America After 50 Years of the Pill
Geoff Botkin writes on the societal implications of 50 years on birth control…buckle up.
“Fifty-nine modern nations are plagued by the high-tech benefits of birth-control pills. Each of them have waged a cultural war against babies. Each of them suffer below-replacement birthrates. Each of them face potential extinction. But concerns such as national suffering, dangerous international geopolitics and the disappearance of entire nations are matters that would require mature thinking – something that was successfully bred-out of the American people when they accepted the pill as, in the words of Hugh Hefner, the greatest invention of the 20th century.”
Read How ‘The Pill’ Led to Societal Infantilism
Related posts:
Tags: birth control
birth control | Word Warrior | 
March 3, 2010 11:39 pm
Saved…
Click on the hyper-linked text “Coming Home” in my comment.
Grace sweetie, who just brought it up again? That would be you. You’re the one practically dancing around with a “See? I’m right, I’m right, and you can’t disprove it!” attitude. It amuses me that you think your words mean something to me.
“You off-handedly denied these verses”
No I didn’t dear; I said God was addressing people who SURVIVED pregnancy. God knew which eggs would grow to be humans and have souls; I can’t believe I have to explain this to you. And don’t even bother trying to wave this post in my face, because your last post, like every one before it, required-no, DEMANDED-an answer.
“An unborn child, even in embryo form”
Says who? Neither the Bible nor science say this.
Thanks for the link, Kelly. I appreciate that man’s honesty on the matter. He appeared to conclude what I’ve already acknowledged: that fertilization creates a fertilized egg, a new cell, which if unprevented will grow eventually into a full human being, or the beginning of one. There was a heck of a lot of medical jargon, but my deduction was this: according to this man, a zygote is the beginning of an embryo, which is a cell that if unprevented will grow into a full-fledged human. Am I right?
Jennifer, I don’t believe anyone is dancing around regarding your obvious ignorance of Biblical truth. I think if anything most of us feel pity for you. You can still obtain salvation. Repent and trust God.
I’ll leave you with these verses and due to your hard heartedness and stiff neck hope others will leave it to the Lord to “sift you on the threshing floor”:
2 Timothy 2:14 -16
Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers. Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. But avoid worldly and empty (vain) chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness and their talk will spread like gangrene.
Proverbs 26:4
Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
Proverbs 25:5
Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
We are making her wise in her own conceit.
Jennifer, I hope you will listen to God’s voice through His written word because, I, like many on this blog fear for your soul. Not because you don’t think like us but because of your obvious disbelief in Scripture.
You are arguing symantecs, yes God knew which ones would live. So, you would take the place of God and presume that you know which ones should die? Prideful, prideful, prideful Where little child is your humility?
Jennifer,
Yes and no; he is saying that fertilization creates a zygote but that a zygote is a human being.
Jennifer, I feel like the jargon has been the problem in this whole debate. Since it isn’t rational or possible that a fully-developed human can be present at conception, then it’s equally irrational to claim the zygote is any less human. The fact that a human MUST begin as a zygote doesn’t make it less human. The logic is so, well logical, that the frustration from others should come as no surprise.
You, little child, are an ignorant and arrogant fool. How dare you question my salvation because I disagree with your fundamental views of the Bible? I hope you don’t return to your own prideful folly like the dogs mentioned in Scripture when you hope to convert a true non-believer. You, little Pharisee, has “wisdom” which means nothing to me. You are not my sister, I am not yours, and as of now I am ignoring your prideful spirit and barbs of fear.
So basically Kelly, he’s defining the zygote as a human being; is it not a single cell with a single nucleus? Is he not basically saying what you and others have been saying the whole time?
Jennifer,
No and yes, again. *He* is not defining a zygote as a human being. But he has (apparently on the site??) provided scores of statements from the scientific community concluding that a zygote is, indeed, a human.
My point is that you can’t bank on “the medical community says it’s not human” because many, many scientists have concluded it is.
I don’t see anything on the site saying anything other than “a zygote is the cell beginning of a human being, and I and other scientists believe it is therefore the equal of and/or nothing less than the beginning of a human being.” They seem to be saying in other words that it’s both a cell and a human.
Please read the following 13-page paper by Robert George:
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/daed.2008.137.1.23
If you don’t have access to a Daedalus subscription and don’t want to pay for access to the paper, there is a free version available here:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3671/is_200801/ai_n24392942/
A more detailed analysis can be found in the book “Embryo: A Defense of Human Life” by Robert George and Christofer Tollefsen, soon to be discussed on this blog:
http://gerardnadal.com/2010/02/27/by-popular-demand/
Can I re-post my comment? All of us should stop engaging, taking the bait. Pearls to swine. Can we not see the hand of the enemy gaining a foothold in our lives because we assume we can change the mind of Jennifer who is arguing to argue, not to gain understanding? If this were a conversation in a room with all of us there, would be continue? I think cyberworld has blinded us all.
Only Holy Spirit can change her mind, or ours. Stop trying to be Him. Just pray! And stop this snotty verbiage back and forth. We are not being good witnesses to those who know not Christ, but are watching intently!
What I think, Kelly, is that this issue is far more complex than either side here makes it, in everything: science, egg, formation, heart and feelings of the one carrying these things. I have listened for so long to the loud cluster of voices here, telling me what Jesus is and exactly how He thinks, and I have listened to my own angry and defiant voice for so long responding to these shouts and saying what He is NOT, in turn, that I’ve almost forgotten what HIS voice sounds like; that terrifies me. I can almost always sense Him here, whatever I’m arguing/struggling with, but now His voice has been almost lost among the shuffle and nothing scares me more. I’ve heard enough; the God of all of you here seems One who judges absolutely and springs into action to point a finger at me whenever your voice is raised in either concerned love or belligerent pride. In turn, my defense has become so automatic that I’ve almost caught myself trying to pull my God along by the Hand to stand by my side and represent what I say. I will not accept this finite picture of God, either yours or mine; I will not see Him as either a God who agrees with my side absolutely or who serves as the mascot for the “pro-life” people. I’m tired of these absolutes and tired of this issue; it’s starting to mean less and less to me, cuddly babies and all. Enough is enough.
You may be sure, Kelly, that I haven’t been plugging my ears to you. You’ve challenged me to reconsider carefully how I see an embryo. You want me to err on the side of caution? Very well, I will; other than this, I don’t know what else you want from me. You women want me to consider the ejection of every single zygote as something absolutely equal to the murder of a fully developed human or late-term baby? I can’t do that. You want me to condemn every single rape survivor who uses a MA pill instantly as a murderess? I WON’T do that; ever. This is where our paths meet, where the bridge begins and ends. Take of that what you will. I’m tired of this topic, tired of Jesus being wrested into each individual’s vision of Him, and wish to leave this behind forever.
Hello All,
I’m up rather late and decided to pop in on the conversation, having been directed here by one of the participants.
I am the scientist being quoted here and thought that perhaps I could clear a few issues up, answer some questions, and let you know of some more material.
First, I’m a Ph.D. in molecular biology and medical microbiology with 16 years of teaching college under my belt. I’m unapologetically Roman Catholic and ardently pro-life. My blog, Coming Home, is dedicated to bringing forward the explosion of hard-core, mainstream scientific data that supports every single contention of the pro-life community. I’m glad to have found this blog and will be adding it to my blogroll when I’m done posting.
Briefly, the field of Embryology tells us that egg and sperm are maternal and paternal tissue, respectively. At fertilization, they cease to be parental tissue and become a new life, a new organism, a new human being. See this post with all of the hyperlinks to supporting posts on the blog:
http://gerardnadal.com/2010/03/08/embryology-and-truth-denial/
We all are most familiar with the adult form of a human, but Embryology tells us that this is but one of many stages of development a human progresses through during his/her life-cycle. Just as I am the adult, I was the adolescent, the child, the toddler, the infant, the neonate, the fetus, the late embryo, the gastrula, the blastula, the morula, the single-celled zygote.
Embryology tells me that I was the same organism, with my own unique genetic identity directing my own development in every one of those stages. I didn’t need to exhibit all of my potential capacities at every stage in order to be me. (reproducing at age five is a scary thought). Yet, despite how many functions I end up performing, or whether I ever develop all of my capacities, I am still me, and was, even at the single-celled stage.
Thee is lots more to discuss on this, which is why I extend an invitation to you all. On my blog, every Tues and Thurs. I run a column called Pro-Life Academy. Beginning next Tuesday, I will be running a book club for 8 weeks, doing a chapter a week from the blockbuster book, Embryo: A Defense of Human Life, by Prof. Robert P. George of Princeton and Dr. Christopher Tollefsen of USC.
The book treats the issue from a strictly secular perspective and does not appeal to religion to arrive at a vigorous defense of human life in the embryonic stage. The book is available at Amazon.com
An added bonus is that co-author Dr. Tollefsen will be joining in the conversations to assist with understanding the philosophy and ethics. Dr. Tollefsen is a great guy, witty and very approachable. Grab a copy of the book and join us starting next Tuesday.
If there are any questions, I would be happy to answer them here, or at my blog.
God Bless.
I’ve been troubled this morning by my part in this discussion. I want to say that I’m sorry I offended.
Jennifer, maybe one doesn’t have to believe the entire Bible as truth for salvation. But in order to live the Christian life you do have to obey Holy Scripture.
At any rate, I’m sorry.
