Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TheRedHen

Feminism’s war against women

Recommended Posts

The feminist movement has really done a number on women with respect to the issue of abortion.  We've been bullied into accepting that the decision to abort or not abort is 100% in the hands of the woman.  It's her body.  No one can tell her what to do with her body.  Fine, but let's be honest about how that harms women.  If 100% of the decision making power is hers then so is 100% of the responsibility.  The man who impregnated her is off the hook.  So is the doctor who performs the abortion.  They're only doing what she has decided she wants.  They're serving her desire.  Is that fair?  Of course not.  What is fair is to have everyone involved share the weight of the decision.  The boyfriend or husband shouldn't be able to hide behind her decision.  The doctor shouldn't be able to pretend it's just another requested routine medical procedure.  If abortions are to occur then let's share the burden and let everyone involved suffer the consequences.  I think we'd have fewer of them in the end.

  •  
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Children in my country of origin used to be seen as a source of wealth even a resource for the parents. Now things are turned around children are a cost and a burden.  Well it turns out both concepts are wrong. Society projects value or lack of it on the unborn.  Some things are so much simpler than we can imagine. That the world must have children is one of them.

By the way your avatar picture is scary!

Share this post


Link to post

Haha - sorry about the avatar.  What is your country of origin?  I’m from Australia and what I find interesting is that although as a nation we are less religious, as a people we are much more respectful of religion and life than America.  That’s my opinion anyway.

Share this post


Link to post

I was born in Canada.

Share this post


Link to post

Probably more similar to Australian culture than American in my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, TheRedHen said:

Probably more similar to Australian culture than American in my experience.

Depends on where you live.  Canadians told me and I experienced the same while living there almost 15 years, that Western Canada was more similar to the Western US than Eastern Canada, for example.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Calm said:

Depends on where you live.  Canadians told me and I experienced the same while living there almost 15 years, that Western Canada was more similar to the Western Us than Eastern Canada, for example.

Got to love Alberta the Canadian Utah!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Metis_LDS said:

Got to love Alberta the Canadian Utah!

Calgarian for 12 years, Utahn for the last 7.

Love them both.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Amen, Calgarian for 13 and 1/2 years, Utahn for almost 16.  I felt a bit sad when Utah passed Calgary.  That was the longest by far I had ever lived before and the happiest. Can't really compare the last 16 as it is in another category with my daughter having diabetes, I love Utah and think it was better for where we were at medically speaking, but life is just too different to compare, it has a much more serious tinge to it.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, TheRedHen said:

The feminist movement has really done a number on women with respect to the issue of abortion.  We've been bullied into accepting that the decision to abort or not abort is 100% in the hands of the woman.  It's her body.  No one can tell her what to do with her body.  Fine, but let's be honest about how that harms women.  If 100% of the decision making power is hers then so is 100% of the responsibility.  The man who impregnated her is off the hook.  So is the doctor who performs the abortion.  They're only doing what she has decided she wants.  They're serving her desire.  Is that fair?  Of course not.  What is fair is to have everyone involved share the weight of the decision.  The boyfriend or husband shouldn't be able to hide behind her decision.  The doctor shouldn't be able to pretend it's just another requested routine medical procedure.  If abortions are to occur then let's share the burden and let everyone involved suffer the consequences.  I think we'd have fewer of them in the end.

The primary issue in the USA is Constitutionalism in a very pluralistic society.  Individual rights are deemed supreme, they are protected by the U.S. Constitution, and interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court.  The rule of law is not a feminist concept.  Nor is the rule of law overwhelmed by public opinion (at least not in theory).  Democracy cannot overrule Supreme Court decisions through ordinary legislation.  For that a Constitutional amendment is required, and that is very difficult to achieve.

So, unless the Supreme Court reverses its decision in Roe v Wade on what constitutes life, there is little likelihood that abortion will be made illegal in the USA.  The definition used in that decision was basically viability of the fetus outside the womb, i.e., how early can a preemie survive?  The Court did not adopt the view that life begins at conception.  In fact, the Bible takes the view that life begins when the person takes his first breath (Gen 2:7).

