Abortion

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, Grunt said:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/eternal-marriage-student-manual/abortion?lang=eng

I could have sworn I heard that! Thank you. 

[LDSGator]

I do feel sympathy for both sides of the abortion argument because it’s so nasty. Not all pro lifers would shoot up abortion clinics and not all pro choicers are Godless atheists who burn bibles and hate children.
 

Both of the extremes are too dense to see how much rhetoric like that hurts their cause, but self criticism is impossible when you see yourself as a noble crusader for women's rights or a holy warrior standing up for life. 

[Carborendum]

6 hours ago, Grunt said:

Thank you.  I'm familiar with most of these, and others, which ultimately led to my question.   Murder is typically used as a legal term (ie: abortion is legal therefore not murder) but it also has spiritual connections.  The Church has said there may be circumstances where it would not consider abortion serious enough to restrict membership.   I just felt that "abortion is not murder" was a very broad statement that might imply things which are not necessarily true.

Statements from general authorities are very consistent.  "Abortion is like unto murder."  There is apparently an ecclesiastical difference.  Yet "It cannot be overstated that it remains one of the most grievous sins of this generation (dispensation)."

Some use the "like unto murder" as some sort of "get out of jail free card."  That is ridiculous.  "Oh, I didn't commit murder.  I only committed a sin so close to murder that it is difficult to tell the difference."  This won't stand up well when brought before our Maker.  It should be a HUGE blinking red sign that we ought to do all we can to stay away from it as much as possible.

On the other hand, we make allowances for abortion that would not be had for murder of one outside the womb.  Rape victims are essentially given a green light (I'm being generous with that terminology, I know).  If it is murder, why that allowance?  Of the three parties involved, the baby is certainly the one who certainly has no guilt in the matter.

There is a difference that warrants some different treatment.  Yet, it is so close that it should never be taken so carelessly as so many do in this generation.  It is this sliver of a difference that causes so much grief among people who aren't given enough light to understand what they are choosing.

[mordorbund]

On 11/10/2023 at 2:15 PM, LDSGator said:

I’m not sure anyone has had their mind changed after a debate. Especially an online one on such a loaded topic. 

I agree that very rarely does a person participating in a debate changer their mind from the debate, but it does happen. Dave Rubin went full derp-face while interviewing  Larry Elder and subsequently changed his views on black victimhood narratives.

@NeuroTypicalhas more experience with online debates than I do, but I’m sure he’ll agree that the person you’re trying to convince is not the die-hard staring at you but the silent lurker sitting on the fence observing the proceedings. These individuals change their minds all the time because they’re coming to the debate wanting to be persuaded.

[LDSGator]

16 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

I agree that very rarely does a person participating in a debate changer their mind from the debate, but it does happen. Dave Rubin went full derp-face while interviewing  Larry Elder and subsequently changed his views on black victimhood narratives.

@NeuroTypicalhas more experience with online debates than I do, but I’m sure he’ll agree that the person you’re trying to convince is not the die-hard staring at you but the silent lurker sitting on the fence observing the proceedings. These individuals change their minds all the time because they’re coming to the debate wanting to be persuaded.

All excellent points. 100% agree. 

Edited November 12, 2023 by LDSGator

[JohnsonJones]

On 11/11/2023 at 11:05 AM, Grunt said:

Thank you.  I'm familiar with most of these, and others, which ultimately led to my question.   Murder is typically used as a legal term (ie: abortion is legal therefore not murder) but it also has spiritual connections.  The Church has said there may be circumstances where it would not consider abortion serious enough to restrict membership.   I just felt that "abortion is not murder" was a very broad statement that might imply things which are not necessarily true.

In that same light, of course, is killing.  Some are very troubled by killing at times, even when approved by the Church.  A prime example are some of our defenders of our Freedoms (of which I think you were one at one time).  At times, many of them have been involved in combat and thus, are in the position of needing to kill or be killed.  Others are ordered to kill the enemy, even when not in a direct threat themselves.  This killing can be troubling to those who participate, but church leaders have been told to assure such individuals that the sins do not lie on them, but on the heads of those who were their leaders and brought such wars upon themselves in the first place.

