woman were innocent, then no harm would come to her by drinking it. But if she were guilty, then she would be cursed with "bitter suffering;" namely, "she will have barrenness and a miscarrying womb." In this text, God himself appears to be endorsing the practice of abortion.

- Jewish law is quite clear in its statement that an embryo is not reckoned a viable living thing (in Hebrew, bar kayama) until thirty days after its birth. One is not allowed to observe the Laws of Mourning for an expelled fetus. As a matter of fact, these Laws are not applicable for a child who does not survive until his thirtieth day.

So, where does the Bible say that life begins at conception? So, where does it prohibit abortion? If God is all-knowing, all-powerful, why didn't he specifical say life begins at conception?

After all, God did create Adam whole, then give unto him a soul -- God didn't create a soul, then build the shell of a man around the soul.

Bottom line? Half the country are conservative Bible thumpers, so why wouldn't half the states have the rules on book, even if the Bible which they thump doesn't support their interpretation of life. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 13, 2009 10:56 PM:

" Uhm......Locke?

You never answered my question, now did you.

A...no. No you didn't.

The point in question was the legal definition of "murder" as it applies to the unborn,

was it not?

A....yes. Yes it was.

And since you're an Atheist and a wanna be Constitutional Law Scholar;

why don't you go ahead and show us how "bright" you think you are and answer my question?

Oh that's right, because for all of your long-winded desperation to appear "intelligent" and informed; you really weren't aware of the State Fetal Homicide Laws, now were you?

No. No your weren't.

And since Libtards like you whine endlessly about the separation of Church and State; religion really doesn't enter into this debate now does it; other than an attempt by you to obfuscate my original point.

So here's my question for you, AGAIN:

If a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, why doesn't it have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother? "

XTownie wrote on Feb 14, 2009 1:33 AM:

" "So, where does the Bible say that life begins at conception? So, where does it prohibit abortion? If God is all-knowing, all-powerful, why didn't he specifical say life begins at conception?:

I predict if we give it a few more years, all of those questions will be answered in the next translation of 'God's Word'. It's a money-maker for the people channelling Jesus to have the new and improved version of the Bible! "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Feb 14, 2009 10:55 AM:

" It's just like a liberal, such as Locke, to spin the Bible for your own immoral purposes...

Exodus 21:22-23
Genesis 38
Leviticus 27:1-7
Numbers 5: "In this text, God himself appears to be endorsing the practice of abortion."

All you do is illustrate your ignorance here.

There's a vast difference between any of your inferences here concerning "The Law" of the old testament, as it applies to Rabbinic Judaism, and the gospel of the the New Testament, as it applies to Christianity.

You are undoubtly detestable. "

The Question wrote on Feb 14, 2009 11:19 AM:

" I believe you nailed them to the wall, Mr. Locke. "

The Question wrote on Feb 14, 2009 1:07 PM:

" The Republican Party loves legal abortion. Whipping their easily gulled voters up into a froth about it drags them out to the polls and makes them vote against their own economic interests.
Abortion is billions in the bank to the GOP. The Republican Party has never done anything to overturn Roe v. Wade, and never will. "

Melissa M. Harden wrote on Feb 14, 2009 1:52 PM:

" All babies, whether at their very beginning of life (fertilized egg aka embryo), or at their first heart beat at 18 days after conception or at the ninth month, have the right to live!

In order to abort a baby it takes a loop-shaped steel knife and then a high powered vacuum (proper name dilatation and curettage or D&C). The abortionist could mame if not killing the baby, make the mother bleed to death and definitely create scare tissue in her uterus. Not to mention the emotional scares she will have to deal with every time the baby's would-have-been birth date arrives.

Once the abortion is complete the clinicians have to re-assemble the baby to make sure they have not left an arm or leg in the uterus as it would created a deadly infection resulting in death of the mother.

As you can see in the classified ads in the JG-TC, other newspapers and magazines there are a lot of families who would welcome the "unwanted" babies with open hearts and arms.

If abortion isn't murder then why do they have to use a knife to kill it?

It is a courageous and honoring decision in choosing life! "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 8:16 AM:

" NeoCon give us chapter and verse in the New Testament to counteract Locke, if you can. If you can't I suggest you face the TRUTH. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 8:19 AM:

" Ms. Harden it doesn't take courage to choose life, to choose not to abort, that is the copout for those that are unable to make difficult decisions. TRUE courage is being able to look at ALL the aspects, the consequences, the realities a situation presents. "

Harry Potter wrote on Feb 15, 2009 8:45 AM:

" Should a pregnant 12 year old girl be forced to have a baby after being raped by her drunken father, or a stranger for that matter? Is this part of God's plan? "

Melissa M. Harden wrote on Feb 15, 2009 11:43 AM:

" It has been my experience that when I speak to someone who is a staunch pro-abort that they have done one of two things, they have either had an abortion and/or they have helped someone else obtain one. Anger is a reaction to guilt and self doubt.

Here is a thought, if a pregnant mother has been shot in the stomach she lived while the baby died the shooter is convicted of MURDER. There were two victims.

I have friends who have lost twin babies at six months. They had an open casket wake. The babies were beautifully and fully formed, they were not blobs of tissue. A person who has lost a baby needs closure.

In saying that, if anyone has had an abortion or helped someone to get one there is a second chance. Ask for forgiveness and then have a ceremony (perhaps privately)for the baby.

