Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: Jesus Loves The Little Children
Source:
The Aquila Report
URL Source: http://theaquilareport.com/jesus-loves-the-little-children/
Published: Jul 23, 2015
Author: Kevin DeYoung
Post Date: 2015-07-23 15:42:28 by redleghunter
Ping List: *Pro-Life* Subscribe to *Pro-Life*
Keywords: None
Views: 5318
Comments: 38
Oddly enough, it’s sometimes progressives who are most eager to move the culture backward. As we reflect in horror at the utter callousness with which some persons and organizations speak of (not to mention crush) the tiniest humans, it’s worth remembering that the ancient world was unabashedly open to the killing of children. For starters, they had almost none of the sentimentality we have towards kids. There was no Disney, no summer camps, no play dates. Family life–even if there was such a thing–certainly did not revolve around children. In general, children, were useful at best, burdens at worst, and almost never coddled. If there was one dominant fact regarding children in the ancient world it was their high mortality rates, especially among infants. Many newborns were stillborn or died in labor. Those who made it safely out of the womb often went hungry. There were too many mouths to feed and too little food. As a result, children were often abandoned, exposed to the elements, literally left on trash heaps to die. From 230 B.C. onward, the most common family in Greece was a one-child family. Families of four or five were rare. Some families might want two sons, but rarely would they want two daughters. Unwanted children were disposed of, often sold into slavery. Others were aborted in the womb. Many more were simply killed as infants. Newborns were not considered part of the family until the father officially acknowledged them and received them into the house by religious ceremony. Consequently, ancient Greeks and Romans thought little of little babies and did not hesitate to get rid of them. In the ancient world, it was uniquely the Jewish people who prohibited abortion and infanticide, the latter of which was not outlawed until Christianity took on a privileged place in the empire. Christians have always opposed killing children, whether infants outside the womb or infants inside the womb. The two were one and the same crime. “You shall not abort a child or commit infanticide,” commanded the Didache, a late first century church constitution of sorts. Despite the muddled arguments of progressive Christian groups and denominations (whose obfuscation with language is positively Orwellian), opposition to abortion and infanticide is not simply one position for Christians, it is the Christian position. Jesus welcomed children when others wanted to push them away (Mark 10:13-16). He said the measure of our love for him would be measured by our love for children (Mark 9:36-37). He took the children in his arms as if to say, “Honor these little ones, and you honor me. Send them away because they are weak, socially insignificant, and bothersome, and you’ve demonstrated you don’t understand the values of the kingdom.” As abortion is again in the public eye (though willfully ignored by major media outlets), let’s pray for our society to change its mind regarding the smallest and most helpless of its citizens. Let’s pray for the church to lead the way in protecting, honoring, and caring for children–not matter how unborn or unwanted. Let’s pray that every judge, politician, and doctor becomes convinced of the sanctity of unborn life and acts accordingly. Let’s pray for the flourishing of pregnancy centers and women’s clinics that provide an alternative to abortion. Let’s pray for the women contemplating such a tragic choice, and for the family members encouraging them in the wrong direction. Let’s pray for men to be men, to stop fooling around and to stop fleeing when they have. Let’s pray that hundreds of politicians, thousands of pastors, millions of would-be moms and dads, and 300 million hearts are gripped by a Jesus-inspired view of children. Red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in his sight. Jesus loves the little children of the world. Even the ones with an umbilical cord. Poster Comment: The West is regressing to its pagan roots of disposable children.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: GarySpFc, liberator, CZ82, tomder55, Don, BobCeleste, SOSO, Nolu Chan (#0)
Some historical perspective from a Christian.
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.---John 1:17
Yep. Come Judgement Day, PP, and all of the people that have been pro choice are going to have a lot of splanin to do. Si vis pacem, para bellum
Didin't you get the memo? Only black lives matter.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Some fifty eight million babies have been sacrificed since Roe vs Wade passed the U.S. Supreme Court. I wonder how many of those babies were black?
Some fifty eight million babies have been sacrificed since Roe vs Wade passed the U.S. Supreme Court. I wonder how many of those babies were black? DK. Probably best to ask Margaret Sanger and her successors. The popular wisdom is that black abortions are/were disproportionately high relative the percentage of blacks in the general population. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
It's roughly 2-1 Black vs White, so you figure somewhere in the neighborhood of 39 million “Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Margaret Sanger had her own agenda. Population control, especially of blacks, was important to her.
