Technological advances have made striking pictures like this (an elephant embryo six months along in its 24 month gestational period) possible. This post (HT: Ryan DeBarr) contains several striking pictures of animal embryos. What is crystal clear is that they are not developing through several stages of evolution in the womb—and they are not mere lumps of tissue.
And of course we now know for certain that the same is true with human embryos. 3D ultrasound technology has completely destroyed the myth of a gestational evolution of sorts. But guess what? Textbooks continue to repeat the Darwinian myth that human embryos have gill slits and etc. And pro abortion people continue to denigrate human embryos as “just tissue”.
How very sad. And, how painfully obvious.
∼striving for the unity of the faith for the glory of God∼ Eph. 4:3,13 “¢ Rom. 15:5-7
This is truly an amazing picture. I have seen it on a few different secular sites and their commentary is (not suprisingly) deficient in exposing that life does begin in the womb. Unfortunately for pro-abortionists, discerning readers will figure it out on their own! Praise God for His wonderful creation, both animal and human!
Since when are pro-choicers “pro-abortion”? The majority of us are for choice, which could be adoption, keeping the child, or abortion. If we were “pro-abortion” like you insinuate that we are, we would only be for abortion and nothing else. Nice try though at making our side look bad.
Also, abortions after the first trimester are illegal in much of the United States, so any point you were trying to prove with the photo of a six-month-old elephant fetus (since six months is far, far past the first trimester) is moot.
I suggest you learn more about the facts of abortion and its legality before you go around showing your ignorance yet again.
May Darwin and his wonderful theory of evolution bless you,
Hannah (yes, I am a godless heathen ;))
If there is nothing wrong with abortion, why do you think it makes you look bad to support it?
Elephants do not have tri-mesters. An unborn elephant is its sixth month is only a quarter of the way through the pregrancy, like a two month old human unborn child.
Darwin and his “wonderful theory” of evolution is so far out of date that even evolutionists laugh at it.
Hannah,
I meant no offense with the term “pro abortionist”, but don’t you defend the practice of abortion? We pro lifers have no qualms with adoption or letting the baby be born and stay with the family, either. It is the practice of abortion that we object to.
Yes, abortion is legal, but so is adultery and other crimes. But abortion is the killing of a child making it far worse than adultery, it is basically murder.
My point in this post was fairly obvious I thought. Fetuses are not blobs of tissue but little people (check out the evidence readily available of how developed human babies really are while still in the first trimester). And fetuses are not in some evolutionary development which somehow would make it less morally problematic to dispense with them.
The truth is that textbooks still today in thousands of schools repeat the unverifiable (in fact it has been proven false by experts) myth that human embryos have gill slits and mirror the evolutionary process as they develop.
Also, Hannah, I am sure you are aware that abortion causes incredible grief and psychological pain for those involved in the decision making process. There is not much blessing that goes with the abortion.
As for being godless and pagan, I hope you one day encounter Jesus Christ. He offers true joy and peace. Check out the link in my sidebar under “Important”. I don’t think less of you because you aren’t Christian. I want you to experience the love and joy that I have in Christ.
Lastly, let’s remember that if the child had a choice, he would choose to live. Aren’t you glad you are alive?
May God bless you, and one day open your eyes to how gloriously wonderful He really is.
Bob Hayton
Wow…
“If there is nothing wrong with abortion, why do you think it makes you look bad to support it?”
I have never heard someone who is pro-choice get so upset over the term “pro-abortion.” The comment follow-up that I quoted was 100% appropriate and to the point. If pro-choicers are so in favor of abortion, doesn’t it stand to reason that they would not be offended by someone saying that they are pro-abortion unless their is something wrong with abortion?
Great post and great comments!
Oy, the ignorance. First of all, Bob, your god has no place in this issue, so please keep him out of it. Also, please stop proselytizing to me, it is not appreciated at all.
Second of all, how exactly is abortion at all like adultery, or any other crime, for that matter? Adultery hurts an already-born human being. Abortion does not.
Also, please call the fetus what it is, instead of relying on emotional rhetoric by calling it a “child.” It’s plain to see that all you’re trying to do by calling it that is strike at my maternal urges, which is a very immature debate tactic, so I suggest you don’t do that anymore. Plus, I have no maternal urges to speak of (I plan on remaining childfree my entire life long), so that tactic doesn’t even work with me.