The official teaching of the LDS Church is that human life is sacred:

Quote

Therefore, the Church opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience, and counsels its members not to submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions.


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.


The Church teaches its members that even these rare exceptions do not justify abortion automatically. Abortion is a most serious matter and should be considered only after the persons involved have consulted with their local church leaders and feel through personal prayer that their decision is correct.    https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/public-issues/abortion .

This is very different from the Roman Catholic Church position which makes any and all abortions wrong, asserting that life begins at conception.

Edited by Robert F. Smith
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Calm said:

Depends on where you live.  Canadians told me and I experienced the same while living there almost 15 years, that Western Canada was more similar to the Western US than Eastern Canada, for example.

That’s really changed a lot I think as Alberta grew with the oil boom and then faced a semi collapse economically as oil prices fell. Of course I’ve not been living there in some time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I have never been to Calgary but know people who have. 

How about everyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

I have never been to Calgary but know people who have. 

How about everyone else?

We drove through once. My mission president Ted Brewerton was from Calgary. Top notch fellow.

Edited by Bernard Gui

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

In fact, the Bible takes the view that life begins when the person takes his first breath (Gen 2:7).

Robert, do you think it is really logical to infer that when we all pretty much agree that the creation o Adam narrative in the Bible is allegorical? I believe that a different inference could be drawn from the experience that Elizabeth had when she met Mary, evidently for the first time after Mary had conceived the Lord Jesus. Elizabeth exclaimed that her own conceived child who would be named John leaped in her womb for joy.

15 hours ago, TheRedHen said:

The feminist movement has really done a number on women with respect to the issue of abortion.  We've been bullied into accepting that the decision to abort or not abort is 100% in the hands of the woman.  It's her body.  No one can tell her what to do with her body.  Fine, but let's be honest about how that harms women.  If 100% of the decision making power is hers then so is 100% of the responsibility.  The man who impregnated her is off the hook.  So is the doctor who performs the abortion.  They're only doing what she has decided she wants.  They're serving her desire.  Is that fair?  Of course not.  What is fair is to have everyone involved share the weight of the decision.  The boyfriend or husband shouldn't be able to hide behind her decision.  The doctor shouldn't be able to pretend it's just another requested routine medical procedure.  If abortions are to occur then let's share the burden and let everyone involved suffer the consequences.  I think we'd have fewer of them in the end.

  •  

I do not quite know how to answer that. I have detailed an experience that I and my first wife went through some few years ago when a decision about abortion was thrust upon us. If the decision had of been mine, I would have been put in the position o choosing between my wife and an unborn infant. My wife had the greater burden of choosing between her own life and that of an unborn infant. So maybe I was chickening out, trying to avoid accountability by deferring to my wife and telling her that I would support her, whatever decision she made. It was an agonizing time for both of us because we both feel life is sacred and do knot know exactly when the embryo actually becomes a life.

And I believe that  a decision to get an abortion should be one that is not made lightly. It should be one that is an agonizing choice because we do not know scientifically or as a matter of doctrine when that fetus becomes a child.

Glenn

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The primary issue in the USA is Constitutionalism in a very pluralistic society.  Individual rights are deemed supreme, they are protected by the U.S. Constitution, and interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court.  The rule of law is not a feminist concept.  Nor is the rule of law overwhelmed by public opinion (at least not in theory).  Democracy cannot overrule Supreme Court decisions through ordinary legislation.  For that a Constitutional amendment is required, and that is very difficult to achieve.

So, unless the Supreme Court reverses its decision in Roe v Wade on what constitutes life, there is little likelihood that abortion will be made illegal in the USA.  The definition used in that decision was basically viability of the fetus outside the womb, i.e., how early can a preemie survive?  The Court did not adopt the view that life begins at conception.  In fact, the Bible takes the view that life begins when the person takes his first breath (Gen 2:7).