If you, shumphreys were happily pregnant would you allow a Dr to dilate and cram a knife into your uterus? Probably not because it would kill your baby. Why then doesn't any other baby in the USA deserve the loving protection of a mother's womb?

Now about rape... what a horrible, degrading and demeaning thing to go through. There are not enough words to describe what a rape victim goes through.

There is a slim chance for a woman let alone a twelve year old girl who may not be fertile to get pregnant as a result of a terrible rape situation. There are only five or six days of fertility in a thirty day month. She may get horribly raped on a non-fertile day. Emotional trauma can cause an interuption in the ovulation cycle.

If she is raped on a fertile day there are TWO victims now! The girl and the baby. Is it the baby who did anything wrong? Should she get a death sentence for what a terrible man did to her mamma?

Doesn't the twelve year old girl have a choice in the matter? Will she become sterile after the abortion? Will she hate her parents for making her kill an innocent baby?

If the baby is given life she can be adopted. She may turn out to be a strong and courageous woman knowing her mamma loved her so much that she gave her life.

There is no guilt in giving life.

I challenge any pro-aborts to be a witness to an abortion, standing in the room at the mother's feet. The baby receives no anesthetic. She can feel the pain of the cut and dismemberment of her tiny body. Could you be the person to count the baby's arms and legs?

It is courageous to choose live.

Abortion is not the unforgivable sin. Ask for forgiveness and be set free. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 15, 2009 11:53 AM:

" (Harry Potter - "Should a pregnant 12 year old girl be forced to have a baby after being raped by her drunken father, or a stranger for that matter? Is this part of God's plan?")

Should the baby (the most innocent of human beings) be murdered for something he/she had absolutely nothing to do with, Harry?

Is THAT part of God's plan? "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 1:02 PM:

" Perhaps Ms Harden you should quit looking at antiabortion websites and educate yourself about how abortions are performed. Your experience is also limited since many people are pro-choice who have never been pregnant (men and women) or who have never known someone who has had an abortion, they are people that can look beyond their own needs to have compassion for those that are in difficult circumstances. You should try it. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 1:04 PM:

" I might add Ms. Harden you are a prime example of why people need complete, unbiased education. Christian fundamentalists and pro-lifers prefer scare tactics rather than factual information. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 1:06 PM:

" Also Ms. Harden you are refusing to face the reality. It doesn't matter if there is only one out of 50 young girls that gets raped and becomes pregnant. What that girl decides to do is NONE of your business. She needs compassion, support, full and complete, unbiased information about ALL of her options. "

Harry Potter wrote on Feb 15, 2009 1:26 PM:

" I'm really not surprised that someone like Cybil would expect a 12 year old rape victim to be forced to carry the baby of a rapist. Somehow I suspect he wouldn't feel that way if it were his 12 year old child. On second thought, given his warped sense of right and wrong, he probably would. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 4:33 PM:

" There is another aspect of the abortion debate that everyone is ignoring. If young men and women are NOT RESPONSIBLE enough to use birth control they ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE enough to be PARENTS. If you don't like that idea consider this: if a child can't read blame the parents not the school. if children aren't learning in school take a look at discipline problems in that school, discipline starts and ends at home with the parents. 1 out of 100 adults in the US is or has been incarcerated. Bullying and abusive behavior (many display that on this site) is learned at home from the parents. Hate crimes, hate is taught, at home. Again if young men and women aren't responsible enough to use birth control they aren't responsible enough to be parents. "

Harry Potter wrote on Feb 15, 2009 5:10 PM:

" . Bullying and abusive behavior (many display that on this site) is learned at home from the parents.

That says a lot about Cybildog's parents doesn't it? Let's hope he doesn't pass his antisocial personality traits onto his poor children. Hopefully he doesn't have any. lol! "

Locke wrote on Feb 15, 2009 6:06 PM:

" "Should the baby (the most innocent of human beings) be murdered for something he/she had absolutely nothing to do with, Harry?"

Herein lies the ignorance of far too many.

1). It is not a baby until it is born. It is a fetus. A fetus is not a baby. At some point the fetus resembles a baby, but's not a baby.

2). It's not murder.

These are not opinions -- these are applicable terms. Until one side understands these terms and starts using them, there will be no movement on the issue. But then again, neither side really wants a movement toward compramise. It's either my way or the highway.

Stop murdering babies, etc. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 15, 2009 7:38 PM:

" No Locke,

you're the ignorant one here and dishonest as well.

I'll repeat the same question to you that you've already ran away from, twice now:

24 State Fetal Homicide Laws define a fetus as a person and a separate homicide victim. This gives the fetus legal rights distinct from the woman who was attacked.

If a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, why doesn't it have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother?

Care to make your ignorance and your cowardice a three-peat, LockeTard? "

Melissa M. Harden wrote on Feb 15, 2009 7:53 PM:

" Men Get Life For Pregnant Woman Shooting

Woman Survived Shooting, Unborn Baby Died

BOSTON -- Two men were sentenced to life in prison Tuesday after being convicted of first-degree murder in a shooting that injured a woman and killed her unborn baby.

Boston's NewsCenter 5's Shiba Russell reported that Andre Green, 22, and Chimezie Akara, 23, were sentenced to life plus 66 to 80 years in prison for the February 2003 shooting of Hawa Barry on a crowded Orange Line train. Barry, 24, was 8 months pregnant at the time, and her son died. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 15, 2009 8:27 PM:

" That just can't be, Melissa.