Less black and white are the situations such as home defense or killing another in self-defense.  The unfortunate reality is sometimes people must defend themselves and their homes from those who would destroy them or their families. 

In the same way, abortion has a few situations that MAY be an exception (stressing the word, MAY there).  When it is caused by non-consent or force, When a Physician considers the life or health of the mother in danger.  When the baby's health may be in danger or not be viable.  In these situations, this is not an automatic reason for abortion, but when consideration could be given with prayer, pondering and consideration. 

This is why I favor the original Roe vs. Wade where it was NOT an automatic election or "woman's choice" per se, but something that was determined by Doctor.  It was something that was kept between a patient and their Medical provider (also a big reason for our medical privacy laws today).  Later court decisions changed that (more towards what we see as Woman's choice or my body, my decision...etc).  I feel that some do not take these things into account.

This is why Ohio was a disaster for abortion rights individuals from what I hear.  The Democrats ran commercials with a 9 year old and 12 year old where they basically pointed out that they would be forced to go through with birthing, even from rape or incest, due to the laws that the public were voting on.  From my understanding (especially in the case of a 9 year old) the younger a child is, the higher a chance that they giving birth to another would kill them (I am not a doctor).  Most people, when shown things like this, tend to get outraged.

The problem is that these tend to be the exceptions rather than the rule.  I think if we looked at the majority of Abortions done between 1993 and 2020, we would find that it was an extremely small percentage that involved children.  A majority probably were done with those who were over the age of 18, though a notable percentage may also be with those from ages 15-18 as well.  It is disgenious to try to present it only as something that affects young children (that seems to be the slant that many counter campaigns are doing that are pushing for states to legalize abortion).  However, it seems to be EFFECTIVE and why many states are either legalizing abortion within them, or when it is on the ballots, voters are voting for abortion.

It would seem more politically intelligent to allow some exceptions in the laws for such cases (which would disarm that entire argument) if one wanted to actually limit abortions and win over the public on the discourse. 

That said, from conception without exception is a perfectly valid argument, and if more people paid heed to what their religion actually taught, would probably be a more popular opinion. 

[JohnsonJones]

On 11/11/2023 at 10:29 AM, Carborendum said:

Here are some quotes to consider:

Quote

I know of no sins connected with the moral standard for which we cannot be forgiven. I do not exempt abortion.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1992/04/our-moral-environment?lang=eng#p13

 

Off topic.  I appreciated this article.  I found the following to be extremely interesting.

Quote

It is not uncommon for responsible parents to lose one of their children, for a time, to influences over which they have no control. They agonize over rebellious sons or daughters. They are puzzled over why they are so helpless when they have tried so hard to do what they should.

--------------------------------------------------

“The Prophet Joseph Smith declared—and he never taught a more comforting doctrine—that the eternal sealings of faithful parents and the divine promises made to them for valiant service in the Cause of Truth, would save not only themselves, but likewise their posterity. Though some of the sheep may wander, the eye of the Shepherd is upon them, and sooner or later they will feel the tentacles of Divine Providence reaching out after them and drawing them back to the fold. Either in this life or the life to come, they will return. They will have to pay their debt to justice; they will suffer for their sins; and may tread a thorny path; but if it leads them at last, like the penitent Prodigal, to a loving and forgiving father’s heart and home, the painful experience will not have been in vain. Pray for your careless and disobedient children; hold on to them with your faith. Hope on, trust on, till you see the salvation of God.” (Orson F. Whitney, in Conference Report, Apr. 1929, p. 110.)

