Sunday, October 5, 2008

RESPECT LIFE SUNDAY AGAINST OBAMA???

Blogger Mudrake wrote today: "Many children in the U.S. go to bed hungry and are dying needlessly because of stupied fundamentalist Republican policies.
But, Respect Life Sunday is nothing but a single attack on
Obama."

Respect Life Sunday has been observed for years and thus can't be called an attack on Obama--I and people from my church used to join the Catholics along Monroe Street to hold up the distributed posters that say "abortion kills children" --and "Jesus heals and forgives."

Since the demonstration is annual, it has nothing to do with Obama, per se --except that he doesn't believe abortion kills children --and apparently doesn't care what God thinks about the issue. Says he hasn't the "paygrade" to know when human life begins --even though any scientist could tell him. He is very radical on the issue --not even wanting to save kids who survive the abortions --but letting them die in a nurse's arms. He heard all the nurses' and survivor's testimonies about these kids being left to die after surviving the procedure to kill them -- and how the survivors were glad they survived--and yet still maintains his lonely vote against BAIPA. (Born alive infants' protection Act.)

Now, Mudrake, just which Republican policies are sending children to bed hungry at night and causing them to die needlessly??? The gov't has free and reduced-price lunch programs at school, plus the food stamp program -- so why are the kids hungry at night? Have you any idea how much food these poor, hungry kids throw away at school every day? --barrels of food. If they are going to bed hungry, it's probably because Mom spent all the foodstamps on potato chips and pop the first week she got them --instead of planning menus and buying sensibly. I don't know if needy school kids still get school breakfasts; they used to in Toledo. Maybe they found that not enough used that program though they were elegible. They may have had to come early.

I'm not aware of children that don't get enough health care or food to prevent their deaths, if their parents function in their behalf. But no question about it, divorce and single parenting do deprive the children economically--because the most advantaged families typically have a married mother and father in their homes --instead of an absentee dad splitting monies between multiple households in child support. Our moral choices effect poverty even more than gov't. does.

Granted, failing businesses hurt families, too, and gov't can affect business. However, my theory on that is that we should've been building cars Americans needed instead of these gas guzzlers Detroit kept turning out --and more durable cars --as we lost that business to the Asians instead of being the top car producers. That has impacted MUCH industry --especially in our city. This was the fault of CEO leadership --and I saw somewhere that most CEO's are democrats and the corporations tend to be very leftist in their social views and support? So is it really the GOP's fault that the U.S. auto industry has tanked along with much of corporate America?



"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

8 comments:

candyly said...

Funny how people pick and choose which scientists to believe.

Barb said...

Scientists describe the facts of fetal development. Go see the foundation for life kiosk at the Westfield Mall. Once the egg is fertilized, the developing human has begun. He is a unique human life once he is a zygote --the process has started --like a bomb in reverse there is an inevitability of outcome --barring any abnormality or interference --

The conceived being is something good and progressive, fully programmed by DNA Code as to sex, eye, skin and hair color, appearance, potential height, intelligence, fingerprints, etc. The human WILL keep growing until it emerges as a unique individual, a helpless, baby whose life still depends on its mother or other adult for several years, Needing a mother's protection from conception until mature age.

we can't create people --our bodies can but it has nothing to do with our intelligence --this miracle called a baby defies both the theory of evolution and the support for abortion. We keep creating after our own kind --and we are miraculous creatures with our constantly pumping hearts that aren't plugged in to anything, our mushy-looking brains that have computer-like capacities --the way we look at a person and know who he is because we have a mental image of that person in our brains somewhere having once seen that person --our eyes, our skin, our senses --all amazing --all designed --all part of the amazing gift of life.

steve said...

I'm no scientist, and this may sound like crazy talk, but I think that the development of the human fetus is Gods way of displaying the beauty of his method of biological development on this planet - namely evolution. I remember a few years ago when I was in Anatomy and Physiology, we were stuying human in vitro development and they contrasted human fetus devolopment with that of pigs and chickens and other animals at specific stages. And at certain stages the human fetus has a stikingly similar morphology to that of all other animals. I think it's Gods way of showing us where we came from. Now before all your heads explode, that's just my own personal take on human development. I don't think a fetus is entirely "human" till it has self awareness and can act on it's environment. I do believe that at a certain point a fetus does become a human and at that point abortion is immoral, but exactly where that point arrives, I don't know. So for me, late term abortion is definately murder, but early term, when it is just an clump of cells and genes, I don't think that that is a person yet.


http://8e.devbio.com/images/ch23/Richardson1.gif

Barb said...

It's interesting what we do to justify abortion. Evolution helps.

But golly, Steve, your mother didn't give birth to a pig, did she? even though the embryos LOOKED similar at the earliest stages. Just a clump of genes and cells? I think not! you were tiny Stevie in his earliest stage as a Zygote that had your very DNA. What a shame had you been cut up and vacuumed from her womb --or chemically burned, poisened and then removed from the womb!

That zygote was destined to become YOU (knit together in your Mother's womb by God Himself) --and the self-awareness would eventually come. And you may lose some of your self-awareness and your ability to impact your environment someday--should you become ill or demented --and then would you cease to be human such that we could check you out with clear consciences? After all, ol' Grampa Steve doesn't know which way is up anymore! Might as well put him in the trash heap with the aborted babies.