Abortion is the work of Satan.
Wow. Stunning.
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.---John 1:17
Sir you are correct.
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.---John 1:17
Blacks make one tenth of population. So it could be 10 out of 58
Have you seen the latest trend that is gaining traction in the medical " intellectual class " ? A couple years ago , a couple of medical 'ethicists " proposed that since babies aren't really fully developed after birth ,that it is moral and ethical to do "after-birth " abortions . Publishing in the Journal of Medical Ethics ;"two philosophers", Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva argued that If criteria such as the costs (social, psychological, economic) for the potential parents are good enough reasons for having an abortion even when the fetus is healthy, if the moral status of the newborn is the same as that of the infant and if neither has any moral value by virtue of being a potential person, then the same reasons which justify abortion should also justify the killing of the potential person when it is at the stage of a newborn. jme.bmj.com/content/early...edethics-2011-100411.full They don't give a time frame when that baby is actually a person . Maybe it's a day or 2 . Maybe they are thinking more in line with Herod ,using a 2 year window. Does it matter ? The same arguments for offing a fetus can be applied to a baby evidently . Why wouldn't it then be a standard applied to the infirmed or the elderly ? It's all the same moral base ..... someone else deciding someone elses worth as a human ,and having the power to terminate that person. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
The CDC reports that during the 1970's, roughly 24% of all U.S. abortions were performed on black women. That percentage rose to 30% in the 1980's, 34% in the 1990's and 36% in the 2000's. That means that about 31% of all U.S. abortions since 1973 have been performed on African American women. Based on the January 2013 estimate that there have been 55.7 million abortions in the United States since 1973, we can deduce that approximately 17 million of the aborted babies were black. Despite an overall black population growth of 12% between 2000 and 2010, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that the black population "grew at a slower rate than most other major race and ethnic groups in the country. "CBS News reported in 2009 that "Hispanics have surpassed blacks as the nation's largest minority group."Can there be any question about the role abortion has played in this demographic shift? Despite similar population numbers, Hispanic women currently account for about 20% of all U.S. abortions, whereas African-American women account for 35%. From 1973 to 2012, abortion reduced the black population by 30%, and that doesn't even factor in all the children that would have been born to those aborted a generation ago. To put it bluntly, abortion has thinned the black community in ways the Ku Klux Klan could have only dreamed of. You're right my figures are off got in a hurry I guess. “Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Publishing in the Journal of Medical Ethics ;"two philosophers", Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva argued that If criteria such as the costs (social, psychological, economic) for the potential parents are good enough reasons for having an abortion even when the fetus is healthy, if the moral status of the newborn is the same as that of the infant and if neither has any moral value by virtue of being a potential person, then the same reasons which justify abortion should also justify the killing of the potential person when it is at the stage of a newborn. jme.bmj.com/content/early...edethics-2011-100411.full They don't give a time frame when that baby is actually a person . Maybe it's a day or 2 . Maybe they are thinking more in line with Herod ,using a 2 year window. Does it matter ? The same arguments for offing a fetus can be applied to a baby evidently . Why wouldn't it then be a standard applied to the infirmed or the elderly ? It's all the same moral base ..... someone else deciding someone elses worth as a human ,and having the power to terminate that person. Tom, can't say I am shocked but yet did not think some would be so overt as in the days of Sanger. ALL: ping to tomder55's post above. Pro-Life ping. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.---John 1:17
Well didn't SCOTUS establish viability as the test? What newborn infant is viable on its own - none. By that standard abortions should be legal up until about 18 (probably at least 26 if they are still on their parents medical insurance) and then again after one loses control of their bowels. After all according to ex-Governor Toe Head the elderly have an obligation to die - if they don't voluntarily do so then society has a right to move them on. Indeed it is a Brave New World, Dr. Kevorkian. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
on another site my post about this is about to be shut down by the administrators Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Let us know the site and we can help pile on:) For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.---John 1:17
yeah why not . https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/more-grotesque-horror-planned- parenthood-814174.html
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
The viability test is not whether the fetus/baby can survive on its own. It is whether it can survive at all, even with proper medical care. Roe was decided on which of the competing interests it considered paramount at various stages of pregnancy. http://laws.findlaw.com/us/410/113.html U.S. Supreme Court ROE v. WADE, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) From Syllabus (Reporter's synopsis of holding) (a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician. Pp. 163, 164. (b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health. Pp. 163, 164. (c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother. Pp. 163-164; 164-165.