We cannot overemphasize the value of temple marriage, the binding ties of the sealing ordinance, and the standards of worthiness required of them. When parents keep the covenants they have made at the altar of the temple, their children will be forever bound to them. President Brigham Young said:

“Let the father and mother, who are members of this Church and Kingdom, take a righteous course, and strive with all their might never to do a wrong, but to do good all their lives; if they have one child or one hundred children, if they conduct themselves towards them as they should, binding them to the Lord by their faith and prayers, I care not where those children go, they are bound up to their parents by an everlasting tie, and no power of earth or hell can separate them from their parents in eternity; they will return again to the fountain from whence they sprang.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols., 2:90–91.)

I have posted things regarding this in the past, but it is always to see it stated once again regarding how strong the binding ties of Temple Sealing and Marriage are. 

[LDSGator]

On 11/12/2023 at 7:46 PM, JohnsonJones said:

or when it is on the ballots, voters are voting for abortion.

Sadly, republicans never grasped the meaning of “Don’t ask a question you don’t want the answer to.” 

 

I’ve noticed that some in the GOP have turned this into a “win win” situation. If a state votes for abortion rights, it confirms how sinful and awful people are. If the state votes to ban abortions, then they celebrate the win. It’s strange. 

Edited November 16, 2023 by LDSGator

[ZealoulyStriving]

On 11/11/2023 at 9:11 AM, LDSGator said:

@zil2, didn’t Gordon Hinckley have a GC speech about it or am I lost?

Then Elder Russell M. Nelson did:

Reverence for Life

 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1985/04/reverence-for-life?lang=eng

[Jamie123]

Many, many years ago a very good friend of mine had an abortion. She was a girl i used to hang out with a lot (not a girlfriend) and we used to watch movies together and eat pizza, and I'd go to her apartment to keep her company when she was feeling down. (And no I wasn't the father, in case you were wondering.) She didn't tell me about the abortion until afterwards, which in some ways was a good thing, because had I known I would have pulled out every stop to talk her out of it - including offering to pay for the child's upbringing myself. My own family would have then called me an idiot, but I know what I'd have told them: "All death diminishes me for I am involved in mankind" (which I've probably misquoted). As it was, all I could do was try to be supportive of her. Anything else would not have brought the baby back. 

[LDSGator]

2 hours ago, Jamie123 said:

Many, many years ago a very good friend of mine had an abortion. She was a girl i used to hang out with a lot (not a girlfriend) and we used to watch movies together and eat pizza, and I'd go to her apartment to keep her company when she was feeling down. (And no I wasn't the father, in case you were wondering.) She didn't tell me about the abortion until afterwards, which in some ways was a good thing, because had I known I would have pulled out every stop to talk her out of it - including offering to pay for the child's upbringing myself. My own family would have then called me an idiot, but I know what I'd have told them: "All death diminishes me for I am involved in mankind" (which I've probably misquoted). As it was, all I could do was try to be supportive of her. Anything else would not have brought the baby back. 

So sorry about your friend. That’s an awful burden to carry. Hope she found peace. 

[NeuroTypical]

On 11/16/2023 at 9:51 AM, LDSGator said:

I’ve noticed that some in the GOP have turned this into a “win win” situation. If a state votes for abortion rights, it confirms how sinful and awful people are. If the state votes to ban abortions, then they celebrate the win. It’s strange. 

Well, to be sure, this is hardly a phenomenon from the right.  It's not uncommon for me to hear my woke millennial buddies, talking about how grateful they are to live in Portland or Seattle or Cali, where people who actually care about humans are in charge, and good sane progressive policies are more abundant.  They roll their eyes at Texas and Florida, wondering aloud what must be wrong with people to go live in those barbaric spaces, where the people and the government hates the rainbow and women.  They're enthusiastic about Colorado, which seems to be pulling itself out of it's history of white colonization.  (This is a rough summary of their comments over a few years on the topic, and yes, I've seen eye rolls.)

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Well, to be sure, this is hardly a phenomenon from the right.  I

I totally agree with you, and to me that’s more evidence that the extremes of both sides are filled with the same types of people. 

