Jump to content

Fether

Members
  • Posts

    958
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fether

  1. I understand you are just playing with this, but this is like diving deep into tax law, investments and inflation to decide how much you really owe in taxes. Just don’t pay someone to have an abortion and we are good
  2. Does the writer to qualify what they mean by this?
  3. Are we, as faithful Latter-day Saint, expected to vote for laws that support our faith? If we live the principles, but vote in laws that don’t force others to live the principles, are we unfaithful? for example: - Is it unfaithful to vote against the prohibition of alcohol? - Is it unfaithful to vote for legalization of weed? - Is it unfaithful to vote in laws that allow early term abortions for everyone everywhere? - Is it unfaithful to oppose laws that make it illegal to have sex before marriage? - Are we expected to seek to vote in a law that makes it illegal to not attend church on Sunday? “there was no law against a man’s belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds.” - Alma 30:7
  4. Fair point! thanks! I am pro-life. I just didn’t understand this point. This makes it a little more clear. Had the church ever stated why they are against abortion beyond the “sanctity of life”
  5. So there is some doctrine somewhere that says “if a child is born in the covenant or dies before birth, they are automatically sealed to their parents”? please do share
  6. I’m mostly just asking about this point because it seem to fly in the face on the church’s pro-life stance. If we believe life starts at conception and we are against abortions, why do we also not allow sealings to happen for miscarriages and aborted children?
  7. But sealing to parents still happen with children who die younger than 8 and were born outside the covenant. In my example. We would not seal the aborted child or the miscarried one. But we would seal any other children that were born. why wouldn’t we seal the aborted or miscarried children?
  8. I raise your handbook quote with this handbook quote: “No baptism or endowment is performed for a child who died before the age of eight. Only sealings to parents are performed for such children. If the child was sealed to parents while he or she was living or if the child was born in the covenant, no vicarious ordinances are performed.” https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/members-guide-to-temple-and-family-history-work/chapter-7-providing-temple-ordinances?lang=eng
  9. I run a very serious and Vehemently anti-Neanderthal organization. We are meeting outside the SLC temple This next Monday night to protest the potential recognition of sub-human species.
  10. If we do temple ordinances for born children, why not unborn children?
  11. Because they are dead and we are alive. And they look different than us. Hairy man apes don’t deserve temple ordinances.
  12. Does the church do temple work for aborted children or miscarriages? Say My mother has a miscarriage and the. Later has an abortion. I then join the church. Would I then do temple work for the miscarried child and the aborted child?
  13. Because they look different than us and are stupid
  14. I’ll say it… Neanderthals are sub human and don’t deserve temple ordinances.
  15. Do they? If so, I assume it is simply because of connection to them. The further something away is, the easier it is to not be affected by it.
  16. It’s the “other concerns” part I am hesitant about
  17. I agree 100%. I know nothing of it. I am very willing to offer sympathy and patience with anyone going through it. But it won’t change my view that an unborn baby is just as valuable as a born baby.
  18. Because there is less emotional connection and mentally it doesn’t seem as there was every really a life to be loved.
  19. Someone grieving, no matter how deep, is no moral justification for killing an unborn baby.
  20. For a pro-lifer, the woman’s choice has little to do with the conversation. There is a living person in her stomach and the only reason they are on with abortion is because they are emotionally detached. There would be no woman who would willingly kill a baby that is newly born.
  21. I fixed your question. And whoever is elected to make the laws ought to make the laws. Whether the majority are male or female is up to the populace
  22. I would happily consider the abortion of a baby in a scenario where the parents would kill the daughter. My point, however, is that we can’t use such fringe cases to decide laws.
×
×
  • Create New...