Assumption: Most abortions would end if the Federal Govt paid women for each child she brought to term and free medical and day care for the child till 18 years of age and offered adoption placement services for free to those wanting to keep the child. Double bonus for child born to married couple (married before conception). I don't see any way abortion will end. Women seem to view abortion the way some see gun owning rights. So if it takes bribes - I am willing to give to Caesar what is his to mitigate the slaughter.
Not so. But you may try to convince me otherwise. What encompasses proper medical care? Shelter? Feeding? Bathing? Clothing? Hygiene? потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Medical care to keep the delivered fetus/baby alive. If that is beyond possibility, the fetus is considered non-viable. It is the inability to keep the fetus alive outside the mother's body, generally due to underdeveloped organs. I should reiterate one more time that I am not in agreement with the Roe court, but the opinion is what it is. From Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed. (1990) For purposes of abortion regulation, viability is reached when in the judgment of the attending physician of the particular facts of the case before him, there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus' sustained survival outside the womb, with or without artificial support. Colautti v. Franklin 439 U.S. 379, 388, 99 S.Ct. 675, 682, 58 L.Ed.2d 596. See also Viable, Viable child. Viable. Livable; having the appearance of being able to live; capable of life. This term is applied to a newly-born infant, and especially to one prematurely born, which is not only born alive, but in such a state of organic development as to make possible the continuance of its life. See Viability; Viable child. Viable child. Unborn child who is capable of independent existence outside his or her mother's womb, Libbee v. Permanente Clinic, 268 Or. 258, 518 P.2d 636, 637; even if only in an incubator, Sylvia v. Gobeille, 101 R.I. 76, 220 A.2d 222, 223. In most states a viable unborn child is considered a person under the wrongful death statute, e.g., DiDonato v. Wortman, 320 N.C. 423, 358 S.E.2d 489, and in some states is considered to be a person under a homicide statute, e.g., Comm. v. Cass, 392 Mass. 799, 467 N.E.2d 1324. See also Child (Rights of unborn child) Unborn child; Viability; Wrongful death statutes. The ability to sustain the life of an incompletely developed fetus/child, via artificial means, is ever changing in favor of sustaining life at an earlier stage of development.
I don't see any way abortion will end. Women seem to view abortion the way some see gun owning rights. So if it takes bribes - I am willing to give to Caesar what is his to mitigate the slaughter. While it sounds good to address a current problem, the result of the incentives would surely be to encourage more babies. And we are $18T is debt. Who is going to pay for all this, and how? Free money is not free. I do not see the issue as one encompassed by a grant of delegated power to the Federal government. I think this should have been left to the States to regulate as the people of each state see fit and proper for their state. There is certainly no national concensus. I think it should be a political decision, not a judicial decision in the absence of of political decision.
There hasn't been a newborn infant ever, except perhaps Christ, that was capable of independent existence. Every infant needs shelter, food, water, clothes, hygiene, etc. None of that falls under the realm of natural or artificial life-supportive systems. "Viable child. Unborn child who is capable of independent existence outside his or her mother's womb", See above. Never, ever, ever. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Didn't seem to work in Russia. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
And what a horrible reality that a court of law must play God using the Darwinian worldview. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.---John 1:17
I was thinking monogamy and self control was still a human capability. Guess not. So we have to pay people so that when they have sex they don't face consequences. I hear ya and join you in looking for solutions to prevent government sanctioned murder. And no money can equal one life. I'm hearin ya. But I don't see the culture of no fault Caligula sex in America giving a damn. Sure they would have the kid take the money and then probably double down and sell the kid to Planned Death for body parts. That's how damned and destitute our society has become. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.---John 1:17
Reality is you will not ban abortions. In a few years the abortion operation will be replaced by a pill abortion or an ultrasound abortion so it will be easier to do as technology progresses. Many married women have abortions as well as single so it is not a case of loose unmarried women getting abortions all the time. Paying women to have babies is a common practice - Israel does it. They also have abortions in Israel - even easier to get than in the USA and that is an ultra Orthodox linked govt in Israel. The rabbis don't endorse abortions of course but prohibition won't work and they don't want women doing back room abortions either because it may damage the woman. So they keep abortion legal but try to mitigate it. Trying to ban abortions also costs money - you would probably spend the same amount of money banning abortion as you would paying for programs to help women keep their babies. It is 40 plus years since Roe. Abortion will not be banned ever till Jesus returns. Time to end the fantasies that the Supreme Court will end abortion or the constitution will be amended to end abortion. It won't happen.