Hi,
I have a comment being held hostage. I’m willing to pay the ransom…
Thank you for answering my questions, Jennifer. This debate is why I rarely comment on this or any other blog with such a hot topic. Comments and the tones can be misunderstood, then discussion degenerates from there, feelings hurt, etc. But, I let myself get sucked in. (head smack) I lose my focus on my Savior.
Anyway, even if we never agree on this subject, no hard feelings on my part, no judgement. If I have conveyed that to you, I apologize.
Take care.
Thank you, Dr. Nadal, for this information and the critically important work you are doing for the pro-life movement.
Thank you, Kelly L for your wise counsel. I’m going to heed it.
Thank you so much for your comment Dr. Nadal and for the invitation! Thank you to all the pro-life commenters for showing clearly that life begins at conception. WW-you are amazing!
Jennifer-I am so sorry that you still don’t see this. I mean no condescension. Truly sorry. usually, I can read people’s comments that appear confused and I feel compassion but for some reason your comments truly break my heart. I can only think that it is the Holy Spirit prompting me to respond to you. I can’t begin to address every one of the mistaken conclusions i see but I did have this question. You say that “… I said God was addressing people who SURVIVED pregnancy. God knew which eggs would grow to be humans and have souls…” Have you considered that the babies you say don’t survive being pregnant filled their God-given purpose and life, however short? God is eternal. These babies lives seem too short, their parents didn’t even get to hold them but we are finite and can’t always understand these mysteries and can’t see time from an eternal standpoint. They had souls from conception. Sometimes, things don’t have to be spelled out exactly to know what God has to say on the matter. The Bible does not specifically say, “Thou shall not look at a pornographic magazine!” but we know from countless scriptures that we are not to do that. the same is true in this situation. God does not use the word zygote or other medical terminology however He does make it known who controls the womb, when he knew us, etc by countless passages many have referred to in this comment thread. No one is asking you to not feel compassion for those brutalized by rape. Just that you would see the taking of innocent human life is not the answer and that the life begins at conception. More could be said but i think i will leave it at that. Humbly praying for you and all of us, that we would see clearly what God’s word says and be bold to stand for it.
blessings, jen in al
Jennifer, I’ve had 3 miscarriages. The last one I’m not sure EVER had a heartbeat. I do NOT believe that the question of humanity comes in whether or not there’s a heartbeat. I DO believe that upon conception the “clump of cells” is human-he or she has a spirit….a spirit that if he or she dies goes to be with our Lord.
If an everlasting spirit is not present at conception, then when does it appear? Did my 3rd baby (who formed and looked human, but probably never had a beating heart) never have a spirit (or soul as some people call it) because his or her heart never started to beat?
SavedbyGrace, that means a great deal to me. I’m very sorry too, sister, for my cruel words. This is possibly the most volatile issue there is and we have regrettably both spoken inaccurately of each other. As I hope you can see by my last post, I don’t hold you or anyone else alone to blame anymore. Thank you again.
Thank you for your Christian kindness, Jane. You’ve not conveyed judgement at all
I apologize for the times when my finite brain thought otherwise. God Bless
Oh and Jane-believe me, I lost sight of my Savior too, somewhere along the way. I intend to never let that happen again.
Jen in AL, I hope you read my last comment from last night, the one right before Dr. Nadal’s long one; I don’t see things nearly as cut and dryly as you seem to think.
“I DO believe that upon conception the “clump of cells” is human-he or she has a spirit”
You believe that, and that’s your prerogative. I hope for the sake of all the embryos out there that it isn’t true.
Thank you Dr. Nadal for answering my last question. That’s what I thought you meant.
Jennifer,
What follows from the conclusion of Embryology, that a new human organism exists at ferilization, is the question of personhood. That new organism is a human organism, but is that human organism a human person?
Science cannot pronounce on personhood, as personhood is a legal and moral status possessed by the human organism. The identity of the organism (WHAT is it?) is the formal object of our study.
“HOW do you treat that organism?” is the question for philosophy, theology and law.
As a Christian and as a citizen (I’m not only a scientist), I would say that personhood is intrinsic to being human. The organism is human from conception onward, therefore it ought to enjoy the rights of all human organisms, without prejudice regarding age or developmental stage.
That’s what our reading of the book EMBRYO, will be addressing over the next 8 weeks. I hope you’ll be able to join us.
God Bless
Oh no Jennifer, this is not the most volatile subject there is. I can prove it too but this isn’t the time nor the place.
I said I was sorry I offended but, honey, you are still wrong – Biblically speaking. The Bible teaches that our life belongs to God – we were purchased at a price- even babies. What you propose is that a new pregancy doesn’t count as life and so doesn’t matter if murdered. There is no Biblical support for that and where science disagrees with Scripture that science is being misinterpreted.
What you are basically telling every woman that miscarries is that it doesn’t matter, it wasn’t a real person anyway – it didn’t even have a soul. Don’t you think that’s a rather heartless thing to say to a grieving woman?
Personally, I have twins in heaven. We had a nice heartbeat one day and then the next we didn’t. Those babies had souls and I’ll see them in heaven. I have faith in God that His purpose in our family experiencing that tragedy will one day be known.
We live in a fallen world and bad things happen rape, miscarriage, murder but we shouldn’t embrace it and make excuses for the sinful way people respond.
Your words show that you still don’t understand my position, Grace. “Pro-life” people are more likely to be cruel to a woman who did what they don’t agree with (and you and others seem to think it’s ok to call all such women murderers) and I haven’t once mocked or taken lightly a would-be mother’s sadness. Your assumption that I’ve even spoken to a grieving woman, much less said THAT, is untrue and frankly unfair. Please stop assuming such things.
You’ve expressed your view of the embryo in its biological form perfectly, Dr. Nadal. Thank you
Jennifer, I didn’t say that you had said that. I asked if you thought it was cruel. So, I didn’t assume anything – stop jumping the gun and think.
I don’t know any “pro-life” people personally. BUT I know a lot of Christians. These same Christians know that Biblically abortion is wrong. For a lot of different reasons which have been stated many times over the last few days.
I’ll say this much more – I’d never condemn a unsaved woman for having an abortion. That same woman needs the gospel far more than she needs to be condemned. Christ paid for that sin when He paid the whole bill. As for Christian women – quite frankly I don’t know what I’d say. I’d hope, I’d listen to the Holy Spirit and let Him guide me. As I’ve said before – Sin is sin there are no gray areas. Sinning to “correct” a sin isn’t excusable at all. We all need to be conformed to Jesus Christ. The Biblical Jesus Christ not some version that we’ve made up to suit ourselves.
BTW, Jennifer. If it’s understanding you want – you’ve got it. I do understand you very well. I used to be the as you but through study of the Scriptures and guidance by the Holy Spirit I’ve learned better.
I understand and I disagree. What’s the problem in that. Surely you are not friends only with people who agree with you???
No, of course I wouldn’t say such a cruel thing to a woman. I’ve gotten the “I understand you because I used to be you” words before; dozens of older women have given me this, their way of saying “you’re young, sweet and wrong, and you’ll change”. It’s cute, because those women (always on blogs, never in person) always thought they were being empathetic. Sure I have friends who disagree, and who don’t fear for my soul. I’m glad you wouldn’t condemn a woman in that situation. Thank God He’s in charge.
Jennifer, I wouldn’t write those “older” women off so quickly if I were you. Those of us with little age on us sometimes shudder to realize how foolish WE sounded
I know my mother still snickers from time to time. Titus 2 actually tells “older” women to teach “younger” women. Perhaps it would behoove you to listen a little more and explain yourself a little less. We all benefit from that from time to time.
Surely you realize that we gain insight as we age, we also grow intellectually and spiritually (if we listen to the Holy Spirit). Honestly, I’ve told many people more difficult things than this face to face so I doubt I’d have a problem with you — unless you’re really tall and scary!
I’d say everyone on this blog (and many like it) is thankful that He is in charge. I’ve met several Christians (like you ) who work to insert worldly ideas into Christianity and I tackle each one the same way. You know where the problem comes in? It is always a lack of belief in the validity of Scripture. “It was written by men”, “it doesn’t apply to us today”, “we’re too smart for that now”, “it’s just a fable” or some such.
So, what I’d really like to know from you is what do you believe about Jesus? I don’t want to argue – I just want to know. I want to know because I truly do care whether or not you are heaven bound. I’m willing to drop abortion, we are each God’s servants and He can make us stand when the time comes, we will agree to disagree. But it’s important to believe in the Jesus of the Bible ( all of it ). Our gospel has to be right or we really have believed in vain. Are you willing to share that with me? or I guess “us” would be more accurate right now.
I’m well-aware of what Titus says, Grace, and those women should worry about how foolish they sound now. I listen and learn greatly from amazing older women. I know wise older women when I see them and have learned from them; the patronizing ones who try to use their age as a caste system are not among these.
I really don’t need you to tackle me in any way, shape, or form Grace. I don’t need you to fix me or tell me whether I’m heaven bound or not; you are in absolutely no position to do so and to be honest with you, I’m still amazed at your gall. I think well of you now, far from what I did last night, but you still have a way of saying something in exactly the wrong way. I haven’t found help in this thread, just confusion and a myriad of voices muffling His. I’m sorry, but I’m done sharing. The last thing I’ll say is that I take the Bible as nothing less than His Divine and inspired Word.