You see, our resident Constitutional Law Scholar (Locke) has assured us that a fetus is not a real baby, and not a real person, and as such; murder of said non-person is legally impossible.

And he's even repeated this several times, and stated it in terms of

Point 1

and

Point 2

and everything! "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 9:22 PM:

" The difference that Ms Harden and others ignore is that between voluntary action and having something done to you against your will. The woman who wanted that child and carried it to eight months when it was taken from her against her will is different from the woman who chooses to abort. The law acknowledges the difference why can't you? "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Feb 15, 2009 9:33 PM:

" shumphreys wrote on Feb 15, 2009 8:16 AM:

" NeoCon give us chapter and verse in the New Testament to counteract Locke, if you can. If you can't I suggest you face the TRUTH. "
-------------------

Well, well, well Suzy...where would you like for me to start?

Maybe I'll jus'n go to some "God-furin' Bible sites" fur THE TRUTH so un' weez cun have us an ol' time revival! But first wherz mah cross un mah bible un' mah furarms?" I gots ta handle sum vipers furst too!

HALLELUJAH!

Now'n I gots the holy spurit in me...

I'll just pull out the old Thompson Chain-Reference (King James version) Bible given to me by a bible-thumpin' family member....so let's take a gander here, shall we?

These verses pretty much says it all as far am I am concerned, you may argue otherwise, as it speaks of a "baby leapt for joy" in the mother's womb.

(Lk 1:41,44) "And it came to pass that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and was filled with the Holy Ghost." "For lo as soon as the vioce of thy saluation sounded in mine ears the babe leaped in my womb for joy." In Luke 1:43, Elizabeth addressed Mary as "the mother of my Lord" before Jesus was born.

From the old testament, and illustrating how CORRUPT in thinking the BS ARTTIST LOCKE IS, it speaks of "Begat sons and daughters" in Gen 5:3,4,28-30. Begat always refers to conception and fertilization in the Bible just as "to know" someone meant to copulate with someone. In Psalms 135, David praises God's superintended formation of him in his mother's womb, an indication of God's knowledge of children in their mother's womb.....

In Genesis 25:21,22, Rebekah conceived twins, and "the children struggled together within her." That which was conceived was called a "child" between the conception and the birth. This is another recognition of a fetus as a CHILD IN THE WOMB!

Besides "children & sons in womb", see also Gen 25:21-22 see also 2 Ki 19:3; and Ruth 1:11.

Note the difference between day of birth and night conceived, "a man child conceived" in Job 3:3. See also similar versus in Rev 12:5 concerning "man child born".

In Num 12:12; Lk 1:43 it speaks of
"mother" of unborn child and in
Rom 9:11 "for though the twins were not yet born, and had not done anything good or bad".

In Lk 1:3 and Acts 7:29 it speaks of conceiving a "son" before it was born. I guess they had ultra-sound then...

Hallelujah! L I B! God provided a miracle 2000 years ago...he provided a high sufisticated DE-VICE like'n ah ultrasound fur them hillbilly Hebrews!

In Job 3:16 it speaaks of babies that die before birth that are called "infants" that never saw the "light". This is exactly like babies that are aborted. OOPSY!

In Numbers 12:12, Moses describes "one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he cometh out of his mother's womb."

The word "mother" always refers to one who has procreated or formed another human individual, a separate and distinct individual from the mother herself, so see Num. 6:7; Gen. 3:20; and Luke 1:60. A woman who has conceived, even if the child is not yet born and even if it dies before birth, is a "mother." "Behold, I was shapened in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." Psalm 51:5

Psalms 106:37,38 in context, it says Israel was "polluted with blood" because the people shed the innocent blood of their "sons and daughters", their born/unborn baby "sons and daughters." I cun hear reverend Wright now saying "g*d D*mn America, g*d D*mn America" over the number of abortions in America, eh?

In Matthew 2:16, Herod is considered wicked because he slays the male children in Bethlehem. In Luke 2:12,16 it calls such unborn children "babes."

But Luke 1:41,44 also calls unborn children "babes," so how can it be acceptable to kill them?

Boy, Suzy, for such a DEVOUT athiest you sure do love to talk Bible don't you? And here I thought you were one of those sophisticated cornfield socialist atheists....

But you know what Suzy...there's really no need in pleading our case to you...so I'm all for LIBERALS ABORTING THEIR UNBORN BABIES......knock yourselves out! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 15, 2009 9:35 PM:

" Tell me Susan,

if Fetal Homicide Laws have determined that a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, why doesn't it have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother? "

lefty wrote on Feb 15, 2009 10:40 PM:

" BlueDogDemocrat is back with more witty comebacks. To be specific, one comeback: "is it above your paygrade?" Clever, especially when used over and over again. "

Locke wrote on Feb 15, 2009 11:49 PM:

" Responded in that thread. Go read it and talk about it there, little man. I can't help if it every right wing wackjob and every left wing nutcase is writing letters to the JG and they have to have so many letters YOU can't find my response.

Want me to buy you a dictionary too?

