Jump to content

Anijen

Contributor
  • Content Count

    2,521
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,237 Excellent

About Anijen

  • Rank
    Brings Forth Plants
  • Birthday 01/01/1868

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    never

Recent Profile Visitors

3,983 profile views
  1. Please do NOT put words into my mouth. I have never made the argument that human life is the same. I have made the argument, that life is life. Even in my answer to you I spoke of prioritizing life (i.e. triage). I have reported your post. It is absolutely without excuse. Your statistics still say 75% will die. No, I do not believe one can honestly give an exact number in your very sill Hobson choice scenario. Abortion is murder, plain and simple.
  2. I'm not sure what your confusion is here. Remember most fetuses that are aborted were not because they were viable or not, but simply because they were of inconvenience to the mother. Besides, Bluebell, Alteridem, and others make a great point; if the fetus is not viable, then why kill it if it is going to die anyway?
  3. Very sad justification for abortion. I might add even evil. Because there are so many miscarriages we then should accept abortion? I do not think so. Abortion is purposefully killing, miscarriages are not.
  4. Anijen

    Statement on Book of Mormon geography

    Every islander I know has once described the Americas as islands. Perhaps they do not mean too, and i am sure they know the difference, but it happens daily.
  5. Overheard; "yeah, out of the 1793+ abortion clinics, you can never find one soon enough. I guess I'll just have to kill my baby at a later term."
  6. Anijen

    Statement on Book of Mormon geography

    Just an FYI, you are lecturing a very accomplished sailor. rodheadlee has lived in his sailboat and has sailed IIRC the currents we are speaking about many times. Besides currents will change at different times, seasons, temperatures, El Nino, etc.. Furthermore, God can move currents, ships, both too accomplish this.
  7. Nehor, I love your style of humor.
  8. These Hobson choice type scenarios are unrealistic. Just saw a meme were I could "only save one" Dumbledore, Dobby, Doctor Who Sirius, Fred, etc.. Why is it only one? Phhhift, I wanna save them all. "Where to elect there is but one, 'Tis Hobson's choice—take that, or none" You still deserve an answer. Seeking, I guess what I would do is prioritize like a triage. Are the embryos even viable (most are not viable for human life, because the thawing process)? The six month old baby, there is no speculation she is alive and breathing. I'd save her first. I would never harm a baby, I would never harm an unborn baby, I place them in a higher priority than say a dog (and I LOVE dogs), I would not purposefully go out to harm any life, not even an insect. However, I would not suffer a single pang of guilt slapping a mosquito sucking blood from my arm. I would feel guilty hurting a dog and I think my remorse would be huge if I harmed a baby... Now comes the; "would you kill an animal?" argument. I believe again babies are higher than animals. I believe some animals are an important food source. It is hard to eat an animal (say a chicken) when it is still alive. Please do not apple/orange the discussion of babies equating with animals, it is a silly argument no matter how many Harvard/Princeton professors advocate it. Again a Hobson's choice question... I will exhaust every possibility to save both. You said the dog was unconscious, is the dog saveable? If not I'd save the embryo's and come back for the dog. I refuse to think there is only one choice. Oh, and I love dogs.... love love love
  9. I would like to clarify that a baby within a womb is not a woman's body. The baby, has his/her own body, inside the host of another body. I reject the silly idea that life starts when the baby draws its first breath outside the womb. The baby is already receiving its oxygen, drawing its breath already via oxygenated blood through the umbilical cord. In regard to scriptural support, I would suggest that when the baby jumped within the womb when Elizabeth and Mary were together in the recognition of the Savior that there is an implied scriptural support of life inside the womb.
  10. And neither do I. I am making the distinction that both are life.
  11. Interesting that we will pay millions to divert highways so that a certain endangered species will not be harmed. We will create nature areas for all manner of life to have a place to habitat. We will legislate into laws that when a deer leaves a National Park and goes on to private land, that same deer receives all the protections from it being hunted. I have fought against all manner of child abuse and prosecuted those who are guilty of it. I contribute money to charities specifically made for children. I ask my government, on every level, to legislate for the wellbeing and protection of our children. I help educate these children by teaching in the school systems. Why would I not for the unborn?
  12. If I ask my two year old grandson what is in her moms pregnant belly? He will answer, my baby sister. Almost everybody knows what is in the womb. I believe there is no difference between the embryo and the adult that would justify it being killed. Is killing you at an earlier stage justified rather than killing you at an older, say adult stage? Are differences in size, level of development, environment, degree of dependency good reasons to kill then, but not now? Do you think hurting people because of their skin color or gender is okay? I hope not. Why is it then okay to hurt them because they are smaller, less developed, or in a different location? Or are you practicing selective prejudicism? Abortion is the worst form of discrimination against the less developed, the smallest, those who cannot protect themselves. A cystoblast is still life. I was once a mass of cells, killing me then is just as wrong as killing me now. Both are killing.
  13. To me life is more precious than how the words label them.
  14. Hi Calm. I agree, It is shocking how we have devolved into thinking abortion outside the womb would be condoned. Here are some legal terms that might help us all understand the legalese: For the crime of assault you need to purposely, meaning with intent, put someone in a state of fear, (no contact is necessary to have an assault, being placed in a state of fear is enough). The victim would show a reasonable apprehension that they would be harmed. Here, I do not think it would qualify as an assault because the pregnant mother voluntarily placed herself in the position of having an abortion. Battery is defined by an intent to commit the act of using non-consensual harmful or offensive contact. Again here, the mother volunteering for the abortion would take away the needed element of non-consent. "Murder" is defined as the killing of a human by another human with malice aforethought. In the decision Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court made the argument that a baby inside the womb is not yet "human" until born. Thus, the Court avoided the murder charge when an abortion takes place because the baby, legally, is not yet human. However, this will cause some redefining now. If some states passed laws for abortion after the baby is born. I think what will be argued is that it will not be considered an abortion but viewed like unplugging someone from life support. i.e. the baby is born made comfortable and warm but nothing else, eventually the baby dies. My opinion; killing a baby inside the womb is killing (even at the zygote stage). It is wrong and IMO there is no justification of allowing a baby to be killed before it is born let alone after it is born.
  15. Well, I guess if you find the government condoned killing of babies unethical.
×