The last thing I’ll say is that I take the Bible as nothing less than His Divine and inspired Word.
Jennifer-I am so glad you said that! I will pray for God to reveal His word to us more and more everyday.
I do have a question… you said “I hope for the sake of all the embryos out there that it isn’t true.” – Why do you hope that?
Dr. Nadal-loved your last comment about personhood. thank you!
blessings, jen in al
Thank you Jen
I said that because if she’s right, it’ll mean that embryos are the equivalent of humans and in the face of early abortion, that can’t be good.
“I said that because if she’s right, it’ll mean that embryos are the equivalent of humans and in the face of early abortion, that can’t be good.”
Possibly why some of us are soooo passionate about what you view as nothing but a lump of cells.
No, it is not good at all, to think of the numbers of tiny live snuffed out by deliberate early abortion. And a mother who’s lost a pregnancy early on knows that it’s no less a grievous thing than a later miscarriage.
The embryo is a tiny, genetically unique, genetically human being (or organism, if you like scientific words). I do not know how anyone could still argue that in the face of basic biology. The only question is, is this small being to be valued as a full person, or must it meet certain standards I have come up with before it’s safe from having it’s life ended for my convenience or emotional ease?
Dr. Nadal–thank you for adding your comments! I will have to turn my dad on to your blog. As a doctor, a dad, and a Catholic, I know he’ll appreciate it!
It’s not nearly so simple as you say, Margaret. Which is why I’m passionate about not fitting the matter into a box
“A mother who’s lost a pregnancy early on knows that it’s no less a grievous thing than a later miscarriage.”
Actually, not all women see a resemblance between ejecting cells after a matter of weeks and losing a partly formed or full-formed baby.
I have serious medical problems due to malfunctioning female hormones. I take “The Pill” because my body doesn’t make/use my hormones properly. Because of this, I have had medical complications that not only make me ill on a daily basis, but that could have killed me, had I not had intervention.
Yes, a hormonal imbalance caused me to have periods for 16 days at a time, with only 2 weeks in between – I became anemic, and complications resulted.
Would people rather me be ill, and possibly die, than to use this medication to supplement what my body cannot create? Had “The Pill” never been created, I may not be here. At least now, my condition is manageable, but I am in daily pain and discomfort due to hormone imbalances.
I’m very sorry for your difficulties, Cassandra. Thanks for sharing them; they’re a very valid matter.
WOW! There are so many comments on this topic and I skimmed them, so if I am repeating something someone else has already written, please forgive me.
Sorry I posted anonymous, but right, wrong or whatever, I am not ready for the world (or my 3 children) to know my deep dark secrets,
Cassandra, taking a medication to fix a real illness is not the same as taking a medication to prevent babies. (I do hope that if you are married you are careful about using the medication as birth control, as some of the pills cause abortions.) And it seems that as a society we have begun equating pregnancy with an abnormal state of our body, rather than a natural one. Almost like an illness or even a mistake that God made us fertile and we need to fix that.
Carmelita, I am saddened by your comments, but maybe your husband and children are glad that you lived and were not aborted.
Jennifer, many of your comments refered to a woman who had been raped and then had to deal with the pregnancy as a result. I have experienced rape and I know it is a horrible thing. I also have had 2 abortions (unrelated to the rape) and personally I would rather be raped over and over than live with the knowledge that I killed my babies. And it doesn’t matter if I wasn’t very far along. ONce I had a baby I realized that abortion is murder. It is. It really just is. I have heard a few women tell their stories about how it was a good thing. I have heard MANY women tell their stories of regret. MANY wish they had never done this horrible thing to their own children. MANY of us wish we had not bought into the LIE that tells us “it isn’t even a baby”. IT IS A BABY.
I also would like to comment on the young earth, male headship stuff. For me, I believe the entire bible the way it was written. If you only believe part of it, how do you decide which parts are true and which parts are symbolic?
Sorry I posted anonymous, but right, wrong or whatever, I am not ready for the world (or my 3 children) to know my deep dark secrets,
word warrior, I reposted because it didn’t come up. Basically the same thing. Please delete the one stuck in limbo.
thanks
“Personally I would rather be raped over and over than live with the knowledge that I killed my babies”
I’m sorry you think such a horrific thing.
“ONce I had a baby I realized that abortion is murder. It is. It really just is”
Once again, these comments are based on emotion, as you based them on nothing but how your feelings changed after giving birth. Having a baby generates a lot of emotion. The feelings of you and women who regret it are not greater or worthier than those who don’t.
“For me, I believe the entire bible the way it was written. If you only believe part of it, how do you decide which parts are true and which parts are symbolic?”
Well, it’s painfully clear the “Lord is my Shepherd” psalm is symbolic. As for the male headship circus, it’s not called ignoring the Bible, but doing a little research.
I’m truly very sorry for your tragedies. I hope you confide in a trusted therapist. You are not to blame for your rape, or the abortions; I say the latter because it’s likely you were indeed deceived about certain medical matters.
Jennifer,
which medical matters might I have been deceived about?
Jennifer,
“Once again, these comments are based on emotion, as you based them on nothing but how your feelings changed after giving birth. Having a baby generates a lot of emotion. The feelings of you and women who regret it are not greater or worthier than those who don’t.”
I thought you were talking about emotion when you mentioned abortion after rape. I think it was your comment (there are so many comments, so I could be wrong) about a woman having to feel the kick of the baby and relive the rape 5 times over again? I am a little confused about why it is OK to play the emotion card when justifying legalized abortion, but not when explaining why it is wrong. Even if it is true that you would relive the rape, that is only for 9 months, instead I am going on 20 years of reliving the “procedures”. My feelings changed because it was at that point my INFORMATION changed.
Also, I have been to therapy, thanks very much. I sought out a biblical counselor, not a secular counselor, who most certainly did not try to justify my sins, but focused on God’s forgiveness and redemption. I most definitely am not to blame for the rape, but I AM totally responsible for the abortions, just as every other woman who made that decision is. I am not sure if you have had any experience personally with abortion, but it seems a little odd that you are so dead set on justifying it. I just thought you might want to hear from someone who had been through both. It is horrifying to be violated through no fault of your own. It is even more horrifying to live with knowledge that you have done something so unforgivable to your children. Maybe the most disgusting thing of all is the fact that so many people told me it was OK to do, people who were Christians. As Christians, we need to be very careful that we are not telling other Christians a sin is not a sin.
Mark 9:42 Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea.
I also would like to point out that A LOT of women have post-abortion problems. The Catholic church has a whole counseling program called PROJECT RACHEL, because it is something that many people rightly feel guilt over. It is not some procedure that is over and done with and then everything is fine afterward.
Also, as Christians we need to be able to accept correction and heed the biblical counsel of other women. There is a “chain of command” so to speak. Husbands being the head of their wives, like Christ is the head of the church is one of those authority things some people have problems with. I don’t know what research you have that disputes the validity of the bible in that area, but once again, we are back to I believe the whole bible. Anyone is certainly free to practice the parts they think are important. However, we need to remember that our hearts will deceive us, but scripture will guide us.
Proverbs 28:26 He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, But he who walks wisely will be delivered.
AND
Proverbs 10:17 He who heeds discipline shows the way to life, but whoever ignores correction leads others astray.
“Well, it’s painfully clear the “Lord is my Shepherd” psalm is symbolic. As for the male headship circus, it’s not called ignoring the Bible, but doing a little research.”
I’ll give you that the Lord is my shepherd is symbolic, but you are equating Psalms, which are songs of praise to the Lord, with Titus and Timothy (biblical headship) which are letters written on how the church should behave. They are not the same thing at all and it still is ignoring the bible to ignore the pastoral letters on the behavior of the members of the Body, especially if you are using songs in the bible to justify it.
One very last comment about the young earth. In one of your previous comments you said that maybe an earth day wasn’t the same as a heaven day. When you read the creation, Genesis does say there was morning, there was evening and this was one day, a second day, etc. I would wonder why God went to all the trouble to tell us how long the day was. Just something to consider. Someone else commented that you were trying to mix science and the bible or God or something like that. I don’t believe you have to have one or the other. I do believe that some of the “scientific evidence” is not actual evidence and if you do independent research on it you will discover some deception in the scientific community. An independent study of evolution changed my life. And I wasn’t studying to disprove, but just as an activity with my then 12 year old home schooled son.
Sorry this comment is all over the place.
God bless all of you.
Thank you Kelly for all you do. I have said many times, I wish I knew some wise Titus 2 women when I was younger and am thankful for your blog now.
Anon,
Very well-articulated and I appreciate it.
“I am a little confused about why it is OK to play the emotion card when justifying legalized abortion, but not when explaining why it is wrong”
I never said it’s wrong to “play the emotion card”. I have VERY clearly said that it’s individual choice. What happened was wrong for YOU; I contradicted your words that it was wrong PERIOD. Besides, you didn’t even get an abortion based on rape; you simply claimed it’s wrong for everyone, no matter what, all because you’ve given birth and now feel this way. That won’t fly with me.
No you didn’t say it was wrong, you just dismissed it. It seemed as if your example of emotion was ligitimate, but then you dismissed mine. Well, everything is not individual choice and somethings are cut and dry, even if everyone doesn’t see it. Some will justify murder of adults with circumstances.
Two wrongs never make a right. I guess my main concern is that we need to quit focusing on what “flies with us” and start focusing on God’s will, which I believe is revealed through his Word. Sufficient and infalliable.