Calling abortion murder is like saying guns kill -- you can try and squeeze your logic into the definition by grasping at straws, but ultimately, it doesn't and will never fit. Good for rhetoric, bad for logic. "

Locke wrote on Feb 16, 2009 12:11 AM:

" So the revised version of a revised version of a revisited translation of a translation of a translation of a heavily edited body of literature translated twice again proportedly over 3,000 years old refers to the unborn as babes. Excellent job.

Sorry, but I don't see how "babies leaping from wombs" or the linage of Biblical persons has anything to do with the value, rather lack of value and status the unborn -- be they called fetus or "babes" in your book.

Please, show me where the unborn are given equal value to that of a born child or an adult. Show me where God says the unborn are not to be aborted -- because I can show you where God sanctioned abortion in Numbers. "

Locke wrote on Feb 16, 2009 12:16 AM:

" "But Luke 1:41,44 also calls unborn children "babes," so how can it be acceptable to kill them?"

Rather simple, I quote Samuel 15:3:

Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and (substituting donkey.)

So now, I ask you, how can be it acceptable to kill them (the Amalekites)? "

Harry Potter wrote on Feb 16, 2009 6:34 AM:

" It seems our friend Cybildog can't decide which he hates more, President Obama or a woman having the right to make her own decisions regarding her body. His delusional rant of 9:33 late night was a dandy too.

You da man, Doh! hee hee "

Locke wrote on Feb 16, 2009 7:31 AM:

" Is abortion murder?

Murder is defined as the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought.

So if we throw out all supporting evidence in the Bible that says an 8 week old fetus isn't a full person with a soul, and we ignore the fact abortion is very much legal, abortion is still not murder because it lacks the malice intentions.

How many times has the anti-abortionites argued that abortion is a gut wrenching decision, weighing heavily on the woman's mind? If this is the case, then she has remorse and not malice.

Or, how many times have they demanded that mandatory counselling be given so that she fully understands her decision? In this case, the woman is ignorant of her decision. How can you have malice when you don't understand what you are doing in the first place?

And most frequently charged by the radicals, how many times have they claimed the woman is just plain selfish. How can it be malice when all the host is thinking about is herself and what grade she will be getting in 8th grade science this year?

Kiah White and those who share their opinion have stated very wrongly, murder is not to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously and abortion is not murder. Criminals were beheaded for centuries and it was not murder. War is exceptionally pretty savage, barbarious, and downright inhumane -- but it's not murder either.

If anything, theoretically granting several key points to the anti-choice crowd, abortion would be most similar to manslaughter. Of course, that just would sound right. It doesn't have the heavy conotation as murder -- does it?

Stop manslaughtering those "babes" doesn't sound right.

Merriam-Webster doesn't support their position. The laws in American don't support their position. Most of recorded history doesn't support their position. Most of the world doesn't support their position. Most of America doesn't support their position.

The Bible doesn't even support their position -- you'd figure if God was speaking directly to you, through the 'gospel' then he'd be very clear about abortion. Oh, but wait, He works in mysterious ways and we must decipher His will by deciphering the Bible in study groups like a bunch of Robert Langdon's playing sudoku.

Some people are just saying what their mom, dad, spouse, or pastor has told them to be the truth without using their own brain to answer key questions that are fundamental to understanding the issue. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 7:53 AM:

" Oh dear NeoCon you have really stepped in it this time. On the other thread you argue with CrowWoman about God "knowing" a person before he was born therefor the soul was first before the body, thus babes have souls. Here you state that the use of the word "know" refers to knowing a woman intimately/sexually. Oh dear how is one to interpret that one pesky little word. If this word means one thing in one instance and something quite different in another it seems that you don't have an argument for the "Truth" of a Bible interpretation in any other instance. Such as babes. Oh by the way, women will tell you that their babes are quite kickers even when God doesn't speak to them. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 7:57 AM:

" Oh and NeoCon the verses you quote don't contradict or negate any of the verses Locke quoted. So you will need to try again. I respect and appreciate the Bible for what it is, a great book, full of great wisdom, nothing more. I suspect that Locke does too. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 8:04 AM:

" Grow up BDD, try a new argument. You know abortion isn't murder. You also know the abortion debate isn't about this issue of when "human life" begins, when a "soul" enters the body, that is the work of those who refuse to face the REAL issues, education, expense for and availability of birth control, health insurance, availability of adoptive homes, rape and incest, health issues of fetus and pregnant woman, AND most importantly Compassion for those who face difficult decisions or condemnation, punishment,guilt trips, judgment of the same (what appears to be the preferred Christian treatment). "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 16, 2009 8:27 AM:

" Gee Locke,
In your many responses to my question of abortion as murder;

you've covered virtually everything from the Bible to the dictionary to counseling.

But...uhm.......you have never touched the topic of Fetal Homicide have you?

So I'll ask you again for the FOURTH TIME:

If Fetal Homicide Laws have determined that a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, why doesn't it have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 16, 2009 8:36 AM:

" (shumphreys - "Oh dear NeoCon you have really stepped in it this time. On the other thread you argue with CrowWoman about God "knowing" a person before he was born therefor the soul was first before the body, thus babes have souls.")

No Susan, that was me. And no, I'm not Neo. And in translation, the word "know" can have more than one meaning, nimrod. And in that conversation I considered the very real possibility that the unborn have souls. Not that it was definitive. My opposition to abortion is not necessarily Biblical. It never has been.

