Abortion Split from: "What the [LDS] church misrepresented in the AP article response"

[MG 2.0]

What are the scenarios, again, where it’s acceptable to “kill an innocent baby”?

Because I want to make sure we’re all clear that the Mormon church, and then by extension MG, are in fact pro-choice.

- Doc

The Church allows for possible exceptions for its members when:

Pregnancy results from rape or incest, or
A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy, or
A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.
Even these exceptions do not automatically justify abortion. Abortion is a most serious matter. It should be considered only after the persons responsible have received confirmation through prayer.

Rape or incest, mother might die, the fetus might come out bad or will not survive beyond birth, and if god confirms the decision through prayer.

I think mg might disagree with the church but he’s not being very clear. Also it seems mg disagrees with god who has been responsible for most abortions. Then again he thinks we have to forget our reasoning when it comes to god because his ways are not our ways and he has to assume god will only do good things like save fetus’ who are going to abort, but then he doesn’t do that, so….let’s just say mg is full of contradiction and lacks a desire to be reasonable.

Apparently I failed to adequately get my points across in a fashion that you were able to fully comprehend what I was saying. Your summary is a mish mash of partial truth/falsity and incomplete and somewhat incoherent interpretations of my posts on this topic.

Again, I would simple invite others to read thoroughly and for complete understanding what it was that I wrote and expressed.

I do apologize for the apparent lack of clarity which was necessary to help you understand fully what I’ve been trying to say.

I thought, however, I was rather clear.

Good day.

Regards,
MG

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

What are the scenarios, again, where it’s acceptable to “kill an innocent baby”?

Because I want to make sure we’re all clear that the Mormon church, and then by extension MG, are in fact pro-choice.

- Doc

The Church allows for possible exceptions for its members when:

Pregnancy results from rape or incest, or
A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy, or
A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.
Even these exceptions do not automatically justify abortion. Abortion is a most serious matter. It should be considered only after the persons responsible have received confirmation through prayer.

Rape or incest, mother might die, the fetus might come out bad or will not survive beyond birth, and if god confirms the decision through prayer.

I think mg might disagree with the church but he’s not being very clear. Also it seems mg disagrees with god who has been responsible for most abortions. Then again he thinks we have to forget our reasoning when it comes to god because his ways are not our ways and he has to assume god will only do good things like save fetus’ who are going to abort, but then he doesn’t do that, so….let’s just say mg is full of contradiction and lacks a desire to be reasonable.

So, an “innocent baby” is created through a trial, a tough trial it may be, and MG allows for “killing an innocent baby” because that makes sense. Either that “innocent baby” is a developing human being worthy of a life or not. How that “innocent baby” is created is beside the point. If outside circumstances have bearing on whether or not that “innocent baby” is worthy of gestation and being allowed to live, then the whole “innocent baby” thing is just a shtick to make a woman’s body property of the state.

- Doc

[Marcus]

As you can see the thread has now been split off. I am fine with that.

Now, say your piece in regards to the topic of this current thread or back off.

Regards,
MG

Looks like you chose to back off.

Regards,
MG

"Back off"? No i got your derailment booted from the topic i started and was interested in:

Mentalgymnast is derailing again, so apparently it needs to be said again

Nice try to divert the attention away from the topic at hand. The Church is still in the wrong. The leaders have been and continue to make big mistakes here, mistakes that you don't want to acknowledge (hence the diversion attempt) or try to justify somehow.

Incidentally, whataboutism is a form of the tu quoque fallacy and a subtype of the ad-hominem. But you already know this.

Mentalgymnast, please start your own thread and stop derailing.

That was what was needed. Pretending to be threatening by telling a person to "back off" because they requested and got a proper thread split is just more of your posturing and trolling.

Stop derailing your own thread.

[dastardly stem]

Apparently I failed to adequately get my points across in a fashion that you were able to fully comprehend what I was saying. Your summary is a mish mash of partial truth/falsity and incomplete and somewhat incoherent interpretations of my posts on this topic.

Again, I would simple invite others to read thoroughly and for complete understanding what it was that I wrote and expressed.

I do apologize for the apparent lack of clarity which was necessary to help you understand fully what I’ve been trying to say.

I thought, however, I was rather clear.

Good day.

Regards,
MG

Take this opportunity. Clarifications are always welcome I say. What do you say? Shall we say god is good even though he could have prevented most abortions and yet would not? If so, shall we say god doesn’t see abortions as evil? Or is abortion only evil if a woman chooses to have one? It’s apparently not evil if the woman wishes to carry it to term and yet god has it killed? Or what if every abortion a woman has chosen to have was inspired by god whether the woman realizes it was god who inspired her or not? How would you know otherwise?