“I am not sure if you have had any experience personally with abortion, but it seems a little odd that you are so dead set on justifying it”
Because unlike some, I don’t have to go through something to know that different people will handle it differently. If I got an abortion and regretted it, would I then be in a position to say it’s wrong and traumatic for every woman in every circumstance? No. I have no such authority.
“Also, I have been to therapy, thanks very much”
There’s no need to be defensive. That was a valid suggestion and concern.
“They are not the same thing at all and it still is ignoring the bible to ignore the pastoral letters on the behavior of the members of the Body, especially if you are using songs in the bible to justify it”
That’s a gigantic and incorrect presumption on your part. I wasn’t equating Psalms with Titus, merey giving an example of not taking everything literally; don’t misquote me. I don’t ignore any part of the Bible.
“My feelings changed because it was at that point my INFORMATION changed”
That’s nice to know.
“There is a “chain of command” so to speak. Husbands being the head of their wives, like Christ is the head of the church is one of those authority things some people have problems with. I don’t know what research you have that disputes the validity of the bible in that area”
Yes, I’m well-aware of the chain gang some people have fun with, the sin of spiritual hierarchy where fleshly men represent God on earth. I don’t challenge the validity of the Bible; I see those passages as having different meaning than you. This is a typical assumption, though.
“I would wonder why God went to all the trouble to tell us how long the day was”
Why is it threatening to some to believe this process may have taken place on a heavenly timescale? Also, I know well of scientific deception; I haven’t remained in the dark about these matters.
“As Christians we need to be able to accept correction and heed the biblical counsel of other women”
I hope you’re not assuming I don’t do this. There are many older women I listen to and learn from. As I said before, however, I’ve learned which ones to ignore. Everyone has certain matters they’re convicted on, and I’ve been accused of not having a “teachable spirit” or listening to “wiser women” when I refused to change my mind that men are born to rule and that all nudity in films is pornographic. I have no time for such foolishness and this won’t change based on the age of the people clacking their tongues.
I appreciate your testimony and hope that you will continue to heal. This seems to remain a dark and large part of your life, which is why I suggested therapy. God Bless
I dismissed what seemed at the time to be your only reason for changing your mind; you didn’t mention scientific information at that point. I’ve heard women rapidly change sides when they give birth and don’t consider this valid; among other things, there’s a big difference between the baby they just had and an hour’s old fertilized egg. Secondly, the happy emotional mommy clearly doesn’t have as much place judging as the traumatized survivor.
Actually, not all women see a resemblance between ejecting cells after a matter of weeks and losing a partly formed or full-formed baby.
***************
I hope you never express that sentiment to a woman IRL who’s just lost her baby, even if you think she’s stupid for grieving a “clump of cells”. Or tell her “At least it wasn’t a real baby you lost”.
You have no clue how hurtful that is to a woman who’s miscarried.
I already said I’d never say something like that to a women who miscarried, nor do I judge such women as stupid. You certainly seem to have an issue with selective reading.
What is in your heart can make it through your mouth without intending it to. If you think it’s foolish to believe that an embryo is a human being worthy of grieving, then you do think the woman doing the grieving is foolish. Or misguided. Or uneducated.
And that may come out despite your best intentions.
Probably not much I can add, but I will try.
First the science:
Dr. Nadal comes here, as a scientist, who specifically has studied embryology, and a Christian. He unequivocally states that the zygote is both a human and a single cell.
Jennifer calls that his view. If someone can’t believe a Christian embryologist on when the beginning of life is, on what can he or she base his belief that is stronger than the word of a man educated both about the specific science and about the Bible?
(Hi Dr. Nadal! Nice to see you here
I see no Biblical basis for the belief that life begins with the heartbeat.
Even if one does believe that, determining the age of an embryo is an inexact science. The heart is beating well before the embryo can be seen with a normal ultrasound. How can one verify that the embryo is indeed 1 week 6 days instead of 3 weeks? Last menstrual period is not completely reliable, especially as fertilization and implantation do not always occur at the same point–fertilization could be at different time after intercourse or points in the fallopian tube; implantation can occur over a five-day range.
Jennifer, I find it hard to believe that you are as educated on this issue as you claim. You keep referring to an “after-morning pill.” Second, you use very unscientific terms like “sperm-kissed cells,” “fertilized egg,” and “clump of cells.” Presumably you meant the first metaphorically, but the others are misleading and dehumanizing.
There is no such thing (in humans) as a fertilized egg. The egg and the sperm are separate entities, neither of which has potential to grow beyond itself. When they combine at fertilization, they are a new entity, the zygote. It is improper to call the zygote a fertilized egg–especially in order to dehumanize him or her. It becomes especially obvious that dehumanization is the goal when one refers to the developing entity as a fertilized egg past the first cell division; before that it could be merely scientific error, but by the time that entity has descended through the fallopian tube and ready to implant, it is certainly not a fertilized egg, let alone simply “egg.” Properly, it is called a blastocyst, embryo, or (possibly) pre-embryo (some say this term is also unscientific and dehumanizing). I will assume that, since you think neither an adult nor a baby with a heartbeat nor even the bodies of those who have fallen asleep are only clumps of cells, you mean a clump of undifferentiated cells. The truth is that by the time that the blastocyst is ready to implant, around a week, it has already begun to differentiate–it could never implant otherwise, because the cells that become the placenta are different from the cells that become other parts of the baby. The cells have certainly differentiated before the heart begins beating–the cells that will make up the heart are different from the cells that will turn into other organs.
Furthermore, Jennifer, you repeatedly have asserted that you are talking about an entity which is hours old.
You are, in fact, possibly dealing with a newly-created zygote when the morning-after pill is taken. But there is no way that I know of to kill this entity while he or she is in the natural environment (one could destroy a zygote if he or she were first removed from the womb, with microscopic instruments). The zygote is protected from any harmful substances the mother may have ingested, and at first just divides on without outside nourishment. When the developing entity begins to need outside nourishment, he or she attaches to the uterine wall (in normal pregnancy), to draw that nourishment from his or her mother. It is at this point when hormonal birth control may cause the entity’s death–at 5 to 10 days, not at a few hours old.
Curious that when it is hardest to empathize with the developing human being, God has afforded it the most protection from anything that may harm it. Curious that there is a window of only a week or so when a woman may not know she is pregnant, and her actions may hurt the developing embryo. Curious that the point she can confirm her pregnancy is the same point when the beating heart, which you consider so much a part of whether the child is human or alive, comes into being around the time pregnancy can be confirmed, when she might be tempted to take action against that child–might his or her developing heart turn a mother’s heart. Curious how in your paradigm, a person who had not considered the possibility of pregnancy and is confronted with it and kills the child only once she knows is evil, because the child has a heart, but a mother who decides ahead of time to ingest a drug and make sure a child dies, a mere week before the heart begins to beat, is not. Perhaps God has created the system with the intent of protecting the child more before he or she is lovable. I don’t know this–certainly the Bible does not speak on the child at this age, except that he or she is already tainted by sin. But the God I serve and worship is certainly one who extends grace to the unlovable, mercy to those who cannot protect themselves, and cares about the least of these, even those who never came to birth.
To speak of those embryos who do not implant, or do not develop a heartbeat, does not mean that God does not love or care for them. If you agree that older babies are valuable before their birth, then one could make the same argument of those who die at 8, or 12, or 20 weeks, or those who are stillborn. If a baby is stillborn, I believe that God is in control and had a plan for him or her–I would assume from your statements that you do as well. That many children (how many I do not know; but too many) die at 30 weeks gestation, or in their first month of life, or at 3 years old, or before puberty, does not lessen the humanity of either the people who die at those ages, or the people at those ages who survive. The child who dies at five years old is certainly not less human than the one who lives to become ninety, so why should it work differently if many children die before their second week of life in the womb? I don’t claim to know God’s plan for these children, but I believe that since no sparrow falls without his notice, since even the hairs on our head and the stars in the sky are numbered, the creator of the universe does not allow even such a tiny life to pass through his or her earthly existance unknown or unloved. I believe he sees them and knows them and loves them and weeps for them, whether or not their mothers know or weep, whether or not their deaths are natural.
I also learned recently that the pill can cause miscarriage in pregnancies after pill use is discontinued, including later miscarriages (after the heart has formed).
I find it odd that you do not want pro-lifers to try and prevent women from entering places which kill babies. How are they to know the rape victim trying to obtain a morning after pill (which is more likely to occur at a normal pharmacy than a facility specializing in abortion) from a woman who desires to abort a child 5 or 8 weeks after conception? Do you not believe it is right for them to plead for the lives of children who are 14 weeks old and being killed because they may have Down Syndrome, or children who are 4 weeks old and being killed so that their grandparents do not discover their mother has had sex? Or are you simply saying that those who want to prevent abortion should use discernment and only prevent those from entering who, in your view, would be in error killing the entity growing within them? How would you suggest that occur? Does this not deny the right of those outside the facility to obey their conscience? Almost always they are peaceful; women who don’t believe as they do can simply ignore their words and go in; they are not blocked.