Just when do you think some other life form started to transition its offspring from its own life form to the human life form? There is no evidence of such transition --not even gradual. We all keep giving birth to creatures just like the parents. We don't evolve --any improvements from generation to generation have to do with nutrition, education, parenting, mating --but basically, we get a combination of genes from our 2 parents and it makes us unique --and yet, just like all human beings --little round babies with 10 fingers and 10 toes and brains that will develop and language capacity and reasoning skills.

No matter how much work they do to make apes intelligent, they never are human and don't give birth to progressively more human offspring.

All creatures produce "each after its own kind" just as the Bible said. We have no proof that it was ever otherwise. Only speculations about a few rare fossils. Even extinct creatures that share features and are speculated to be transitional can't be proven transitional. For all we know, the extinct creatures with shared features were just like THEIR parents and offspring. We haven't seen any transitions occuring today; why would we believe they ever did? Just to give us an atheist's explanation for the origin of species. Yes, there are mutations, but the bacteria are still bacteria and the virus are still virus. The virus doesn't become a bacteria and vice versa. "each after its own kind."

And yes, the human was the highest on the Creation chain --the last to be designed and produced. Nothing better comes after us. Just as the Bible said. "in his image, male and female created He them." on the 6th day.

We are god-like --but not Divine. Not like Jesus who could raise the dead and heal the blind, lepers, deaf and dumb and make the man lame from birth walk. Yet, the miracle is that Christ says the Holy Spirit of God can dwell within us. Not in the pig. Not in the horse. Just in man --who was creatied "only a little lower than the angels." It is man who has been given hope for eternal life by a resurrected sacrifice.

It is man who has this self-awareness you talk about --this soul --this ability to communicate with His maker in the name of Christ who bridged the gap made by sin.

Precious little Zygote, Steve, God knew you before you were born. More than a clump of cells and dna.

steve said...

The flesh is only a vehicle for the soul and the mind. What about in the future when man will have the ability to download a persons entire memory onto a computer and mankind will evolve into a machine race to explore the stars? Then we will have achieved immortality.. hahahah HAHAHAHA.. ITS ALIVE!!!! OK, just kidding, but I don't believe that our human-ess is contained in a lump of flesh. I think man transcends this "earthly vessel". The whole life process of DNA - RNA replication and Mitosis and Meiosis is merely to create proteins. It's our experiences and our unique DNA code combined that make us individual humans, not the fact that 23 groups of genes came together to form a chemical reaction and start the process of preprogrammed protein synthesis.

Furthermore, like I was saying in Mudrakes blog, their isn't any explicit edict written in the bible concerning when human life begins. Only innuendo and circumstantial statements that can't really be construed as a law concerning the beginning of life. I attribute the circumstantial in the bible to the limitation of ancient Hebrew and Greek in fully examining the scientific process of fetal development.

Yes, it is possible I could have been sucked out of the womb and not ever have existed. My mother could also have not conceived on the very day I was conceived and I could have been another victim of the menstrual holocaust - Another half embryo lost forever.

Rob R said...

I'm no scientist, and this may sound like crazy talk, but I think that the development of the human fetus is Gods way of displaying the beauty of his method of biological development on this planet - namely evolution.

There's nothing new here, Ernst Heackel (sp?) suggested it over a century ago with drawings that have come to have been regarded as fraudulent. As for what you observed, well, Steve, I'm just not comfortable with the notion that some gross superficial observations of some common exterior features accurately assess the thorough deep complexities between the compared groups in terms of what is hidden under the surface in terms of anatomy and physiology.

The intricate working of a devoloping or even a dead fetus can't be appreciated with the naked eye any more than I can look at you with just my glasses on and see the incredible complexities at work there.

I don't think a fetus is entirely "human" till it has self awareness and can act on it's environment.

That's all well and good and interesting speculation on the philosophy of mind and soul, but steve, would you bet a baby's life on the truth value of this claim? because, that's what we do on a daily basis with abortion. The fact that we don't know for certian when a developing human gains personhood and soul is in no way shape or form an argument for abortion. It's the exact opposite.

Antipelagian said...

Steve said:
I remember a few years ago when I was in Anatomy and Physiology, we were stuying human in vitro development and they contrasted human fetus devolopment with that of pigs and chickens and other animals at specific stages.

Rob's already pointed out that this is *superficial*...at BEST.

This is not even scientific...this is pure conjecture based on insignificant observations you've made.

I don't think a fetus is entirely "human" till it has self awareness and can act on it's environment.

As a new father, I can tell you...my daughter did not begin acting on her environment until well after she was born.

Steve, are you acting on your environment when you're asleep at night? Do you cease being human?

Barb said...

As for the Bible --it says clearly that God knew us before He formed us in our mother's wombs --and Jesus and John the Baptist were special babies before their births--from conception --and reportedly responded to one another in their mothers' wombs when their pregnant mothers met. That's the Word of God.

Of course, this is a matter of faith and not science. but even science cannot create the zygote from man-made materials --it cannot start the beating heart. It can manipulate the stuff life is made of --but can't create one bit of life.

Steve, you and your wife are invited to The Truth Project --about Christian worldview. As described on the blog here. Food, fellowship, and a DVD --with Rob and Christian Apologist and others in attendance, I hope. My home, but i am not going to be in the discussions --unless for any reason Rob should say, "MOM! GET DOWN HERE!!!" which I doubt will happen. I will be dealing with the food.