There are so many questions out there that you refuse to answer. I’m trying my best to put your pieces together. But for some reason you seem proudly dogmatic here. And you also indicated we don’t really know what god wants, I thought. Right?

[sock puppet]

Do you feel that the church's stand on abortion is correct? Secondarily, are you horrified at the number of babies that are killed in the mother's womb before birth? Thirdly, when given the opportunity do you stand up for the life of the unborn fetus to the same extent and with the same vehemence that you do for child abuse and rape (not to negate the horrendousness if this crime).

Regards,
MG

MG, babies aren't in wombs. First, there is fertilization of the egg, there is a blastocyst. If it implants in the placenta rather than being expelled, twelve days later it develops into an embryo. It remains an embryo until about nine weeks after implantation, when it then becomes a fetus. Upon birth, it is a baby. There is no evidence of the blastocist or the embryo feeling anything. For a fetus (9 weeks +), "[f]etal awareness of noxious stimuli requires functional thalamocortical connections. Thalamocortical fibers begin appearing between 23 to 30 weeks’ gestational age, while electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in preterm neonates probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks." https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... cle/201429.

In 1990, there were 1.6m abortions (Guttmacher Institute), 1.4m (CDC). This dipped to a low ebb in 2016, but has had a slight uptick in the years since. In 2020, Guttmacher tallied 930,160; CDC had for 2019: 624,346.

In 2019, 93% of abortions occurred during the first trimester – that is, at or before 13 weeks, according to the CDC. An additional 6% occurred between 14 and 20 weeks of pregnancy, and 1% were performed at 21 weeks or more of the 39-40 week gestation. These CDC figures include data from 42 states and New York City (but not the rest of New York).

Only 1%, or 9,302 per Guttmacher's 930,160 or 6,243 per CDC's 624,346 were performed after 21 weeks or more gestation--and thalamocortical fibers only begin to appear in fetuses from 23 to 30 weeks, and EEG's show that functional pain perception probably does not occur before 29 or 30 weeks.

I would prefer if there were no abortions, but I am more horrified that in the U.S. there are undernourished children (12.5% of households with children in the U.S. face 'food insecurity' according to the USDA. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nu ... -graphics/ Given that there are about 3.8m live births per year, 12.5% means in the U.S. there are about 475,000 children born a year that will live in food-insecure households.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, ten years ago nearly half (45%) of the pregnancies in the United States were unintended. Specifically, 27% of all pregnancies were "wanted later" and 18% of pregnancies were "unwanted." Seriously, what chance do unwanted children have in life?

There is a high correlation between anti-abortionists and those opposed to rigorous sex education in the U.S. In the Netherlands, since instituting such sex education in schools about 35 years ago, unwanted pregnancies are now 26.1% per 100,000 people of what they were before implemented.

If you want to avoid abortion, be a strong advocate for rigorous sex education in schools. And certainly, you should eschew Justice Thomas's suggestion in his concurrence in Dobbs (2022) that that Griswold v Connecticut (1965) ought to be reversed, which would allow states to ban the use of contraceptives.

[MG 2.0]

Do you feel that the church's stand on abortion is correct? Secondarily, are you horrified at the number of babies that are killed in the mother's womb before birth? Thirdly, when given the opportunity do you stand up for the life of the unborn fetus to the same extent and with the same vehemence that you do for child abuse and rape (not to negate the horrendousness if this crime).

Regards,
MG

MG, babies aren't in wombs. First, there is fertilization of the egg, there is a blastocyst. If it implants in the placenta rather than being expelled, twelve days later it develops into an embryo. It remains an embryo until about nine weeks after implantation, when it then becomes a fetus. Upon birth, it is a baby. There is no evidence of the blastocist or the embryo feeling anything. For a fetus (9 weeks +), "[f]etal awareness of noxious stimuli requires functional thalamocortical connections. Thalamocortical fibers begin appearing between 23 to 30 weeks’ gestational age, while electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in preterm neonates probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks." https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... cle/201429.

In 1990, there were 1.6m abortions (Guttmacher Institute), 1.4m (CDC). This dipped to a low ebb in 2016, but has had a slight uptick in the years since. In 2020, Guttmacher tallied 930,160; CDC had for 2019: 624,346.

In 2019, 93% of abortions occurred during the first trimester – that is, at or before 13 weeks, according to the CDC. An additional 6% occurred between 14 and 20 weeks of pregnancy, and 1% were performed at 21 weeks or more of the 39-40 week gestation. These CDC figures include data from 42 states and New York City (but not the rest of New York).