The official teaching of the LDS Church is that human life is sacred:

This is very different from the Roman Catholic Church position which makes any and all abortions wrong, asserting that life begins at conception.

Hi Robert.

You are correct. We think life begins at conception. I would argue against the use of Gen. 2 to say that life begins with the first breath. Of course the lives of our first parents could not begin at conception. They were never conceived!

But the child in Elizabeth's womb "leapt for joy" upon hearing the voice of "the Mother of my Lord". It would seem difficult to say that John the Baptist was not alive. We would consider him a living soul, according to natural conception, in contrast to the extraordinary creation of Adam and Eve.

Happy Easter to you and yours if I don't see you again before. 

Best,

Rory

 

Edited by 3DOP
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

Hi Robert.

You are correct. We think life begins at conception. I would argue against the use of Gen. 2 to say that life begins with the first breath. Of course the lives of our first parents could not begin at conception. They were never conceived!

But the child in Elizabeth's womb "leapt for joy" upon hearing the voice of "the Mother of my Lord". It would seem difficult to say that John the Baptist was not alive. We would consider him a living soul, according to natural conception, in contrast to the extraordinary creation of Adam and Eve.

Happy Easter to you and yours if I don't see you again before. 

Best,

Rory

Thanks, Rory.  You certainly make a valid point.  The thing is, however, that Brother Brigham claimed that Adam & Eve were conceived the same way all other people are.  He said that the creation of man and woman was only described figuratively, and that they were merely brought from elsewhere.

Happy Easter to you as well.

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

Robert, do you think it is really logical to infer that when we all pretty much agree that the creation o Adam narrative in the Bible is allegorical? I believe that a different inference could be drawn from the experience that Elizabeth had when she met Mary, evidently for the first time after Mary had conceived the Lord Jesus. Elizabeth exclaimed that her own conceived child who would be named John leaped in her womb for joy..............................

Yes, Glenn, you and Rory make a valid point, and Jeremiah 1:5 is still another instance.  And it is, indeed, likely that the Creation story is highly allegorical.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, TheRedHen said:

Probably more similar to Australian culture than American in my experience.

I want to say it’s named after President George Albert Smith. But it’s not. It’s named for Princess Luis Caroline Alberta, fourth daughter of Queen Victoria. 

Cardston, however, is named for the city’s Latter-day Saint founding settler. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

on second thought...

Edited by CV75

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

Hi Robert.

You are correct. We think life begins at conception. I would argue against the use of Gen. 2 to say that life begins with the first breath. Of course the lives of our first parents could not begin at conception. They were never conceived!

But the child in Elizabeth's womb "leapt for joy" upon hearing the voice of "the Mother of my Lord". It would seem difficult to say that John the Baptist was not alive. We would consider him a living soul, according to natural conception, in contrast to the extraordinary creation of Adam and Eve.

Happy Easter to you and yours if I don't see you again before. 

Best,

Rory

 

 

31 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Thanks, Rory.  You certainly make a valid point.  The thing is, however, that Brother Brigham claimed that Adam & Eve were conceived the same way all other people are.  He said that the creation of man and woman was only described figuratively, and that they were merely brought from elsewhere.

Happy Easter to you as well.

Bob

So, did Adam and Eve have belly buttons?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

So, did Adam and Eve have belly buttons?

Of course, got em when their umbilicals were cut and tied by Daddy.

Edited by Robert F. Smith
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I did not realize you guys hold that our first parents were conceived naturally. If you are correct about that, yes. If Catholics are correct, no.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

I did not realize you guys hold that our first parents were conceived naturally. If you are correct about that, yes. If Catholics are correct, no.

I suppose that succinctly sums up many of the major differences between Catholicism and LDS Restorationism.  

 

The shortest poem ever written...

“Fleas”

Adam had ‘em.

I see you like Rimsky-Korsakov....one of my all-time favorites, too..... to listen to and to play.