Didn't seem to work in Russia. I seen evidence that it has helped. And the Israelis do it as do other nations. http://www.nbn.org.il/aliyahpedia/government-services/government-benefits-new- immigrants-oleh-chadash/monthly-child-benefits-from-bituach-leumi/ Bituach Leumi (National Insurance Institute) offers a monthly stipend to all Israeli citizens based on the number of children under age 18 in their family. You are eligible for this benefit immediately following your Aliyah.
If there is no babies nobody will pay this debt. Very simple: no peple = no payers.
That's because you're a cultural regressive trying to live in the pre-1960s.
Actually the question I posed was not who would pay the 18T debt, but who would pay the benefits/incentives cost while already burdened with an 18T debt. If no babies are made, no benefits/incentives will be required. The abortion problem will just go away. Or we can pay people with monopoly money to punch out future taxpayers they do not want to raise.
I provided a detailed legal definition. You do not have to accept it.
I recall that some years back, a state offered to permit an unwanted child to be dropped off at a hospital, no questions asked. The were thinking infants but failed to so specify, and people from other states dropped off teenagers.
Progressives are not progressive in any real sense. Progressive is a term fabricated by the left's ministry of propaganda not long ago to describe itself. Only leftists or idiots use the term. Using the term to describe leftists is doing their work of misrepresenting themselves for them. The left is culturally, philosophically, and intellectually regressive, not progressive.
...That's how damned and destitute our society has become. ............................ Home of the free, the sick and depraved A-M-E-R-I-C-A So why the f**k are you looking at me? ~Motionless in White - "A-M-E-R-I-C-A" (lyrics) This song plays in my head whenever I read about the depravity nowadays.
There hasn't been a newborn infant ever, except perhaps Christ, that was capable of independent existence. Every infant needs shelter, food, water, clothes, hygiene, etc. None of that falls under the realm of natural or artificial life-supportive systems. I provided a detailed legal definition. You do not have to accept it. It's not whether I accept it or no, it's that the concept of viability is open to legal challenge and attack. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Co still has that law in effect. Kids can be dropped off, literary left on the doorstep with no attending adult, at other place than hospitals, e.g. - fire station. "The were thinking infants but failed to so specify, and people from other states dropped off teenagers." Hooray for unintended consequences. Think viability. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
#2. To: redleghunter (#0)
" Jesus Loves The Little Children "
#3. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, liberator, CZ82, tomder55, Don, BobCeleste, Willie Green, Nolu Chan (#1)
#4. To: SOSO (#3)
#5. To: Don (#4)
#6. To: Don (#4)
Some fifty eight million babies have been sacrificed since Roe vs Wade passed the U.S. Supreme Court. I wonder how many of those babies were black?
#7. To: SOSO (#5)
#8. To: redleghunter (#0)
How can it not be? 
#9. To: CZ82 (#6)
#10. To: Chuck_Wagon (#8)
#11. To: CZ82 (#6)
#12. To: redleghunter, All (#0)
#13. To: A Pole (#11)
In 2009, a total of 286,623 blacks died in the U.S. That same year, an estimated 1.21 million abortions took place in the United States. If 35.4% were performed on black women, that means almost twice as many blacks were killed by abortion as by all other causes. In 2010, the black population in the U.S. stood just shy of at 39 million.
#14. To: tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole, Pericles, SOSO, nolu chan, *Pro-Life* (#12)
Have you seen the latest trend that is gaining traction in the medical " intellectual class " ? A couple years ago , a couple of medical 'ethicists " proposed that since babies aren't really fully developed after birth ,that it is moral and ethical to do "after-birth " abortions .