Your concern for those who have endured rape is commendable. But at the same time, while you say others should not argue from emotion, you do just that in the case of rape. It is not effective in this case, not because the women here believe rape is anything less than horrible and traumatic, but because we see value in the unborn child as well, and are as offended and moved on his or her behalf as you are on behalf of the victim of rape. If we are passionate, this is why, and this is what we believe our conscience and God’s word to tell us. Shall we ignore what we believe science, the Bible, and our own hearts tell us, because you say otherwise? Certainly if you do not think you should bend to all those speaking from another point of view, you cannot believe it would be right for us to abandon our position on your sayso without being convicted by the Spirit–when in fact, the conviction of the Spirit (we believe) is the cause of our current position.
I have argued from science and logic. I do not feel an argument from scripture would be helpful–you do not believe all of the Bible is literal, and you believe those verses which do refer to unborn people only apply to those who later reach a certain stage of development, and others have presented Scriptural arguments. But I must, though you discount it, also argue from emotion.
I am offended by your attitude towards very young children and those who have lost those children. I am one of them. I do not even know for certain how many children I have lost, because my losses have been so early. But I have decided that while it may be foolish to mourn a child who never existed, it would be heartbreaking to me to one day learn that I had lost a child and that child was never loved on this earth, and so I put aside the wisdom of the world to be a fool if I feel God wants that of me.
I believe that I have lost 9 children.
One of them I knew before I started losing her. I had a positive pregnancy test the day I expected my period–faint but positive. That day I bled a little and I thought I was losing her. I named her Ruby. I was devastated. But there was only a little bleeding, and research told me that it was probably not a miscarriage. For a whole week I knew about my baby and I loved her. She was 3 weeks old (or so) when she died. She likely had a beating heart. Losing her felt like having my insides flayed–physically and emotionally.
Over a period of four years, I believe I had other very early miscarriages, mostly between 10 and 14 days. Who knows if any of these ever had a beating heart? I did not even know they existed until my period wasn’t normal, but my mother’s heart and woman’s intuition lead me to believe they were early miscarriages.
I do take it personally when someone tells me that Joseph, Isaiah, Elisha, Enoch, Ruby, Maranatha, Michael, Joy, and Ebenezer were not real people, had no value, and deserved no rights. I think this is the first time someone has gone so far as to say that they were not loved or cared about or protected by God, if only because usually those who think it is okay to kill babies don’t believe in our God.
But, even knowing from some comments here that there were women reading who have lost children without a beating heart, you refer coldly to our experiences as “ejecting cells after a matter of weeks” and talk about these children in dehumanizing terms. You say that God does not love those children, and that it is okay you think so because not everyone cares when they lose children at a very young age. (Not everyone cares if they lose a child at 8 weeks, or after birth, either, so that is hardly a logical argument.)
I learned that I was pregnant with my daughter around 15 days after her conception. I was so worried I would lose her, because I had never carried a pregnancy past 3 weeks. I beseeched God over and over for her life before I saw a picture or even really felt her presence. And God gave me a beautiful daughter who is now just under 2. I thought everything must have been better, and now I would not ever lose an unborn baby again.
9 months later God gave me another child. He lived 10 days. I named him Ebenezer.
And somehow in less than a month I managed to figure out what had gone wrong and put things in place to protect the next child I conceived. Less than a month later, somewhere in my fallopian tube, one of my husband’s sperm penetrated one of my eggs, and a zygote was formed. He implanted in my womb and began to change my blood chemistry. 11 days into his life, before his heart could begin beating, a blood test told me he existed.
Again I pleaded with God for a new life within me, and solicited the prayers of others. No one told me they wanted to wait a few more days before they would pray, because he wasn’t a baby yet. And at 11 days I loved him deeply and fiercely. Now he is almost one year older–3 months after his birth. He is lying across my arms with his hand and head resting against my breast, sleeping lightly (until I put him down–then he’d wake up). He is the same being as he was as a zygote, when his father’s sperm cell and my egg cell met to become him. He is the same person he was when he burrowed into my womb to take nourishment I was not hesitant to give. This boy is the one I fell in love with at just 11 days old. He is no more human now than he was when I started feeling cramps a month after I learned he was there, cramps that worried me I would lose him and then worried me they would not end for 11 months. He was my son when he would turn sideways and put me in so much pain I couldn’t think at 7 months. He was the same person as now through 3 weeks of on-and-off early labor, and when my water broke at 38 1/2 weeks. He was still the same person when, an hour fifteen minutes later, he was “ejected from” my body on the same day his daddy had been born 27 years earlier.
God knew him at conception, and has loved him and nourished him since. I knew him at 11 days, and I have loved him and nourished him since.
And God and I knew and loved Ebenezer as well. And Ruby. And Joseph, Isaiah, Elisha, Enoch, Maranatha, Michael, and Joy.
God love you.
On the issue of using the pill for medical issues:
First, this is a separate issue than using the pill for birth control. If a woman is not married and does not plan to marry soon, how is it an issue?
Second, there are other ways to get or take the hormones that would not interfere with developing children. Obviously–as women with normal hormone levels usually are able to conceive and bear children. If, for example, there is a progesterone deficiency–which can actually cause miscarriage as well–progesterone can be used in one of several ways and is not dangerous to a developing child. It can prevent ovulation, but if used only after ovulation, it actually helps sustain a pregnancy. However, I learned several months ago that the sudden withdrawal of progesterone will almost always cause a miscarriage (hence, the placebo pills in a BCP package probably will lead to a period even if conception has occurred–meaning they may cause a child to be expelled even if he or she implanted). But if the progesterone is used until a pregnancy can be detected–usually when the period would start or before–a test could determine whether or not there was a pregnancy, and progesterone could be continued (or possibly increased) if the woman was pregnant, and safely discontinued if she was not.
In actuality, I think that the omnipresent use of the pill has left women with some problems in the lurch, because rather than diagnose and treat the true problems, doctors just can prescribe a pill which gives everyone the same cycle all the time and masks the symptoms of a number of reproductive disorders.
Kelly, I think I have a huge comment caught in moderation.
Jennifer,
I started to reply to all your counter points, BUT I’m not going to, simply because I don’t believe you are teachable in this case. If you have been accused of not being teachable, maybe you aren’t, in which case there would be no point in continuing. Over 200 comments on this topic, mainly between you and some other commenter and you still maintain you position, even though a few women have made very valid points that you just ignore.
I don’t think I misquoted you at all. The example you came up with for why all the bible is not true was Psalm. If you have a better one, I would love to hear it. However, I don’t think we are ever going to agree on the correct way to decide right and wrong, because to you it is all relative. To me it is cut and dry. Making decisions based on how well you will handle something is selfish and self-centered. As Christians I think we are to love ourselves last.
Once again, I would love to hear some of the research that helped you come to the conclusion you did about husbands headship and also which verses support this and how you are able to incorporate the Timothy and TItus verses into your viewpoint.
Anonymous and YCW wonderful comments. Thank you for taking the time to write them. It is certainly by God’s grace that so many ladies can take the time to fully address this issue.
YCW I feel for you – all those losses. But think of the wonderful reunion in store for your family. I share with you one other thing – a problematic pregancy and a daughter named Ruby. Water broke @ 17 1/2 weeks, bed rest except to go to the doctor for 3 mos., born and crashed, rushed to a level 4 NICU. The doctors told my spouse she’ll die on the machine or in your arms what do you want to do? He said I’ll pray and tell you in the morning – God’s miracle!! She’s 8, she’s beautiful, she’s smart – my precious little girl. So much more than I asked God for, all I wanted was a playmate for my son – just able to play that’s all, LORD. YOU will get us through the rest. God is so generous, loving, kind, all- knowing, wonderful, empathetic, patient – I could go on – as I’m sure you could too
What a glorious day I met my Saviour and now I get to serve HIM for eternity.
Definitely NOT a “clump of cells” and definitely KNOWN by God Almightly and HELD in HIS capable hands to this day.
I don’t think women are foolish for grieving lost pregnancies, which could mean a lot of difficulties for them. Don’t bother trying to read into my heart mode, Margaret.
ycw,
Your comment may be the sweetest thing I have ever read. I have tears thinking about all my children and I am so sorry that all babies don’t have a mother to love them they way you have loved yours.
“I see no Biblical basis for the belief that life begins with the heartbeat”
I see no Biblical basis that it begins when sperm meets cell.
“Presumably you meant the first metaphorically, but the others are misleading”
Not in the least, and they haven’t been any less scientific than most of the comments here by people other than Dr. Nadal. It’s a huge thing trying to claim that a human being is a single-cell.
“you repeatedly have asserted that you are talking about an entity which is hours old”
If a rape survivor arrives at a hospital hours after the assault, or sooner, that’s exactly what we’re dealing with.
“The heart is beating well before the embryo can be seen with a normal ultrasound. How can one verify that the embryo is indeed 1 week 6 days instead of 3 weeks?”
The doctor should be able to determine this.
“so why should it work differently if many children die before their second week of life in the womb?”
Because those beings are not yet humans, like 5-year-olds are, that’s why. You speak in cool scientific terms, yet non-logically called zygotes “him or her” when they couldn’t possibly have genders yet. You’re right, you don’t “know” whether God in fact has a plan for them.
“I find it odd that you do not want pro-lifers to try and prevent women from entering places which kill babies”
Um, because it’s illegal? Because it’s wrong? Because it’s traumatic?
“How are they to know the rape victim trying to obtain a morning after pill (which is more likely to occur at a normal pharmacy than a facility specializing in abortion) from a woman who desires to abort a child 5 or 8 weeks after conception?”