[NeuroTypical]

7 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

the extremes of both sides are filled with the same types of people. 

Agreed.  And not only that, but the extremes seem to point at their counterpart on the other side when they're looking to get offended. 

Antifa and the QAnon people pay attention to and fight each other.
Conservatives and Liberals stoke outrage by pointing to what the other one is doing. 
Democrats and Republicans spend a lot of time criticizing the other.
Socialists and Capitalists attack each other and defend their own. 

I'm still of the opinion that my various opinions and principles which make me who I am, are more correct than those with whom I argue.  But boy howdy does the whole human experience look an awful lot like this:

[LDSGator]

17 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Agreed.  And not only that, but the extremes seem to point at their counterpart on the other side when they're looking to get offended. 

Antifa and the QAnon people pay attention to and fight each other.
Conservatives and Liberals stoke outrage by pointing to what the other one is doing. 
Democrats and Republicans spend a lot of time criticizing the other.
Socialists and Capitalists attack each other and defend their own. 

I'm still of the opinion that my various opinions and principles which make me who I am, are more correct than those with whom I argue.  But boy howdy does the whole human experience look an awful lot like this:

Agree totally with everything you said my friend. One of my favorite things to watch is when the hard right and hard left call one another snowflakes with no sense of irony. 

[Ironhold]

8 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Well, to be sure, this is hardly a phenomenon from the right.  It's not uncommon for me to hear my woke millennial buddies, talking about how grateful they are to live in Portland or Seattle or Cali, where people who actually care about humans are in charge, and good sane progressive policies are more abundant.  They roll their eyes at Texas and Florida, wondering aloud what must be wrong with people to go live in those barbaric spaces, where the people and the government hates the rainbow and women.  They're enthusiastic about Colorado, which seems to be pulling itself out of it's history of white colonization.  (This is a rough summary of their comments over a few years on the topic, and yes, I've seen eye rolls.)

It's been my experience that such individuals who "know" so much about the rest of the world have rarely, if ever, actually left their tiny little bubble within their large, usually coastal, city. 

...And whenever someone calls them out on it, they have some excuse for having never left. 

[LDSGator]

43 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

It's been my experience that such individuals who "know" so much about the rest of the world have rarely, if ever, actually left their tiny little bubble within their large, usually coastal, city. 

...And whenever someone calls them out on it, they have some excuse for having never left. 

That’s true, and I agree with you. With a slight caveat. In huge cities like NYC, Toronto,  LA or London you can experience almost every culture known to man in a few square miles. Is it the same as living to Beijing for three years? Of course not. But someone living in Boston/Philly for twenty years and never leaving might be more culturally aware than someone who never left rural Florida.

 

In my limited experience many Americans are clueless about other cultures and grossly overestimate their knowledge. When we’ve hosted Chinese exchange students people stupidly tell us to “take them to grocery stores.”     
 

Uh…

 

We point and laugh at them when their backs are turned. Or we make fun of them to their face. 

Edited February 27 by LDSGator

[LDSGator]

I’ve also heard stories of stupid Americans asking German exchange students what language they speak in….Germany. Or making Nazi comments  like it’s the fault of the 15 year old kid who just wants to improve his English skills and make new friends. 
 

😞 

[zil2]

1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

I’ve also heard stories of stupid Americans asking German exchange students what language they speak in….Germany.

Well, duh!  They speak Deutsch. 

[Ironhold]

2 hours ago, LDSGator said:

That’s true, and I agree with you. With a slight caveat. In huge cities like NYC, Toronto,  LA or London you can experience almost every culture known to man in a few square miles. Is it the same as living to Beijing for three years? Of course not. But someone living in Boston/Philly for twenty years and never leaving might be more culturally aware than someone who never left rural Florida.

Scenario.

You ask someone where their food comes from.

They say the grocery store. 

You ask where the grocery store gets their food from.

They either can't answer you or think it just shows up there. 