And you need to wise up Susan, because 24 State Fetal Homicide Laws define a fetus as a person and a separate homicide victim. This gives the fetus legal rights distinct from the woman who was attacked. You don't really have an answer for that, do you Susan.

Nope. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 16, 2009 8:39 AM:

" Susan, in her high-pitched women's-rights-protester-voice: "Grow up BDD, try a new argument."

Now try answering my fetal homicide argument Susan. "

Locke wrote on Feb 16, 2009 12:03 PM:

" Sorry chump, but I don't visit the website to answer your questions upon demand.

This is part of the problem -- you can't read.

I suggest you scroll up, find where I previously told you that you can't read, and where I previously told you I responded to your "24 state ruling" comment.

Then you can scroll just a little further up and find where I replied. "

Locke wrote on Feb 16, 2009 12:20 PM:

" "24 states have a law! 24 states have a law! Answer my question because I can't read! 24 states have a law! 24 states, etc."

1). There are 50 states. So, less than half of the states have this law. Impressive. 26 states don't have this law. I guess the counter argument has more strength, huh?

2). Abortion is legal in all 50 states because (largely due to Lincoln) the states are subordinate to federal rulings. So, in these 24 states, why aren't the abortion doctors charged with murder and the mothers as accessories to murder? Maybe abortion isn't really murder?

3). A fetus does not have the same protection under the Constitution, and like the Bible, the government does not reconganize the fetus as a person of equal to the value of an adult. (Please see the 14th Amendment: "All persons BORN or NATURALIZED in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.")

4). You can't claim a fetus, or stillborn, child as a dependent with the Social Security Administration, the Department of Veteran Affairs, or the Internal Revenue Service. I guess if life started at conception, the federal government would reconganize it, wouldn't they?

Next time, be more careful with what you wish for. "

TommyTutone wrote on Feb 16, 2009 2:29 PM:

" I think that we can all agree that whether or not we believe abortion should be legal or not, it is. There has been a lot of ruckus about it for a long time, but no change. It seems to be a way to mobilize voters without actually having to produce anything in the end. That being said, there are many things besides, or perhaps in addition to bickering about the topic that we can all do to reduce the number of abortions regardless of which side of the fence we're on. There's a lot of data out there that suggests a correlation between level of education and incidence of abortion. Statistically, better educated people tend to have fewer abortions. So, one could fight abortion in a meaningful way by supporting better education in areas with higher abortion rates. Public sex education also seems to have a tangible impact on abortion rates. Therefore, by supporting sex education, one could impact the number of abortions. Finally, availability of contraception should reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that end in abortion, so funding public programs that make contraception readily available should reduce abortion rates. I think we all know that the law isn't going to change any time soon, so here are some realistic options to fight abortion.(I won't bother posting citation of my assertions. People seem to get what they want out of data if they're emotionally invested enough, but do a little research and see what you think if you're interested.) "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 3:16 PM:

" BDD I have pointed out before that the fetal homicide laws were the anti-abortionists attempt to get in the back door. I also pointed out the difference is between personal choice and having something done to you against your will which the fetal homicide laws recognize. There is a BIG difference between choosing to abort and having a fetus taken from you against your will, being forced to abort. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 16, 2009 3:16 PM:

" Gosh Locke!

And STILL you can't deny that the Fetal Homicide Laws in 24 States have determined that a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, can you?

Uhm No. No you can't.

So then back to my question that you can't seem to answer:

If a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, then why doesn't the fetus have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother?

AND

As of Nov 2007 there have been 10 Constitutional Challenges to
State Unborn Victims (Fetal Homicide) Laws

Including:

California, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin

All challenges were based at least in part on Roe v. Wade and/or denial of equal protection.

All failed.

How can this be Locke?

Now be a good little trained seal and jump to an answer. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 16, 2009 3:37 PM:

" That doesn't address the legal contradiction Susan;

Those 24 State Fetal Homicide Laws define a fetus as a person and a separate homicide victim.

These laws give the fetus legal rights DISTINCT from the woman.

So again, if a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party,

then why doesn't it have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother?

How is this NOT a legal contradiction, Susan?

Explain the logic, please. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 4:07 PM:

" BDD what you don't get with the laws it isn't the fetus right being addressed it is the right of the womans that is being addressed. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 16, 2009 4:32 PM:

" (Susan- " BDD what you don't get with the laws it isn't the fetus right being addressed it is the right of the womans that is being addressed.")

Absolutely WRONG Susan.

Under the Fetal Homicide Laws I'm citing, the fetus has legal personhood distinct and separate from the mother. If the mother survives and the baby dies- it's still murder. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 4:50 PM:

" BDD the law was written to protect the womans right to deliver a baby, and to give her retribution for what was taken from her against her will. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 16, 2009 5:04 PM:

" Susan,

These laws grant legal personhood to the fetus, and the killing of such can and has brought murder charges. "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Feb 16, 2009 5:49 PM:

" Oh and NeoCon the verses you quote don't contradict or negate any of the verses Locke quoted.
--------------------------

AH YEAH THEY DO. But that's okay I wouldn't expect you to catch the nuisances of the passages without the literal Greek translations that I did not include. The the Luke verses, in the Greek text, use specific words to acknowledge the soul of the child in the womb. "

Harry Potter wrote on Feb 16, 2009 7:16 PM:

" Looks like Cybil can't decide who he is tonight. lol... "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 7:59 PM:

" NeoCon I do catch the "nuisances" of the passages. I think you meant nuance but I don't want to fuss abous typos. Since nuisance fits perfectly. The Bible is a nuisance so many conflicting passages, whats a person to do? People just have to pick and choose the passages that fit their agenda and ignore the passages that don't! "

father bob wrote on Feb 17, 2009 10:32 AM:

" shumphreys wrote on Feb 16, 2009 7:59 PM:
" NeoCon I do catch the "nuisances" of the passages. I think you meant nuance but I don't want to fuss abous typos. Since nuisance fits perfectly. The Bible is a nuisance so many conflicting passages, whats a person to do? People just have to pick and choose the passages that fit their agenda and ignore the passages that don't! """""

pretty much rings true of religion in general. "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Feb 17, 2009 11:10 AM:

" "nuisances"
--------
Yup meant nuances...

As for, "People just have to pick and choose the passages that fit their agenda and ignore the passages that don't!"... ah yeah...a holistic approach and considering context would be a much better approach.... "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 17, 2009 2:55 PM:

" If only people would do that NeoCon as well as consider the history and times when passages were written. But that isn't what is done by most posters on these pages. "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Feb 17, 2009 5:24 PM:

" Yes, and certain altruism's stand the test of time...but I guess that's why they are called altruism's...

....like maybe the killing of defenseless fetus is not only a waste of medical resources and emotional energy, regardless of era; it's just....plain wrong? "

Harry Potter wrote on Feb 17, 2009 8:02 PM:

" Hey "Neo", ever eat at the Red Lobster? lol... "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 17, 2009 9:19 PM:

" NO it isn't wrong, it is a choice that some make that may not be your choice but it is their choice, right for them, and you have no right to interfere. "

what? wrote on Feb 17, 2009 9:48 PM:

" Whales have a God. Her name is an aria sung by Her children, it echos through the deep. They hear. They know. They sing. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 18, 2009 8:28 AM:

" (what? - "Whales have a God. Her name is an aria sung by Her children, it echos through the deep. They hear. They know. They sing.")

Susan,

Clean up on aisle five, please. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 18, 2009 8:41 AM:

" (Harry - "Hey "Neo", ever eat at the Red Lobster? lol...")

Apparently you haven't heard Harry, but uhm......Christian's don't necessarily follow Jewish laws and beliefs.

It all sort of changed about 2000 years ago;

there was this guy........ by the name of Christ someone........who claimed to be God........

then some miracles happened.........

and Christ explained to the Jews that they didn't quite interpret their own scriptures quite right........

then there were a whole lotta arguments between Jesus and the Jewish pharisees and sadducees.......

heck, there were even disagreements between the Jewish pharisees and sadducees......

and then there was a crucifixion........

then Christ rose from the dead and ascended into heaven.........

then Jews disagreed with Christ's followers..........

then a whole separate religion came about..........

Did you happen to hear about any of this, Harry?

Oy vey! "

CrowWoman wrote on Feb 18, 2009 10:59 AM:

" "Whales have a God. Her name is an aria sung by Her children, it echos through the deep. They hear. They know. They sing. "

Very poetic--and a lovely thought, too. "

father bob wrote on Feb 18, 2009 3:14 PM:

" now HP.....you've forgotten once again!

what are we to do with you?

the "christians" as they like to call themselves, get to pick and choose which sin and abomination are acceptable today and which ones aren't....and which ones will be acceptable tomorrow and those that won't.

anything else is taking the "word" out of context. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 18, 2009 8:01 PM:

" Sorry BDD what?s comment was very poetic as Crow Woman said, but what? isn't me. I don't have that kind of poetry in me but I admire those who do. Question if a whale sees God in its own image would poeple be any different? I don't think so. AND when you see something in your own image, just what does that mean. Very esoteric stuff, beyond your compehension but Crow Woman will appreciate the thought. "

CrowWoman wrote on Feb 18, 2009 8:27 PM:

" Dolphins and whales intrigue me, Susan. Once, while at the zoo in Indy, I looked into the dolphin tank and caught the eye of one of them. I saw a glitter of awareness there that I'd never noticed with any other animal.

The quote reminded me a little of C.S. Lewis' "space trilogy" in which he wrote of other worlds where the creatures had their own theology.

It also reminded me of a poem by Elva McAllaster that I've had on hand for the past 30 years:

SEQUOIAS AND ANEMONES

Do they indeed praise you
In their divergent, multifarious ways?
Do hailstones fall in white doxologies?
Do centipedes wriggle and scuttle
Praisingly?

Mountains and all hills:
Are they perpetual paeans,
Slope and peak and cliff and pebble
Paeans?

The beasts:
Do you derive a praise
From all they are and do?
Does the courtship of any elephant
And the chirr of any cicada
Honor You?

Then are anthems You value
Interrupted and diminished
Whenever we hack down redwoods,
Shoot at coyotes,
Murder waterfalls and glaciers
And blue gentians?

Will ravaged earth keep celebrating You
And be renewed
If man despoils her utterly
And disappears, doomed,
To his ultimate assizes?