As for the whole “abortion causes grief and pain” claim, it’s plain to see that you haven’t explored the outcomes of adoption and keeping the child fully enough in order to realize that both of those can lead to grief and pain as well. An unplanned pregnancy is a difficult thing to deal with, and no matter what the woman chooses to do with that pregnancy, there is a chance that she will regret that choice. Plus, not all women regret getting abortions just like not all women regret keeping their child or giving it up for adoption. In fact, here’s a site full of many real-life stories of women who did not regret their abortions one bit: http://www.imnotsorry.net. I suggest you check out that site in order to fully educate yourself on the realities of abortion (rather than willfully remaining ignorant on the topic).
Finally, I am glad that my mother chose life, but if she had chosen to abort me, I wouldn’t have even known that she had done so, since I wouldn’t have been conscious at all. So there goes that little point of yours.
Nicholas, the reason I got so angry about being called pro-abortion is the exact same reason that you wouldn’t like being called anti-choice. It’s a cheap way to insult the opposing side, and make them look bad. I do realize that I am for abortion, but that is not the only thing that I am for. So stop insinuating that it is. Thank you.
Ryan, I’d like to see evidence of your claim that Darwin’s theory of evolution is out-of-date. Because last time I checked, many, many educated scientists were still regarding it as being accurate. It’s fine if you don’t believe in Darwin’s theory, but please don’t spread misinformation about it. Thanks.
Hannah,
You sound very angry for a person who willfully posted opinions that are contrary to the author of this blog’s viewpoint and a majority of his readers. Please understand that most, if not all, of us who visit here are interested in filtering all our views of life through the Word of God, the Bible. We believe it to be the standard of truth, and it says that God knew us in the womb. Therefore, we believe that life begins in the womb and are committed to telling the truth about abortion, that it is murder of a human being.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I do not mind a bit being called “anti-choice” when it pertains to abortion. I am against it in every situation. I am sorry that you were offended by my use of the label “pro-abortion” but you admit to supporting abortion. In my mind, that makes you pro-abortion.
I don’t mean to anger you any more by these posts, but please understand that you are trying to engage the readers of this blog in a discussion, and you chose to do this on a Christian blog. Don’t be suprised when those readers try to share their beliefs and explain why they believe that way. We extend the same favor to you.
Grace and peace,
Donette
You know, Donette, you make a piss-poor mind reader. And I say that in the most positive of mindsets. I’m not angry. I’m just debating. There is a difference, you know.
And religion should not be a part of any debate, since each religion is equally true and to argue all of their individual stances on every issue would take quite a while. So that’s why I’m opposed to the mention of religion in this conversation.
Also, Donette, I guess I’ll let the whole “pro-abortion” thing go. It ruffles my feathers a bit when people try to synonymize it with “pro-choice” but it’s relatively small compared to the other issues I’m arguing. So there you go. See, I am capable of listening to what others say to me. 🙂
Hey, Brother Bob!
Just thought I’d check in right here and say I’ve been enjoying your pastor’s recent sermon on kicking off the final paragraph of the Greatest Letter Ever Written as he brings his seven year flight on the 747 in for a 5 week landing!
“God Strengthens Us by the Gospel.” Brother Piper just gave me a good new “prooftext” for my new favorite theological hobby-horse! I may have to come up with something to say about this doxology in my new “Christocentricity” category someday when I get the time!
Sorry for changing the subject.
Just ignore me.
Just wanted to say “Hey!”
Hannah said,
“And religion should not be a part of any debate”
There is the problem. You do not want to bring “religion” into the debate, and I am compelled to bring every debate into the realm of my belief system (or “religion”). For those of us who have a firm faith in Christ, we cannot argue any point without first referencing the standard of truth, the Bible. You see, I don’t believe that “each religion is equally true”. Truth, by definition, is exclusive. You can’t say opposite things and both be true. Jesus’s claims are exclusive. Take a moment to read Bob’s past posts concerning what Jesus demanded of the world.
I’m sure it seems easy to compartmentalize faith as seperate from this (or any) debate. It just isn’t possible for me. So if you want to debate whether life begins in the womb, or if abortion should be legal with someone who doesn’t share my view of faith and life, then you might need to look elsewhere.