Only 1%, or 9,302 per Guttmacher's 930,160 or 6,243 per CDC's 624,346 were performed after 21 weeks or more gestation--and thalamocortical fibers only begin to appear in fetuses from 23 to 30 weeks, and EEG's show that functional pain perception probably does not occur before 29 or 30 weeks.

I would prefer if there were no abortions, but I am more horrified that in the U.S. there are undernourished children (12.5% of households with children in the U.S. face 'food insecurity' according to the USDA. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nu ... -graphics/ Given that there are about 3.8m live births per year, 12.5% means in the U.S. there are about 475,000 children born a year that will live in food-insecure households.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, ten years ago nearly half (45%) of the pregnancies in the United States were unintended. Specifically, 27% of all pregnancies were "wanted later" and 18% of pregnancies were "unwanted." Seriously, what chance do unwanted children have in life?

There is a high correlation between anti-abortionists and those opposed to rigorous sex education in the U.S. In the Netherlands, since instituting such sex education in schools about 35 years ago, unwanted pregnancies are now 26.1% per 100,000 people of what they were before implemented.

If you want to avoid abortion, be a strong advocate for rigorous sex education in schools. And certainly, you should eschew Justice Thomas's suggestion in his concurrence in Dobbs (2022) that that Griswold v Connecticut (1965) ought to be reversed, which would allow states to ban the use of contraceptives.

Thank you very much for taking the time to post this.

Regards,
MG

[dastardly stem]

Thank you very much for taking the time to post this.

Regards,
MG

I'd agree Sock Puppet gave us great information which I think pretty much renders your position moot, for the most part. And yet another thread goes away in which MG refuses to answer questions or really respond to an argument people have made. But if you will consider once more:

Do you agree that on this topic we might not really know what God wants? It sounds to me you are certain about your position on abortion but aren't sure what God is thinking...correct?

[Doctor Steuss]

In what circumstances do you feel abortions of a fetus and/or child carried to almost full term is permissible.

If the pregnancy is at a stage of medical viability, the circumstances wherein advanced medical sustaining care should not be provided should only be in instances wherein he fetus has extreme birth defects, like anencephaly.

Otherwise, once viability with advanced medical sustaining care is reached, the fetus should be provided said care if the pregnancy is aborted. That is what I feel, but I wouldn't exactly be comfortable advocating for legislation to codify what I feel.

Ultimately though, I primarily trust in the judgement of the individual, aided by the judgement of the physicians, and whoever else they draw upon in making the decision.

[MG 2.0]

Thank you very much for taking the time to post this.

Regards,
MG

I'd agree Sock Puppet gave us great information which I think pretty much renders your position moot, for the most part. And yet another thread goes away in which MG refuses to answer questions or really respond to an argument people have made. But if you will consider once more:

Do you agree that on this topic we might not really know what God wants? It sounds to me you are certain about your position on abortion but aren't sure what God is thinking...correct?

I think I’ve already made it clear but I’ll repeat. I trust God. I trust the plan that I believe he enacted for his children. That plan requires agency and the role of nature in the world. In the natural world spontaneous abortions/stillbirths will occur. There are failsafes to take care of inequalities and inequities that naturally occur.

To accuse God, however, of an evil that runs against his nature is a dead end.

On the other hand God enacted the powers of procreation and shared these powers with mankind and also commanded the animal kingdom and other forms of life to reproduce.

If people choose to purposefully disregard God’s commands given to Adam and Eve they are in opposition to God’s command to multiply and replenish the earth.

Granted, 50 percent of all fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's missed menses.

This is nature’s way of providing for a majority viable births with fewer problems.

But for women/men to take that option/decision and choose to electively abort potential healthy babies that are the end result of a pregnancy is a great evil. Millions of potential human beings have been destroyed by the agency of those who make this choice rather than the more difficult choice of bringing a child into the world.

There will be a difference of opinion between religionists and those that either live a hedonistic lifestyle and/or believe there is no accountability to a God when aborting a fetus through their own choices made out of convenience.

It’s one thing for nature to take its course, it’s another for man/womankind to play God.

All of the rationalization in the world doesn’t change that.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Ultimately though, I primarily trust in the judgement of the individual, aided by the judgement of the physicians, and whoever else they draw upon in making the decision.

Unfortunately a culture that disregards the sanctity of life encourages abortion. That unfortunately results in millions of aborted fetuses that would have resulted in viable and healthy baby boys and girls.

One thing to keep in mind also is the health and mental well being of women who abort and then regret having done so.

Young women ought to be encouraged to bring life into the world, not curtail it through abortion.

Why are Elizabeth Warren and others of her ilk so intent on shutting down women’s health clinics that support pregnancy and carrying babies through a full pregnancy? Why would she promote abortion over life?

These are the “whoever else’s” that many in the culture support. That results in bad decisions.

Regards,
MG