If all the cedars praise You
Let me reverence more deeply
The cedar twigs that brush my sleeves,
Let me honor duly
Your ants and eagles,
Your winds and waters,
Your sequoias, chipmunks, and anemones. "

what? wrote on Feb 18, 2009 11:46 PM:

" What a terrible tangled web we weave. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 19, 2009 9:04 AM:

" CrowWoman Thoreau wrote, "In wildness lies the preservation of the world." The BIG difference between eastern and western religions and philosophies of life is that of seeing God as being within ALL living things, and the western view of seeing God as being without. "

sapient wrote on Feb 19, 2009 11:14 AM:

" In his most famous essay "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" (1849) Thoreau states "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically."

He would probably regurgitate if he could see the radical expansion of government taking place in the last month. "

dstew66 wrote on Feb 19, 2009 11:59 AM:

" Becky wrote -If you feel that a zygote is human life, so be it.

Is it your position that a zygote inside a woman is not human or do you believe that the zygote is not alive?

Zygote: The CELL formed by the union of a male sex cell (a sperm) and a female sex cell (an ovum). The zygote develops into the embryo following the instruction encoded in its genetic material, the DNA.

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=6074

Cell: The cell is the structural and functional unit of all known LIVING ORGANISMS. It is the smallest unit of an organism that IS CLASSIFIED AS LIVING, and is often called THE BUILDING BLOCK OF LIFE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_(biology) "

The Question wrote on Feb 19, 2009 12:49 PM:

" The BIG difference between eastern and western religions and philosophies of life is that of seeing God as being within ALL living things, and the western view of seeing God as being without.
---
Susan is correct, as usual. That's why eastern religions tend to be of a philosophically higher order. "

CrowWoman wrote on Feb 19, 2009 1:22 PM:

" "The BIG difference between eastern and western religions and philosophies of life is that of seeing God as being within ALL living things, and the western view of seeing God as being without."

That is true, based on the Christianity you most often hear about. However, many Christians have come very close to the Eastern perception. Historically, Duns Scotus; also, G. M. Hopkins, the Jesuit (I think) poet...just a couple of well-known examples. Many lesser-knowns, too--myself being one of these--tend to see God within created things as well as without, with each living thing expressing some aspect of Himself. "

The Question wrote on Feb 19, 2009 2:45 PM:

" That is true, based on the Christianity you most often hear about. However, many Christians have come very close to the Eastern perception.
--
I would add the Catholic philosopher Teilhard de Chardin to that list. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 19, 2009 4:25 PM:

" ("The BIG difference between eastern and western religions and philosophies of life is that of seeing God as being within ALL living things, and the western view of seeing God as being without.")

I can't believe you're both omitting the most famous Catholic Saint of all.

The patron Saint of Animals:

St. Francis of Assisi. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 19, 2009 5:11 PM:

" Sapient Thoreau would be intelligent enough to realize that the times have changed, that the world has moved on AND he would be able to change with it. Can you? "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 19, 2009 5:14 PM:

" AND those are the Christians, CrowWoman we need to encourage otherwise they and all others will be swallowed/trampled/degraded by those that aren't. "

dstew66 wrote on Feb 19, 2009 5:30 PM:

" Isn't anyone going to stick up for the whales? "

CrowWoman wrote on Feb 19, 2009 6:07 PM:

" Ah yes, T. de Chardin and St. Francis. I forgot about them! Probably a lot of the mystics fall into that category (coming close to the Eastern approach)--some more accepted by the church, others less so. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 19, 2009 8:06 PM:

" Which returns me to a point I made a long long time ago on another thread, it seems like in another century. There really isn't that much that divides east from west. Something that Karen Armstrong realized in her book about the Axial Age, "The Great Transformation, The Beginning of Our Religious Traditions" the founders of the worlds Great Religions and the Greek Philosophers discovered the same thing, "What mattered was not what you believed but how you behaved." "

The Question wrote on Feb 19, 2009 8:18 PM:

" " Isn't anyone going to stick up for the whales? "
----
I'm sure St. Francis would have. And he'd have been right. "

what? wrote on Feb 19, 2009 8:35 PM:

" Matricide is not in our best interest. It' fatal. "

dstew66 wrote on Feb 19, 2009 9:45 PM:

" Locke wrote
I'll let God speak for me, okay?

The only god speaking for you is the god of this earth, for he was a murderer from the beginning. (Luke 4:6; John 8:44).

The Word is only Gods Word when it is used correctly, not misquoting it as you have. Even the devil knows the scriptures.

As Yahshua said, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures. . . (Matthew 22:29).

Your version of Exodus 21: 22-23 is as follows:

- Exodus 21:22-23: If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury to the mother, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury to the mother, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot...

If you are going to quote the Word of God, then quote it right:

Exo 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Exo 21:23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

In the Hebrew culture, children were an extremely important asset. It was the children, particularly the youngest, who would provide for the care of the parents in their old age. The social security system was still a few thousand years down the road. Israel was also an agricultural society. The children were needed to help provide the living, tend the crops and flocks. It was not a good thing for a woman to be barren. Children were an asset to the parents and to lose one, or to have one maimed was a severe blow to the family. One that caused such a lose had to pay a price.

The word depart in Ex. 21:22 is the Hebrew word yatsa, which means to go out. It doesnt mean a miscarriage. It simply means the baby comes out. If there is no harm, mischief, then nothing is owed. If there was harm, then the one causing the harm had to pay.

The mischief that follows applies to the fruit that has departed from the mother (the child) as well as the mother. If the child dies, then thou shalt give life for life,

So, actually, this scripture supports the sanctity of the unborn as opposed to showing it to be valueless, as you claim.