Okay, fine, Bob. Remain willfully ignorant. Pretend that your religion (and your political leanings) is “the truth,” and see where that gets you. For your sake, though, I do hope that you learn to accept religions (and viewpoints) other than your own, rather than doing what you’re currently doing: covering your ears, closing your eyes, and singing at the top of your voice (metaphorically, of course) whenever someone provides evidence that disproves your views.
May you be blessed with open-mindedness, and the willingness to think for one second that your viewpoint isn’t the only “right” one.
Thanks for your time,
Hannah
Hannah,
It’s not intellectually honest to come to a “Religious Blog” and then make arguments and then insist that those who make counterpoints, “Keep Relgion out of it”. That would be like me going to A Pro Darwin Blog and saying that we should keep “Darwin out of the discussion.” It’s not honest, and it doesn’t make sens to come to a religous blog and demand that relgion not be discussed.
Job 31:15
Did not he who made me in the womb make him? And did not one fashion us in the womb?
Psalm 17:14
You fill their womb with treasure; they are satisfied with children, and they leave their abundance to their infant.
Psalm 22:10
On you was I cast from my birth, and from my mother’s womb you have been my God.
Psalm 127:3
Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward.
Psalm 139:13
For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.
Isaiah 44:24
Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb: “I am the Lord, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.
Romans 2:5
But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.
Deleted per Ryan’s request.
I apologize for my previous post, and ask the webmaster to delete it.
I was a Christian, a Fundamentalist, for many years and did not believe abortion was necessarily murder. In fact, it’s only been about three years since I believed abortion was murder.
Let me explain…
There once was a time when I was in rebellion against the Lord, a time when I was a libertarian anarchist, a time when I felt abortion might be OK and that it was wrong to make people feel guilty for decisions they made in a tough situation.
Then I became close to a few girls who had abortions and saw how it affected them. One night in a secular university I held a female friend of mine for about half an hour as she sobbed and told me how she wanted to kill herself for what she had done.
I decided then and there that if abortion was not murder, it was still evil. It is evil because of what it does to the women who have them. That alone is reason to outlaw it.
Only in the last three years have I become convinced that the Bible teaches the fetus is a human being.
Ryan,
Thank you for taking back your previous post. That was a mature thing to do, and I applaud you for it. As for your most recent post, I will ask you to direct your attention to this site: http://www.imnotsorry.net. It has plenty (possibly hundreds, though I’ve never counted) of real-life stories of women who have gotten abortions and have not regretted doing so. Please do read at least one story on that site; they’re very enlightening and eye-opening. Like I said to Bob in another post, some women regret putting their child up for adoption or keeping their child. It’s not just abortion that holds the possibility of regret. Deciding what to do with an unplanned pregnancy is difficult, much more than I think you’ll ever realize, unfortunately (since you’re a male and will never be able to experience it first-hand). It’s not just as easy as “oh, adoption/keeping the child/abortion is the right thing to do.” It requires days, sometimes even weeks, of long, hard thought. So why should it be outlawed because it’s a tough choice for women to make? That would be like outlawing pet euthanasia because it, too, is a difficult choice to make. Yet I doubt you’re out rallying for that cause. So what makes this difficult decision any different?
Hannah:
I did not say the theory of evolution was discredited. I said Darwin’s theory of evolution was discredited. There is not just one theory of evolution. There are several conflicting schools of thought that are constantly “evolving” (pardon the bad pun). Things that were “accepted science” a few decades ago are laughed at now. Today’s theories will seem funny in another fourty years.
As for religious dogma not mattering… what do you give to us to prove a fetus isn’t a human being? Take most of them out of the womb and they can live. Does the act of getting cut out of a woman’s body make it human? That’s silly.
What you’re really offering is your own arbitrary definition of humanity. You’re insisting that we accept it based on… nothing.
The theory of evolution has nothing to do with the abortion debate. Nothing. If evolution were true, we’d still be faced with the debate.
Hannah:
The “you’re male, you won’t understand” excuse doesn’t fly. Men, as a group, are far more supportive of abortion rights than women are. That says something.