Edited by Bernard Gui
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Barney
      Just a few honest questions about the LDS Church and abortions.
      If a member of the LDS Church has an abortion, where does the spirit or soul of the aborted child go?  Does the aborted child float somewhere up there until they've been sealed?  Can the aborted child be sealed?  What if the parent or parents of the aborted child try to hide the abortion?  Can they get a Temple Recommend while concealing the abortion and still be sealed while trying to hide the abortion?  If those with knowledge of the abortion and haven't disclosed their absolute 'fact of knowledge' and they proceed to obtain a Temple Recommend, are they allowed to participate in various Church and Temple functions?  If they've failed to disclose knowledge of the abortion, is everything they've done in the Temple after obtaining a Temple Recommend and performed Temple ceremonies null and void and without effect?
      What about those in Church (Stake Leaders, Bishops, and others in the local Ward, members, etc.) who are aware of this who've failed to disclose knowledge of an abortion?  Can they be penalized for not reporting this, including Family Patriarchs who have active knowledge of their own childrens' participation in abortions? 
      I realize that these may seem to be loaded questions, but to this day in late 2017, the Elders and Sisters have been unable to answer these questions thus far.  Their general answers are that, "Well, everyone is a sinner, everyone makes mistakes, all can be forgiven, and... pray to Heavenly Father about it and He will lead you to the answer", but they then refer me to the articles provided by Church leadership which don't answer any of these questions.  Personally, I know of one person on planet earth who deserves to know that he or she has an aborted half brother or half sister somewhere out there.
      This is not a knock on the Church, nor am I trying to be antagonistic, but I'd like other's views about the LDS Church and the topic of abortion.
    • By Five Solas
      The LDS Church has been loud in its opposition to legalized same sex marriage - perhaps most famously (infamously?) in its support for "Proposition 8" in California a few years back.  They've had company, of course.  Plenty of Evangelicals, Catholics, and other Christians have endeavored to hold the line for "traditional marriage." 
       
      But while LDS have been loud & clear on the same sex marriage issue--they're relatively-speaking quiet on the question of legalized abortion where the mother's health is not in question (what I'm calling for purposes of this thread, "convenience abortion").  This is not to say LDS are in favor of abortion (they aren't)--but they clearly haven't shown the same political interest/energy in the matter of legalized convenience abortion.  And certainly not in comparison to Evangelicals and Catholics. 
       
      Why is that? 
       
      --Erik 
       
    • By KevinG
      Compare and contrast:
       
      1) The LDS Officer wanting a non-ceremonial assignment for the SLC Gay Parade being put on probation.
       
      2) A bakery being sued because they refused to bake a cake for a "gay wedding".
       
      3) A Hobby shop suing for the right to deny funding for medical procedures/products they feel are not moral.
       
      4) A Muslim man refusing to handle pork at his cash register suing Costco because he was reassigned to gather shopping carts.
       
      http://7online.com/religion/former-employee-suing-costco-for-religious-discrimination-/532866/
       
      Tuesday, February 24, 2015
      NEW YORK (WABC) -- A man is suing Costco for religious discrimination.
      He tells Eyewitness News exclusively that when he refused to work with pork, the major retailer sent him outside to gather carts...
       
      Is it even possible to be consistent in the application of civil liberties, freedom of association, and religious rights across this diverse yet similar set of issues?
    • By BCSpace
      For your consideration:
      Trailer:

      Full Documentary:
      [media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXOKsQqOiA
      Found myself largely in agreement with the trailer so I am now watching the full documentary. The first statements in the trailer by Phyllis Schafly mirrors the latest recent statements (Conference/Newsroom?) about people erroneously seeing the LDS priesthood in terms of a conflict between men and women.
      The goal of Planned Parenthood et. al. in getting children to experiment sexually in order to fuel the abortion business was accurately reflected as are the overall effects of modern feminism in society. I suspect that if it were produced by people with an LDS background it would be slightly tempered but little changed overall.
      This has been out since 2007 so it's a wonder I had not heard of it till now. Seems likely to be a valuable tool for explaining Christian/LDS values in the subject.
×
×
  • Create New...