That’s EXACTLY MY POINT. They DON’T know, so they have no business whatsoever butting in to these strangers’ lives!!
“Does this not deny the right of those outside the facility to obey their conscience?”
Now you think conscience dictates? Those peoples’ rights end at another persons’ body. They have no business intruding.
“Almost always they are peaceful; women who don’t believe as they do can simply ignore their words and go in; they are not blocked.”
Almost always peaceful? Sure. I guess you’re unfamiliar with Randy Alcorn’s suggestion to block clinics. “Peacefully”, of course.
“while you say others should not argue from emotion, you do just that in the case of rape”
I already explained what I said earlier. Scroll up a little.
“We see value in the unborn child as well, and are as offended and moved on his or her behalf as you are on behalf of the victim of rape”
A zygote does not feel trauma, fear, pain, or injustice. This is why I don’t equate them with a traumatized woman.
“Shall we ignore what we believe science, the Bible, and our own hearts tell us, because you say otherwise? Certainly if you do not think you should bend to all those speaking from another point of view, you cannot believe it would be right for us to abandon our position on your sayso”
I never said any such thing, dear one. I said you shouldn’t expect ME to drop mine on your sayso, and shouldn’t convict others. I haven’t once asked anyone esle to drop their convictions, while this has been done repeatedly to me.
“I think this is the first time someone has gone so far as to say that they were not loved or cared about or protected by God, if only because usually those who think it is okay to kill babies don’t believe in our God”
Boy oh boy, do you women go far off with this.
“You say that God does not love those children, and that it is okay you think so because not everyone cares when they lose children at a very young age”
You women indeed have an ice brush you love to paint me with. IF those zygotes are in fact children, of course God loves them. I pointed out that not all women feel the same; this was neither mocking you nor justifying “killing babies”.
“He is the same being as he was as a zygote”
Um, no he isn’t. What a thing to say.
I feel greatly for you, though it’s hard to focus on this when you mispresent my words in the midst of sharing your pain, which you claim I care nothing for. God has blessed you and your children, and may He continue to do so. Thank you.
ycw, thank you so much for pouring your heart out for all of us to see. I agree with you an all accounts. Blessings to you and yours…
“If you have been accused of not being teachable, maybe you aren’t”
No I’m not, in either cases of outright silliness or things I have as much reason as you do to be convicted on.
“Over 200 comments on this topic, mainly between you and some other commenter and you still maintain you position, even though a few women have made very valid points that you just ignore”
I haven’t ignored a single thing, dear one. Yes I do maintain my position, because I’ve been offered no proof that a single cell is a human’s equal. Even Dr. Nadal said the question of personhood is one of philosophy.
“To you it is all relative”
Wrong. I see some things as VERY cut and dry, like partial birth and rape.
“Making decisions based on how well you will handle something is selfish and self-centered”
You’re right, how DARE a traumatized woman be concerned about whether a pregnancy will harm her fragile psyche and heart even further??
“Once again, I would love to hear some of the research that helped you come to the conclusion you did about husbands headship and also which verses support this”
I’d be happy to give you the names of certain authors I trust. However, if you think I’m going to even for a second devote part of this discussion to ANOTHER controversial topic that will win more fire on my head, think again.
“Definitely NOT a “clump of cells””
At some point, that’s exactly what they are. Not at conception, as I first thought; nope, just one cell there. But later on, when more cells come into place, it’s in just that state. This is what my grandmother’s body rejected.
Jenny ‘ol girl since you chose to respond to me –
Why are you so obsessed with being agreed with? No one on this link has agreed with you as far as I can tell. You’ve belittled and offered snotty, presumably empathetic sentiments time after time.
You have used the same arguments over and over again. Do you really believe repeating the same thing over and over will change anyones mind? You have been presented with points of view ranging from science to opinion to experience to Scripture and you disagree with everyone of them. Why are you continuing? What is your point? or even what is it you want us to say?
Jennifer, it is clear that you are not really hearing all that I am saying.
“I see no Biblical basis that it begins when sperm meets cell.”
My basis for this is not the Bible, but science, which Dr. Nadal and I have both explained. Science tells me conception is the beginning of life; the Bible tells me it’s not okay to kill it. I draw the moral teachings from the Bible, and the factual information that helps me make a moral choice from science.
“Not in the least, and they haven’t been any less scientific than most of the comments here by people other than Dr. Nadal. It’s a huge thing trying to claim that a human being is a single-cell.”
It’s a huge thing to claim a baby is not alive until a certain point–and you have done very little to prove your point, other than talking about the fact that it doesn’t look like a baby and does not make sense to you that it can be a baby without a heart. I would not expect terms like “clump of cells” (let alone the scientifically ludicrous “egg” and “fertilized egg”) from someone basing her conclusions on science.
“If a rape survivor arrives at a hospital hours after the assault, or sooner, that’s exactly what we’re dealing with.”
Clearly you missed what I stated:
“You are, in fact, possibly dealing with a newly-created zygote when the morning-after pill is taken. But… when hormonal birth control may cause the entity’s death [is] at 5 to 10 days, not at a few hours old.”
“The heart is beating well before the embryo can be seen with a normal ultrasound. How can one verify that the embryo is indeed 1 week 6 days instead of 3 weeks?”
“The doctor should be able to determine this.”
Please explain.
“‘so why should it work differently if many children die before their second week of life in the womb?’
“Because those beings are not yet humans, like 5-year-olds are, that’s why.”
I agree that it is the humanity of the entity that matters, not the death rate–but you were the one who brought up the death rate as an argument against their humanity.
“You speak in cool scientific terms, yet non-logically called zygotes “him or her” when they couldn’t possibly have genders yet.”
Again you show your lack of scientific knowledge. Gender is determined not by the existence of genitalia, but by the chromosomes. At conception, a normal zygote has either two x chromosomes (female) or one x and one y (male). This is scientific fact–basic biology.
“You’re right, you don’t ‘know’ whether God in fact has a plan for them.”
This is a distortion of what I said. I do know God has a plan for them. I said that I did not know what it was.
“That’s EXACTLY MY POINT. They DON’T know, so they have no business whatsoever butting in to these strangers’ lives!! ….Now you think conscience dictates? Those peoples’ rights end at another persons’ body. They have no business intruding.”
I cannot take your position that it is wrong to kill babies before birth seriously when you deny the legitimacy of those who try peacefully to prevent those deaths. This is not the response of someone who truly has any concern for children killed by abortion. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt–but here you assert that those who oppose child-killing have no rights even to peacefully protest and inform, because such activities might prevent the deaths of some entities you do not feel are children. I cannot understand how, if you truly think it wrong to kill babies–even only after a certain age–you have a problem with those who try to save those babies, simply on the (false) grounds that it is illegal (this falls under freedom of speech and assembly). Besides, do Christians not have a duty to do what is right, even if it is not legal? Morality is not relative. It cannot be wrong for me to kill my 8-week-old fetus, but right for another woman to kill hers, if those children are both human. And if it is wrong, why is it wrong to try and stop it?
“A zygote does not feel trauma, fear, pain, or injustice. This is why I don’t equate them with a traumatized woman.”
The same could be said of some severely disabled individuals–or a person under anesthesia. The rights of a human being are universal, based on the fact that he or she is a member of the human species and an image of God. The Bible says not to curse the deaf–why? Because even if they do not hear it, it offends their human dignity (and ours).
“I haven’t once asked anyone esle [sic] to drop their convictions, while this has been done repeatedly to me.”
Actually, you did when you suggested that they should not protest abortion.
“You women indeed have an ice brush you love to paint me with. IF those zygotes are in fact children, of course God loves them. I pointed out that not all women feel the same; this was neither mocking you nor justifying ‘killing babies.’”
Again, you are arguing from feelings, not science, scripture, or logic. What is felt about the children does not determine the humanity–love, hate, or indifference. You claimed otherwise first. And by asserting that my children were not people, but God would love them if they were, you are quite clearly stating that they are not people and God does not love them. If you can be offended on the account of rape victims, certainly I have a right to offense when you so insult my children.
“‘He is the same being as he was as a zygote’
“Um, no he isn’t. What a thing to say.”
This is not a refutation.
I did not say that my love for my son has not grown–it has–or that I would not miss my born children even more if I lost them–I hope not to find out. I was simply stating scientific fact.
Your words do not convey caring and compassion to me. I don’t need you to feel for me, and I reject sympathy from someone who would call my precious children fertilized eggs. I am indeed richly blessed, and I do not see how I have misrepresented you–you have claimed that prior to the development of a beating heart, children are not people and it is okay to kill them. You have not exhibited any remorse about doing so, and have in fact said that anyone who believes otherwise traumatizes women and will have to answer for their beliefs. Meanwhile, you have refused to allow that others may speak up on behalf even of those babies you say it is not okay to kill, as it might traumatize or hinder women killing entities you believe are not babies.
I refuse to stay silent when you demean children and advocate a right to kill them, even if you claim that you would not be okay with killing all unborn children. I can’t take that seriously when you keep referring to abortion in general and talk about the decision to kill at any point as a private one. One person’s right to privacy is not more important than another’s right to life. But you seem to believe it is until… when again?
I am perhaps being a bit less charitable now, but I believe you have been misleading about what you believe, if you think anyone should butt out of a woman’s decision to kill her child just because it might be a child you are okay with killing.