I’m sure there are people who say they aren’t sorry for their abortion. I’ve met people who weren’t sorry for any number of things they did- including child molestation. But the simple fact is that most people view abortion as murder or close kin to murder. Among those who don’t view it as murder, they are very likely to view it with extreme distaste.
Most people see life as a good thing and want to see more of it. I’ve never heard anyone send condolences to a person with a newborn child.
The reason that women struggle with the decision to have abortion is because nobody, except the deranged, are comfortable with playing God and deciding what life can be and what life can’t be.
And to be frank, I’ve never met a person who had an abortion because they were genuinely concerned about the welfare of the child. I’m not saying such people don’t exist, but they are exceedingly rare. The people I know had the abortion because it would crimp their style.
Of course, it’s fine to dispose of a fetus if it’s not a human life- but then we’re back to square one: the fetus looks like a person, reacts to pain like a person, and in many cases can live outside the womb.
Well, since the theory of evolution doesn’t matter in this debate, then why do you keep on bringing it up? I’ve only mentioned it twice in this whole conversation, and I didn’t try to relate it to the topic at hand either of those times. I do apologize for misunderstanding what you were trying to say about Darwin, though. I do understand now that it’s him that has been discredited and not his theory. Thanks for clearing that up. 🙂
Also, a first-trimester fetus cannot survive outside the womb. It’s basic biology. None of its organs have fully matured, so therefore, there is basically a 0% chance of survival. So my definition of humanity is not arbitrary at all, rather, it’s based on biological factors. (Which should have actually been obvious, seeing as I’m an atheist and all, and I believe primarily in science. 😉 LOL.)
Also, could you please answer my question that I posed to you in the previous post? In case you missed it, here it is again: “Why should abortion be outlawed because it’s a tough choice for women to make? That would be like outlawing pet euthanasia because it, too, is a difficult choice to make. Yet I doubt you’re out rallying for that cause. So what makes this difficult decision any different?” There it is, quoted directly from my previous post. If you could answer that, that’d be great. Thanks. 🙂
First of all, why do you insist on comparing abortion to child molestation time and time again? Like I said before, the two have nothing in common.
And what about the people who don’t see abortion with any distaste at all? Why are you disregarding them?
As for the “life is a good thing” comment, why not try to help other already-living babies and young children have the best lives possible instead of bringing more and more unneeded lives into this world? The United States is, as a country, starting to become overcrowded. That needs to be dealt with before we make any decisions that will lead to a rise in birthrates, like outlawing abortion will. So I’d love to see you and other pro-lifers actually adopt some of the hundreds of thousands of babies and children currently in the foster care system, and/or help out a lower-class family financially. Words mean nothing in this situation. Actions speak much, much louder here. So, are you ready to do either of those things? Or will you continue to be selfish and disregard the consequences of your opinions?
Wow, I leave my blog alone for a few hours and….
Interesting conversation, thanks for all who have participated.
I want to speak to a few things quickly, as I don’t have much time.
First of all, I understand that women are affected when faced with unwanted pregnancies. But there is documented additional emotional and physical problems caused by abortion. See this articl: “Does Abortion Harm a Woman’s Physical and Mental Health?” by Randy Alcorn.
Secondly, I will go and read at least one story at that website you gave, as soon as I have some time. I don’t doubt that many are fine with their decision. However, I am sure you are aware that the pro life numbers are swelling with women who have had abortions and seriously regretted them.
Thirdly, you say the fetus is just tissue. Remember it has every organ it will ever have by the end of the first trimester, and every first trimester abortion is done on a “blob of tissue” that has a beating heart and measurable brain waves. Further, the fetus absolutely looks like a human at that early age. We even have laws defending such preborn children. Which is strange when mothers can abort that same preborn child if they want to.
Fourthly, it is clear that this is an emotionally charged issue. And don’t get me wrong, when dealing with someone facing this decision, I wouldn’t advocate a “thumping a Bible in their face” approach. Care and compassion are needed. But there is so much more harm done through the abortion than adoption would ever cause.
Fifth, I do have Biblical reasons for my position. And I do apply the Bible to all of life. All religions are equally able to make claims, and all truth claims deserve to be heard. Yet at the end of the day, only certain positions are true, while others are false. There is an absolute right and wrong.
