Marriage/Abortion - Morality and Biblical Issues

[b2r]

A sermon on the topic by Todd Wagner, Watermark Church, Dallas Texas, 12/07/14.
The placement here should not offend anyone, if you do not click on the provided links.

www.watermark.org/media/the-pursuit-of-happiness-4-aborting-your-silence-and-dealing-with-the-shame-of-abortion/3311/?autoplay=video 

www.watermark.org/media/

[mmhmm]

Dec 20, 2014 12:09:17 GMT -5 b2r said:

A sermon on the topic by Todd Wagner, Watermark Church, Dallas Texas, 12/07/14.
The placement here should not offend anyone, if you do not click on the provided links.

www.watermark.org/media/the-pursuit-of-happiness-4-aborting-your-silence-and-dealing-with-the-shame-of-abortion/3311/?autoplay=video 

www.watermark.org/media/

I'm going to let your post (complete with links) stand, b2r; however, sermons speak to morality, not legality. While those who wish to do so may read your links, the contents of those links are not to be brought into this thread. The morality/immorality of abortion is not the subject of this thread and will not become the subject of this thread.

mmhmm, Administrator

[weltschmerz]

Dec 20, 2014 12:09:17 GMT -5 b2r said:

A sermon on the topic by Todd Wagner, Watermark Church, Dallas Texas, 12/07/14.
The placement here should not offend anyone, if you do not click on the provided links.

www.watermark.org/media/the-pursuit-of-happiness-4-aborting-your-silence-and-dealing-with-the-shame-of-abortion/3311/?autoplay=video 

www.watermark.org/media/

I'm not going to listen to a guy jabber about sin for over an hour.

In any case, there's no shame in having an abortion. Not from where I'm standing, anyway.

[mmhmm]

Please, folks. Let's not get into the morality/shame issue here. Let's stick with the issues brought up in the OP. It's about legality, not morality and it's going to have to stay that way.

mmhmm, Administrator who doesn't want to remove the thread

[Virgil Showlion]

Dec 19, 2014 21:19:43 GMT -5 Angel! said:

Dec 19, 2014 18:50:56 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I simply pointed out that if a man marries a woman who shares his values and doesn't have sex outside this marital relationship, he doesn't have to deal with any of the issues raised in this thread. No paternity issues or paternity tests, no battles over the fate of his offspring, no worries about potential battles over the fate of his offspring.

I wasn't even the first one to suggest the idea. Wisconsin Beth and txsbbtc did.

Precisely.

Certainly it's a moral issue, but it doesn't pertain to abortion. As I point out above, conforming one's lifestyle to some basic guidelines is the simplest way to avoid moral conflicts over abortion. This thread and everything in it are some other man's problems to deal with.

So really this has zero to do with extramarital sex. Being married doesn't mean you share values and not being married to your partner doesn't mean you don't share values.

I would also point out that there is a massive grey area with abortion so there is a good chance you don't 100% agree on every situation that might arise even if you know your partner well. Even among pro-lifers there is a disagreement as to whether the morning after pill or even bc pills are acceptable. And then there are more complex issues like mother's life at stake or baby with health problems. And a baby with problems has different degrees too...downs syndrome, various physical deformities (which also have different degrees), not going to live past 20, not going to live past 2, not likely to live more than a few days if they live to birth.

I know plenty of married couples that didn't agree on these issues even they had an otherwise strong marriage. Luckily none I knew had to make these difficult decisions. But even a good marriage doesn't mean you agree on everything when there is so much grey area.

You should be advocating knowing your partner, which is not dependent on marriage.

My opinion on the subject is nigh indistinguishable from that of Mr. Wagner (the gentleman speaking in b2r's video). He addresses the issue of degrees, grey areas, strength of convictions, etc. I believe his oratory would would impress upon on you how utterly non-negotiable the issue is in our view, and how fundamental it would be to the selection of a mate.

As for "knowing your partner", suffice it to say that marriage is the only covenant with force commensurate to the consequences of sex (potential pregnancy foremost among them). In plainer terms, if a man doesn't know and love a woman enough to enter into a covenant of marriage with her, he has not met the requisite standards of trust, commitment, and sworn responsibility needed to have sex (and potentially conceive children) with her.

I realize "marriage" these days can generally refer to any two people reciting whatever vows please them and signing a state-issued piece of paper, but I'm talking specifically about the Biblical "until death do you part" standard of commitment.

[weltschmerz]

Dec 20, 2014 14:24:35 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Dec 19, 2014 21:19:43 GMT -5 Angel! said:

So really this has zero to do with extramarital sex. Being married doesn't mean you share values and not being married to your partner doesn't mean you don't share values.

I would also point out that there is a massive grey area with abortion so there is a good chance you don't 100% agree on every situation that might arise even if you know your partner well. Even among pro-lifers there is a disagreement as to whether the morning after pill or even bc pills are acceptable. And then there are more complex issues like mother's life at stake or baby with health problems. And a baby with problems has different degrees too...downs syndrome, various physical deformities (which also have different degrees), not going to live past 20, not going to live past 2, not likely to live more than a few days if they live to birth.

I know plenty of married couples that didn't agree on these issues even they had an otherwise strong marriage. Luckily none I knew had to make these difficult decisions. But even a good marriage doesn't mean you agree on everything when there is so much grey area.

You should be advocating knowing your partner, which is not dependent on marriage.

My opinion on the subject is nigh indistinguishable from that of Mr. Wagner (the gentleman speaking in b2r's video). He addresses the issue of degrees, grey areas, strength of convictions, etc. I believe his oratory would would impress upon on you how utterly non-negotiable the issue is in our view, and how fundamental it would be to the selection of a mate.

As for "knowing your partner", suffice it to say that marriage is the only covenant with force commensurate to the consequences of sex (potential pregnancy foremost among them). In plainer terms, if a man doesn't know and love a woman enough to enter into a covenant of marriage with her, he has not met the requisite standards of trust, commitment, and sworn responsibility needed to have sex (and potentially conceive children) with her.

I realize "marriage" these days can generally refer to any two people reciting whatever vows please them and signing a state-issued piece of paper, but I'm talking specifically about the Biblical "until death do you part" standard of commitment.

And how many adhere to the "Until death do you part" bit? Look at the divorce rates.

Even that moron, Pat Robertson, said it's OK to divorce a spouse if they get sick enough.

Some commitment.

[Shooby]

My parents were married until death they did part. So were DH's parents. So were my MIL and BIL's parents. So were MANY people that I know. So, to answer that. A LOT.

[Shooby]

However, failings on the part of human beings do not somehow negate Biblical truth.