“At some point, that’s exactly what they are. Not at conception, as I first thought; nope, just one cell there. But later on, when more cells come into place, it’s in just that state. This is what my grandmother’s body rejected.”
I find it difficult to believe that you have researched this issue, but only now discovered that a human being at conception is a single cell.
Why do you keep pointing out what your grandmother saw? Frankly, I find it unlikely that she was able to see anything before two weeks, and even at three it is unlikely one could determine what part of what came from one’s body is the embryo. And you said that at two weeks the embryo is human. At any rate, neither what she saw nor what she felt determined the worth of that child, and we have demonstrated that some people do feel deeply for their children even before their hearts started beating–even if their hearts never started beating. If it is late enough for the embryo to have implanted (and before that it is virtually impossible that anyone would see the embryo), cells have begun differentiating, and not all of the embryo’s cells are the same type, so it is no more just a clump of cells than anyone else is.
If this child who died–your aunt or uncle–had a beating heart before dying, would that change your view on whether it was a child? Or your view on when life begins?
“At some point, that’s exactly what they are. Not at conception, as I first thought; nope, just one cell there. But later on, when more cells come into place, it’s in just that state. This is what my grandmother’s body rejected.”
I find it difficult to believe that you have researched this issue, but only now discovered that a human being at conception is a single cell.
Why do you keep pointing out what your grandmother saw? Frankly, I find it unlikely that she was able to see anything before two weeks, and even at three it is unlikely one could determine what part of what came from one’s body is the embryo. And you said that at two weeks the embryo is human. At any rate, neither what she saw nor what she felt determined the worth of that child, and we have demonstrated that some people do feel deeply for their children even before their hearts started beating–even if their hearts never started beating. If it is late enough for the embryo to have implanted (and before that it is virtually impossible that anyone would see the embryo), cells have begun differentiating, and not all of the embryo’s cells are the same type, so it is no more just a clump of cells than anyone else is.
If this child who died–your aunt or uncle–had a beating heart before dying, would that change your view on whether it was a child? Or your view on when life begins?
(Kelly, there’s another in moderation as well)
Sorry about the double post.
One more thing to think about, Jennifer (and/or anyone else who might be questioning when life begins):
When the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary, and she conceived, did Jesus start out implanted at 2 weeks old with a beating heart? Or did His life on Earth begin as a zygote?
I’m not interested in discussing this further, ycw. I have a comment in moderation to dear ‘ol Grace and when that one comes out, it will hopefully be my last. It really doesn’t matter what I knew before now. What I DO know now is that the fertilized entity is less than I even thought it was. And once again, God had a plan for Jesus; you don’t know if He has a plan, or a soul, for zygotes that become nothing further. Once again, what-ifs and might-have-beens don’t make babies.
Of course Jesus began as a zygote (well, perhaps; who knows? He had no sperm to His being). Your implication is not really valid to the argument.
Jennifer,
To me, this that you said is the most compelling reason for NOT gambling with your theory:
“you don’t know if He has a plan, or a soul, for zygotes that become nothing further.”
It is precisely because we do not know God’s purposes that it is so dangerous to assume we can meddle with life.
“Your implication is not really valid to the argument”
To clarify: this is because, as I’ve said before, God knew what He would become. This doesn’t mean that Christ was human as a zygote; it means God always planned for Him to be more. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t be surprised if, in THIS case, Christ had a soul as a zygote. I really don’t know, because this was the most exceptional birth and pregnancy ever made. So, as a matter of fact, I think I’ll retract my last comment before this one; we have no idea what Christ was like in the womb.
But I DON’T gamble with life, Kelly. I think you’ve all assumed that I’d tell a woman in this situation what to do; quite the opposite. It’s between her and God, not me or anyone else.
Jennifer,
Perhaps I should have phrased it differently; I’m not addressing “what you would tell a woman”; but let’s be logical…what I or you believe becomes our philosophy about life; our philosophy about life comes out our fingertips and if we’re obeying Scripture, it becomes the premise for what we teach the younger women in our hearing.
So what you believe (as you are one member of a larger body) matters dearly to the body of Christ. This is certainly why the women debating here care about the issue so much.
As much as we’d like to hold the mantra: “believe what you want and stay out of everybody’s business” that is simply not the way the body of Christ was meant to function.
“Other than talking about the fact that it doesn’t look like a baby and does not make sense to you that it can be a baby without a heart”
No heart, no organs, no NOTHING, ycw.
“Jennifer, it is clear that you are not really hearing all that I am saying”
You’ve shown no more interest in understanding me.
“My basis for this is not the Bible, but science, which Dr. Nadal and I have both explained”
You’ve explained that it’s a single cell, not a person. Blocking an abortion clinic is wrong, presumptious, and illegal. If you can’t understand the problems with this, I don’t know what to tell you. If you see a heavily pregnant woman heading toward an abortion clinic, THAT would be obvious, wouldn’t it? By all means, stop her then.
“The same could be said of some severely disabled individuals–or a person under anesthesia. The rights of a human being are universal, based on the fact that he or she is a member of the human species and an image of God. The Bible says not to curse the deaf–why? Because even if they do not hear it, it offends their human dignity (and ours)”
Nice try. I’m not comparing cells to human beings, whether incapacitated or not.
“Actually, you did when you suggested that they should not protest abortion”
There’s a difference between HAVING convictions and screaming them in other people’s faces. Do you understand this at all?
“If you can be offended on the account of rape victims, certainly I have a right to offense when you so insult my children”
I didn’t insult your children. I’m talking about cells, which are NOT your children. And it’s 100% logical for me to point out that not all women feel the same. I base their beings on their level of function and existence, not emotion. I said that God loves them if they’re children to acknowledge that I could be wrong, not to do what you accused me of doing.
“You have not exhibited any remorse about doing so, and have in fact said that anyone who believes otherwise traumatizes women and will have to answer for their beliefs”
Of course I did dear, after being threatened with hell myself.
“Your words do not convey caring and compassion to me”
That’s because after being criticized, put down, patronized, and spiritually threatened for about four days, I’m starting to lose patience.
“I don’t need you to feel for me”
Good for you.
“I reject sympathy from someone who would call my precious children fertilized eggs”
Your precious children are children now, not zygotes. Does that word make you feel better?
“children are not people and it is okay to kill them”
If they’re not people, it’s not murder.
“I refuse to stay silent when you demean children and advocate a right to kill them, even if you claim that you would not be okay with killing all unborn children”
And I will not stay silent when you and others damn people in different situations from yours who condemn killing unborn CHILDREN, not cells.
“talk about the decision to kill at any point as a private one”
I never said that ANY and every stage was okay. If you want to refrain from LYING about my words, pay more attention.
“One person’s right to privacy is not more important than another’s right to life”
A cell does not have rights like a woman. It is your OPINION that a zygote is human. Emotion-based, whatever, it’s your right. However, your right to believe a zygote is a human doesn’t make it one and it does NOT give you the right to use your convictions to intrude on another’s life.
“If you think anyone should butt out of a woman’s decision to kill her child just because it might be a child you are okay with killing”
You really can’t grasp that some people don’t see it as a child, even scientifically. I’ve tried to be as clear as I can.
I understand what you mean, Kelly. However there IS a limit, isn’t there? If a younger woman doesn’t want advice in her marriage, other women don’t force their way in, no matter how wise they think they are, do they?
As I said to Grace, Kelly (in the stuck comment I really hope comes out soon), I’ve reached a resolution on this matter that’s probably different from what you imagine. I might share it, as soon as the other comments come out.
“Neither what she saw nor what she felt determined the worth of that child”
Actually, what she saw is EXACTLY what determined that it was NOT a child. If it had a heartbeat, of course I’d be upset that my grandmother lost a CHILD.
I’m sorry, Jennifer, I couldn’t publish that comment.
That’s okay, Kelly. I apologize that it was too much. Just as well, really, I’ve had time to reconstruct my thoughts.
Scientifically, a zygote is no comparison to a human or even a tiny fetus with organs. However, I know this will become a human if left alone (maybe) and I’m aware that God often sees things differently, and of the gravity and meaning this has. So, there is no easy answer; it’s a mystery I don’t take lightly. All I know is that I will never, ever condemn a traumatized woman who terminates an early pregnancy; this is between her and God, and only HE can tell her what to do. On this subject I have no more to say, and this will just have to be enough for all of you.
Grace, old girl, you need to listen very closely right now. I don’t care about changing anyone’s mind; I never did. I don’t give a flying darn whether the most stubborn of you ladies go to your graves thinking I’m doomed to hell. Most of the women here are awesome, but I’ve nevertheless had my faith and humanity put down, criticized, patronized, doubted, misquoted, and downright insulted. And you have the nerve to accuse ME of being snotty and belittling? I’ve been a one-woman defense team for the past week, almost non-stop, and you’re getting snooty about the fact that I’m finally starting to lose patience, once and for all, after having received the same arguments from YOU and others over and over and over?? You have no place talking whatsoever on either the matter of sounding snotty OR accusing me of being obsessed with changing people’s minds. Um, hello? People are still addressing ME, still bringing the topic up with ME, trying to change MY mind. And you carry one of the most know-it-all tones I’ve seen in a long time.
I don’t WANT you to agree with me, any of you. What I want is for you to stop OBSESSING over changing MY MIND. I want you to leave me the devil alone. Do you understand that? Because the more you push me, the more defensive I’ll get and the more all your words, from science to sad story, will sound like blah blah blah to me. It’s been a WEEK of this, remember?