Sixth, you mention overpopulation. Since 1972 the average reproductive rate in America has been 1.8 children. 2.1 is needed to maintain zero population growth. The increase in population we have seen, has been largely due to immigration. Actually, if you look at Western cultures, they are almost all reproducing at a rate far less than what is required to maintain current population levels.
Seventh, you challenge me and those who hold my position, to adopt more and to help lower class families more. That is a valid charge. It would be easy to judge others and withold any help from them. However, that being said, you should know that the church I am a part of has two adoption funds (one for foreign children and another for minorities). We strongly advocate adopting children, and I know of dozens of families that have adopted. Further, we advocate helping the poor strongly. We support local charity organizations for our metropilatan area, and we are strongly advocating racial reconciliation and empowerment issues.
You should know that we have many more arguments than merely a Bible verse, for you. And we know this is not an easy issue. It is complex. But I am confident that even when viewed from a strictly secular standpoint, abortin is very problematic. But since I believe as I do in God and in the Bible, I have an even greater desire to stand up for the unborn.
Finally, it seems clear that none of us will be able to convince Hannah nor she us. I don’t want to encourage this debate to go on for ever, especially if it continues in such heated tones. We have made some points on both sides. Let us put this to rest. I will let Hannah have another word, though, before deciding for sure on this.
God bless,
Bob Hayton
I think I’m going to just let this conversation end here, as I feel ill today and definitely do not feel able to refute that whole long post of Bob’s. Thanks for letting me get the last word, though, Bob. That was very considerate of you. Anyhow, I hope everyone has a good day today, and thanks for this little mini-debate. Ciao.
Hope you get feeling better, Hannah. Feel welcome to stop by this blog again sometime.
Have a great day,
Bob
Oh, and “high, back” to John Chitty (aka Captain Headknowledge). I thought you’d love that sermon. I thought the same thing. Perhaps I’ll try to beat you to the punch on posting about it.
God bless,
Bob
Note to all:
Two more things.
1) I came across a rather interesting post summarizing the startling facts regarding overpopulation. The facts are that the US is barely maintaining its population, while almost all of the rest of the West (non 3rd world countries) are well below that mark.
2) I want to caution us all in how we interact with others on this (and other) blogs—especially how we interact with unbelievers. We are all prone (myself included) to take things personally (especially due to not being able to hear the intonations of someone’s voice or see the expression on their face) and to jump to the defensive. What was said in this discussion from “our side” was largely correct. But perhaps we could have spoken with more love and grace. Perhaps we could have been more patient. I am not sure that would have changed the outcome of the debate any, but perhaps we would have gained an ear or encouraged someone to stick with this blog and post an occasional dissenting opinion. That would have possibly resulted in more “ministry” opportunities.
Regardless, and I speak this to myself as well, let us try to keep 2 Tim. 2:24-25 and Col. 4:5-6 in view at all times when blogging.
Thanks again for all who participated. Please, don’t run away, I enjoy your help and support (and interaction) on the blog.
God bless you all richly through Christ Jesus,
Bob
Also, a first-trimester fetus cannot survive outside the womb.
That’s why I said “most.” Of course, very young fetuses are dependent on their mothers. (Then again, so are newborns).
Why should abortion be outlawed because it’s a tough choice for women to make?
The reaction of the girls I know who have had abortions to the abortion convinced me that the practice was evil. I have known some who would try to assert they’re not ashamed, but I don’t find their testimony compelling. I think it is denial, which is a very natural human reaction. We all tend to deny that certain things hurt us.
For example, I have known victims of molestation who cope with the pain by developing the idea that what happened to them wasn’t bad, that there’s no shame in “immoral” sex, and go on to be promiscuous (this is where most female porn stars come from). Others seek out the most hard-core religious groups they can and try to make themselves feel holier or atone for their actions.
I want to make it clear that while I think abortion is murder, that we are all very much bound up in sin and I do not wish to be hateful or judgmental to those who have them.
As for the “life is a good thing†comment, why not try to help other already-living babies and young children have the best lives possible instead of bringing more and more unneeded lives into this world?
There is no such thing as an unneeded life.
Hannah said:
Also, please call the fetus what it is, instead of relying on emotional rhetoric by calling it a “child.â€
How about an “unborn human person”?