That's the kind of ignorance I'm talking about, people who have never even considered life outside of their little bubble, let alone expressed any desire to set foot outside of it. 

[LDSGator]

19 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

people who have never even considered life outside of their little bubble, let alone expressed any desire to set foot outside of it. 

Understand. Those people bother me too when they act like they know everything. 

[Vort]

4 hours ago, Ironhold said:

It's been my experience that such individuals who "know" so much about the rest of the world have rarely, if ever, actually left their tiny little bubble within their large, usually coastal, city.

In my twenties, in the years following my mission, I got to know quite a few New Yorkers who happened to have moved to Utah or Pennsylvania or wherever I was living at the time. I had had almost no contact with people from NYC throughout my life, but I happened to get to know several (a dozen or so) pretty well. They tended to be loud and opinionated, which was sort of the stereotype, so I was not surprised by that. I was shocked—shocked, I tell you! (but I really was)—that they as a group were easily the most provincial individuals I had ever met. New York City was not merely their world; in their eyes, it was the world. They knew shockingly little about the rest of the world, including Europe but, more surprisingly, about the United States. They talked about "the big square states out West", but they couldn't name a half dozen of those states (they got California and Texas—yes, Texas is a western state if you're a New Yorker). They often seemed frankly baffled when people did not share their particular viewpoint on a given topic. It was really amazing to see, and not at all what I had anticipated.

I remember going to Italy and finding the Italians (whom I had always assumed were so suave and cosmopolitan compared to a yokel like me) to be quite provincial, at least as much as my fellow Americans. Imagine my surprise to find out New Yorkers were much more so.

tl;dr—I agree. Big city folks are often in much more of a bubble than anyone else. As the New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael was claimed* to have said, "I can’t believe Nixon won. I don’t know anyone who voted for him."

*Her actual quote was slightly less provincial (or at least she was more aware of her own provinciality) but even more full of New York superiority: "I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them." Well, at least she didn't say "sometimes when I'm in a theater I can smell them", though I expect that's what she meant.

Edited February 27 by Vort

[zil2]

5 hours ago, Vort said:

in the years following my mission

I suspect this is one of the subconscious benefits of being a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Even without having been on a mission yourself, it's probable there are members of your ward with whom you've conversed on at least a casual level about some of the differences between your own culture and half a dozen of those very different from your own - because they lived immersed in said different cultures for 1.5 to 2 years.  In short, through the experiences (past or anticipated) of others, we are more aware of cultural differences.

The repeated study of scripture would also make us a bit more aware of such than the average bear...

[Ironhold]

7 hours ago, zil2 said:

I suspect this is one of the subconscious benefits of being a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Even without having been on a mission yourself, it's probable there are members of your ward with whom you've conversed on at least a casual level about some of the differences between your own culture and half a dozen of those very different from your own - because they lived immersed in said different cultures for 1.5 to 2 years.  In short, through the experiences (past or anticipated) of others, we are more aware of cultural differences.

The repeated study of scripture would also make us a bit more aware of such than the average bear...

There's also something to be said for living near a US military base.

The United States military reserves the right to transfer people between bases as they feel there is a need for that person. This includes US military bases abroad, where it's common for service members to marry local residents and return back to the United States with their foreign-born spouses and possibly some of that spouse's family. Put it all together, and your larger military bases will often bring about very multi-cultural civilian communities. 

I live right by Fort Hood / Fort Cavazos, and I dare say we're more diverse than some of the towns the "good and proper" crowd who tend to preach diversity live in.

[Ironhold]

...And I'm on Twitter right now having to explain to someone from Chicago that people in smaller cities shop at Wal-Mart because Wal-Mart is often the biggest retailer in town. 

He's 30 and by his own admission can't understand why we don't all just drive however far we have to drive to go to places like Barnes & Noble. 

A woman from NYC who's about my age is actually backing me up on this, so hopefully we'll get through to him.