Grace, Ycw and Anon, go home. Go to your families, thank God for them, and pray thanks that you’re right and I’m wrong for daring to say your kids were ever zygotes. Do what you want, just leave me out of it.
I have followed the comments on this post with interest.
The biggest question I have, and have had in the past on other controversial topics that have been posted on this blog, is why people who disagree continue to patronize this blog and engage in heated discussions with people that they clearly disagree with?
Jennifer, please understand that I don’t mean this as an attack, but it seems clear from your comments that you do not hold the same beliefs as Kelly and most of the women who frequent the comment section of this blog. And while I admire someone who listens to points of view that are different from their own, I have a hard time understanding why you would continue to come here if you are indeed as offended as you state you are?
Your last comment stated that you have been belittled, spiritually threatened, offended, insulted, etc., and yet you continue to post, repeatedly, on this blog. Why? If it’s self defense you’re after, I think you achieved that early on in your comments. If you’re not here to change anyone else’s mind, then why ARE you here? Not suggesting you leave, just truly wondering what your motivation is?
I truly don’t mean this is an offensive way. I am just intensely curious. If I disagreed with 95% of the commentors on a given blog, and felt repeatedly put down, offended, and threatened by said commentors, then I would probably stop frequenting the blog.
Also, I think you stated (I could be wrong, there are so many comments on this post that I could be confusing you with someone else) that you are not married, nor do you have any children. If that is true, you cannot summarily dismiss the wisdom (yes, there is wisdom that comes when one experiences these things from a scriptural understanding and practice) that has been gained by those who have. Does this mean that a younger, single woman can’t know ANYTHING about marriage or parenthood? Of course not. But it seems logical that knowing about something is quite different from experiencing something. And while it is not always the case, experience usually brings fresh knowledge and wisdom concerning a topic. You seem to have implied in a previous comment that some women have changed their minds just because they got emotionally happy after having their children, and therefore lost any ability to base their convictions on fact rather than emotion. While this could be true in some cases, it does not logically follow that it is true in ALL cases. While we should not be led by our emotions, emotions do not automatically obscure further knowledge or appreciation of factual information.
Anyway, this comment is getting much longer than I intended. Although I hope my curiosity as to your persistence on this blog is satisfied, I will not be responding to any comments that may be directed my way. I have no desire to be part of the fray that has resulted here the past few days. I confess I have found it interesting, but I know my own tendencies towards defensiveness and how quickly I personally can succumb to dialogue that is not in the least bit edifying. That is not meant to sound all high and mighty; just being honest about my own personal temptations. I like being right and having the last word too much to engage in heated discussions on topics like this, which is why I have never posted before on such a controversial post. This time I guess my curiosity got the best of me.
As to the original topic, Kelly, I am thankful that you post things like this; if not for people who were willing to speak out against the birth control norm, I might never have been challenged to rethink my own beliefs about the subject. My husband and I, in the grace of God, became convicted over our use of hormonal contraceptives 3 years ago.
We will welcome our third child in May (hopefully! our second one was overdue, so I’m hoping this one will show up “on time!”)
Well, if you’re not going to respond to any comments, I guess there’s no reason for me to answer you.
Alright, since you asked nicely I won’t snub you: Lady, I never discounted wisdom, or feelings for that matter, from other people; not deliberately anyway. I’ve said from the beginning that everyone’s entitled to their feelings BUT that these feelings shouldn’t dictate another’s actions. Women with babies are happy; good for them. Does this make them more knowledgeable about this matter scientifically? No, so I won’t respond as though it does.
Why am I still here? A few reasons: some have been polite and I like to talk to them. I want my position to be clear. And, I’m an anxious person; it’s hard for me to let things go. Plus, when someone bites me, I show my teeth in turn; I’m not one to turn my back on that. I hope I can now, because the INPOLITE comments come so unexpectedly and they’re wearing me down. Thanks for asking
Trust me Lady, don’t feel the need to explain why you drifted here and never landed. May I have that strength sometimes. Still, not sure I regret it.
hey Jennifer, I am actually surprised that the comment thread has gotten this long! it gives me hope that there is passion out there for God’s truth and to stop the holocost of the unborn! WW, YCW, ‘Grace, Anon., Lady, Dr. Nadal, so many I am sure I am forgetting someone
have so thoroughly outlined why your position is both unbiblical and unscientific that I will not be commenting on those things but…i did notice something that points to again what I would call the spirit in which you have engaged in this topic from the beginning.
you said-
” I’ve been a one-woman defense team for the past week, almost non-stop, and you’re getting snooty about the fact that I’M FINALLY STARTING TO LOSE PATIENCE once and for all, after having received the same arguments from YOU and others over and over and over?? (EMPHASIS Jen in al)
I just want to gently
point out that your tone and delivery was precisely what I addressed back in my first couple of comments. i saw pain, bitterness, anger, confusion from the start. your tone is the same as it was from the start. The reason that I bring this up is truly not to make you feel like you are being pounded into the earth and i believe wholeheartedly that that is not any other commenters intention either but i bring this up to address a heart issue that I believe is probably killing the joy in your life. I know, i know, really big, bold statement to make after having such limited interaction with you. I don’t know you personally that i am aware of. believe me i have on my “internet big girl shoes, raincoat and hat” to prepare for what may come my way for making such a broad statement. However sometimes it is the view from a bit of a distance, the small but revealing interaction that can sometimes give a pretty good picture of what may be going on under the surface. I hope you can receive this in the spirit it is intended. blessings to all, jen in al
Think what you want, Jen. I have no reason to be bitter, but every reason to be defensive of people I know are affected by what is, to you all, such an easily black and white issue. I know the spirit that your comment is intended, smileys and all, and what you think you know, and it’d be a waste of time to argue. So, there’s your rain of bitter fire from me.
I know you believe that your tone is only defensiveness but I urge you to go read the first few of your comments which were made before your position was openly defensive. the same tone i referred to is present from the start. I know it makes it easier to justify or explain to say you are only defending others you say are being attacked but it doesn’t make it accurate. Please try to look at what I am saying with fresh eyes and a humble spirit. praying for you, for all of us, jen in al
My tone was painfully clearly defensiveness, of women taking the pill and of exasperation and even disgust for Botkin. I’m sorry you persist on thinking I’m a bitter unahppy woman, but whatever; pray your heart out.
Sometimes “defensiveness” is sheer conviction. The whole time they are trying to “defend” the battle rages within them….”I’m right, see I’m right, and look, once again I’m right, because I’m right…Right??” I pray no one looses heart by standing by the choice of LIFE through this comment thread. God can use your words to reach even the coldest, most stubborn, hardest of hearts.
(Although I have commented here several times before, I feel I cannot reveal my name and will be making no responses to this.)
“I’m right, see I’m right, and look, once again I’m right, because I’m right…Right??”
LOL Yeah, I’m the one with that attitude, the cold heart, and they’re the ones who could lose heart. What a cute victimization drama.
thank you No Name. I am sure those of us with a passion for life and what God says about it will never loose heart! thank you for the encouragement to press on.
Jennifer-if your defensiveness is from sheer conviction please defend it biblically and scientifically. so far every one of your points have been clearly and repeatedly shown to be in error on both counts.
Well, Well, Jennifer….at least i can say it to you and I don’t run and hide to another borad to rip you apart as you do Kelly with your “anti-fundie” friends!!I stand by what I say. And BTW Penny, I don’t have to tell him, nor do I have to ask, you sad, sad lady!
I agree. This is getting a bit out of hand. I feel like I’m watching a soap opera.
Wow! So much I want to say!
This subject is a passion of mine! I’ve written on it on my blog many times!
I however, will leave one simple comment by restating a vastly overlooked fact Kelly (WW) pointed out earlier!
“Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.” Hebrews 7:9,10
LOINS! He (a man) met another being (a man) when he was still in his father’s loin! He wasn’t even a clump of cells or a zygote! He was a sperm yet realeased to his mother’s egg!
If this human man knew or met this other human man when he was still in the loin, how much sooner does God know this man & his soul?!?! His life seems to exhist before conception! What a thought!
Why did God feel it important to reaveal to the Author that this man was known by another man while he was still in his father’s loin?!? Most likly to make it blantinly obvious in times such as these, that God alone creates life! That there is no point where life begins that humans can measure ( like conception or a heart beat) God brings to very specific people together to create the DNA he had planned! He brings them together to create the baby he has planned! So gods definition of life may have a beging at the point he brings the people together! God does NOT remain quiet on the birthcontrol or abortion issues! He is loud and clear! Some just choose not to listen to or see His word!
Tawny, the problem with your claim is that we DON’T really exist in our father’s sperm, do we? This is at least partly metaphorical, and I’ve already spoken about God knowing who will be BORN before their time. It seems some just don’t listen.
I have been away from my computer (I do have a life
) and was very disheartened when I returned to check comments. I had already disabled the comments and deleted some of them before I saw a suggestion by someone to do so.
I invite debate and differences of opinion until it turns into character-bashing and name-calling.
I would ask those of you who can’t comment without using profanity to stop commenting. Those of you who have a hatred for fundamentalism and enjoy expressing that here–same message. There are plenty of “snarky blogs” for people who enjoy tearing down the beliefs of others for fun. This isn’t the place.
All in love,
Kelly