- Leviticus 27:1-7: When Jehovah gave monetary equivalents to the value of people of certain age groups, the lowest values were given to children between the ages of one month and five years. Boy babies were worth five shekels, and girls were worth three. Below the age of one month, they did not even merit a price.

- Numbers 3:15: For census purposes, only male babies older than one month were to be counted. Below this age, they were not considered persons to be counted.

Again, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures. . .

The word month in these scriptures is the Hebrew word, Chodesh, which means new moon. In the Creators reckoning of time, the new moon is the beginning of a new month. Chodesh comes from the word Chadash, which means to be new.

In reality, it means that ALL children, including the new ones born from the beginning of the new month, were to be counted. You could be much more productive if you would actually study the scriptures instead of misquoting them. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 19, 2009 9:47 PM:

" A worthwhile endeavor is St.Thomas Aquinas'(Summa Theologica) which was a reasoned rationale for Christian theology in the 13th century. It's fascinating because Aquinas cites various sources including Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and even ancient pagan scholars.

And yes, Question is right, St. Francis would most certainly stick up for the whales. I remember reading a biography on Francis when I was twelve. The entire book captivated me. As an animal lover and nature enthusiast, I was charmed by the fact that Francis addressed all of nature in personal terms. The birds were his sisters. The lone wolf that plagued the village was his brother. And he prayed by the light of his Sister Moon.

Our garden would be incomplete without our statue of St. Francis. "

CrowWoman wrote on Feb 19, 2009 10:36 PM:

" To what?

"What???"

We've wanted a St. Francis statue but haven't gotten around to buying one yet. BDD, have you ever listened to the music of John Michael Talbot? Years ago, he put out a title called Troubadour of the Great King which was based on St. Francis. If you like contemplative music, it is a great album. "My God and My All" is probably just about the best from all his music. "

dstew66 wrote on Feb 19, 2009 10:41 PM:

" dstew66 wrote
In reality, it means that ALL children, including the new ones born from the beginning of the new month, were to be counted. You could be much more productive if you would actually study the scriptures instead of misquoting them. "

I would like to make a correction here. First, I came off as sounding like this is the way it is. That is not necessarily correct. From the Hebrew terminology, it COULD easily be understood to mean all children, as Chodesh means new moon or month. I believe that could be a viable interpretation, based on the original meaning of the word. I know what the scripture says on its face, in English. True meanings sometimes get lost in translation and not having an understanding of the culture.

I am merely a student and not a Hebrew scholar and along with all mankind am prone to err on occasion. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 19, 2009 11:14 PM:

" I will definitely check Mr.Talbot's music out, CrowWoman. It sounds like it would be right up my alley.

One of the most moving songs I've ever heard is the lyrical version of The "Prayer of St. Francis" called "Make me a Channel of your Peace."

It has the ability to move hearts of stone. "

shumphreys wrote on Feb 20, 2009 8:10 AM:

" Actually Dstew66 the Bible presents both sides.You can't insist on the infallibility of the Bible and ignore its contradictions. It is up to humans to decide what to do in their time and place. "

CrowWoman wrote on Feb 20, 2009 3:19 PM:

" BDD, who sings "Make Me A Channel of Your Peace?" I saw several versions on YouTube. Some of John Michael's music is also on YouTube, though most of it is not his most popular work. "Only in God" is another nice song of his. I like to send it to friends who are ill or having other difficulties. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 20, 2009 5:27 PM:

" CrowWoman, "Make Me A Channel of Your Peace" has been an establish Catholic hymn for decades. It's been covered by numerous artists, and there are several versions on YouTube, although you may have to search for a decent one. "

father bob wrote on Feb 20, 2009 8:28 PM:

" let's see.....yep, we raised more money at the albuquerque site for whales than babies! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 20, 2009 11:55 PM:

" CrowWoman, I listened to John Michael Talbot on YouTube and I'm definitely going to buy some of his cds.

And here's a good version of "Make Me A Channel of Your Peace" performed by Sinead O'Connor - http://tinyurl.com/bk65rn

And for truly moving experience I offer this: The Chaplet of Divine Mercy in Song

http://tinyurl.com/chhble

It's repetitive, meditative, and very profound. Never has a song captured the Suffering God that is the Passion of Christ quite like this song. It is a vivid reminder of what Christ suffered, and what He IS suffering for all of humanity. This one tends to move you and stay with you, it definitely cuts to the "point". "

CrowWoman wrote on Feb 21, 2009 10:43 AM:

" Thank you, BlueDog. I especially enjoyed The Chaplet of Divine Mercy. You're right about it being meditative, and I believe it will be great for Lent. The art is thought-provoking, too, and enhances the effect. I'm going to make sure my husband, family and friends see this one....

I'm not Catholic, so most of their music in unfamiliar to me (other than that of John Michael Talbot and the monks of Weston Priory).

Talbot has his own website, johnmichaeltalbot.com. "

injustice85 wrote on Feb 25, 2009 7:35 PM:

" BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Feb 15, 2009 9:35 PM:

" Tell me Susan,

if Fetal Homicide Laws have determined that a fetus has the right not to be "murdered" in the womb by a third party, why doesn't it have the right not to be "murdered" by its own mother? "

they have more rights than teenagers lol "