#15. To: redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole, Pericles, nolu chan, (#14)
They don't give a time frame when that baby is actually a person . Maybe it's a day or 2 . Maybe they are thinking more in line with Herod ,using a 2 year window. Does it matter ? The same arguments for offing a fetus can be applied to a baby evidently . Why wouldn't it then be a standard applied to the infirmed or the elderly ? It's all the same moral base ..... someone else deciding someone elses worth as a human ,and having the power to terminate that person.
#16. To: redleghunter (#14)
Tom, can't say I am shocked but yet did not think some would be so overt as in the days of Sanger.
#17. To: tomder55 (#16)
on another site my post about this is about to be shut down by the administrators
#18. To: redleghunter (#17)
#19. To: SOSO, redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole, Pericles (#15)
Well didn't SCOTUS establish viability as the test? What newborn infant is viable on its own - none.
3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term. Pp. 147-164.
#20. To: nolu chan, SOSO, redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole (#19)
(Edited)
#21. To: nolu chan, redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole, Pericles (#19)
The viability test is not whether the fetus/baby can survive on its own. It is whether it can survive at all, even with proper medical care.
#22. To: SOSO, redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole, Pericles (#21)
What encompasses proper medical care?
Viability. Capability of living. A term used to denote the power a new-born child possesses of continuing its independent existence. That stage of fetal development when the life of the unborn child ma be continued indefinitely outside the womb by natural or artificial life-supportive systems. The constitutionality of this statutory definition. (V.A.M.S. (Mo.), § 188.015) was upheld in Planed Parenthood of Central Mo. v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, 96 S.Ct. 2831, 49 L.Ed.2d 788.
#23. To: Pericles, SOSO, redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole (#20)
Assumption: Most abortions would end if the Federal Govt paid women for each child she brought to term and free medical and day care for the child till 18 years of age and offered adoption placement services for free to those wanting to keep the child. Double bonus for child born to married couple (married before conception).
#24. To: nolu chan (#22)
A term used to denote the power a new-born child possesses of continuing its independent existence. That stage of fetal development when the life of the unborn child ma be continued indefinitely outside the womb by natural or artificial life-supportive systems.
#25. To: Pericles, nolu chan, redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole (#20)
Assumption: Most abortions would end if the Federal Govt paid women for each child she brought to term and free medical and day care for the child till 18 years of age and offered adoption placement services for free to those wanting to keep the child. Double bonus for child born to married couple (married before conception).
#26. To: nolu chan (#22)
The ability to sustain the life of an incompletely developed fetus/child, via artificial means, is ever changing in favor of sustaining life at an earlier stage of development.
#27. To: Pericles, nolu chan, liberator, GarySpFc, Vicomte13 (#23)
#28. To: redleghunter, nolu chan, liberator, GarySpFc, Vicomte13 (#27)
That's how damned and destitute our society has become.
#29. To: SOSO, nolu chan, redleghunter, tomder55, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste, Don, Chuck_Wagon, Orthodoxa, A Pole (#25)
Assumption: Most abortions would end if the Federal Govt paid women for each child she brought to term and free medical and day care for the child till 18 years of age and offered adoption placement services for free to those wanting to keep the child. Double bonus for child born to married couple (married before conception).
#30. To: nolu chan (#23)
And we are $18T is debt. Who is going to pay for all this, and how? Free money is not free.
#31. To: redleghunter (#27)
(Edited)
I was thinking monogamy and self control was still a human capability.
#32. To: A Pole (#30)
If there is no babies nobody will pay this debt.
#33. To: SOSO (#24)
There hasn't been a newborn infant ever, except perhaps Christ, that was capable of independent existence. Every infant needs shelter, food, water, clothes, hygiene, etc. None of that falls under the realm of natural or artificial life-supportive systems.
#34. To: Pericles (#20)
Assumption: Most abortions would end if the Federal Govt paid women for each child she brought to term and free medical and day care for the child till 18 years of age and offered adoption placement services for free
#35. To: redleghunter (#0)
Oddly enough, it’s sometimes progressives who are most eager to move the culture backward.
#36. To: redleghunter (#27)
But I don't see the culture of no fault Caligula sex in America giving a damn...
A-M-E-R-I-C-A
#37. To: nolu chan (#33)
#38. To: nolu chan, Pericles (#34)
I recall that some years back, a state offered to permit an unwanted child to be dropped off at a hospital, no questions asked.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]