Forty-Four Years And Sixty Million Dead Babies

For discussion of secret combinations (political, economic, spiritual, religious, etc.) (Ether 8:18-25.)
EmmaLee
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10884

Re: Forty-Four Years And Sixty Million Dead Babies

Post by EmmaLee »

Yes, I agree completely. ^^ Hence, my comment that I often wonder what church I'm in on Sunday's.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Forty-Four Years And Sixty Million Dead Babies

Post by AI2.0 »

simpleton wrote: March 21st, 2017, 5:30 am Apostle George Q. Cannon (1827 - 1901):


“There is one thing that I am told is practiced to some extent among us, and I say to you that where it is practiced and not thoroughly repented of the curse of God will follow it. I refer to the practice of preventing the birth of children. I want to lift my voice in solemn warning against this, and I say to you that the woman who practices such devilish arts, or the man who consents to them, will be cursed of God. Such persons will be cursed in their bodies, cursed in their minds, cursed in their property, cursed in their offspring. God will wipe them out from the midst of this people and nation. Remember it. Mothers, teach this to your daughters, for I tell you it is true. I need not pronounce any curse, whatever my authority may be, but I say to you that women who take this course, and men who consent to it, will be cursed of God Almighty, and it will rest upon them until their generation shall be blotted out, and their name shall be lost from the midst of the Saints of God, unless, as I have said, there is deep, thorough and heartfelt repentance.”

- Apostle George Q. Cannon, Collected Discourses, v. 5, October 7, 1894
I'm pretty sure he's referring to birth control to 'prevent' pregnancy, though he would have condemned abortion as well. I think birth control to prevent pregnancy is left up to married couples as to whether or not to use it.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Forty-Four Years And Sixty Million Dead Babies

Post by AI2.0 »

simpleton wrote: March 31st, 2017, 8:39 pm
EmmaLee wrote: March 31st, 2017, 4:22 pm I know many active, recommend holding LDS women who are "pro-choice". Some hold leadership positions in our ward/stake - and some are the wives of our ward/stake leaders. They are open and public about their stance on abortion - openly advocating for Planned Parenthood and for legislation to slaughter the unborn. One LDS woman from our ward helped hold the huge Planned Parenthood banner in our town's summer parade (she was the Primary president at the time). No one should ever assume that just because a woman is LDS (even active, recommend holding, in a leadership position LDS), that she is pro-life and is against abortion. I believe this is shameful, and I sometimes wonder what church I'm in on Sunday's. :(
Interesting how that has crept in the church to the point now of some "shouting it from the rooftops"...
No question every person has the God givin right to think and believe and practice their religion wherein it does not infringe upon the rights of others... But i do think that our brother's and sisters in heaven have the right to come to earth without being butchered in their mothers womb...But for every action there is a blessing or penalty. Some murder their offspring, don't even tell me that their "temple recommend" will enable them to cruise into and through the pearly gates ... if that is so then there is no ryme nor reason nor purpose to Mormonism...
Mercy cannot rob justice.
LDS and others with a Christian background and should know better are often socially 'pro-choice'--but only in theory; they still believe abortion is murder and would never consider for themselves or loved ones, but they have bought into the lie that we can't 'legislate morality' to society and that we should not take other people's agency away by passing laws that limit choices...Stupid logic, but that's how people these days think. That's how they've been indoctrinated to think. That's why parents need to carefully teach their own children what is right and wrong, because they are getting the exact opposite messages from all other sources.

Emmalee, if I had women like that in my ward (openly advocating for planned parenthood and being vocally involved with planned parenthood or other abortion advocates), I would have complained to the stake president or Area Authority. I'm certain those women would have been removed from their positions where I live. The upper leadership of the church--the General officers and General Authorities are still very much orthodox in their views and they would have acted--because while someone can have their own private views, they cannot hold public views that are contrary to church teachings and still hold prominent positions in wards and stakes. I would suggest that if this happens again, you contact your area authority. It sounds like the church might need to do some 'housecleaning' among the leadership in your stake...

User avatar
Sandinista
captain of 100
Posts: 518
Location: Ohio

Re: Forty-Four Years And Sixty Million Dead Babies

Post by Sandinista »

I find it disturbing when people cite the health of the unborn child as a reason for an abortion, and agree totally with the Handbook Of Instructions when it says "The only exceptions are the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or health of the woman is in jeopardy or the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape. Even then, the woman should consider an abortion only after counseling with her husband and bishop or branch president, and receiving divine confirmation through prayer."

Let me put this into context. I'm sitting here writing this right before I head home from work. However, I'm not heading home, I'm heading to one our daughter's homes to "babysit" her 13 children while she and her husband are in Europe adopting four more children (yes that brings the total to 17!). She and her husband have triplet's of their own, but due to the complications with that pregnancy they could not have any more children. So the adoptions started. And everyone one of those adopted children are "special". Their "blessings" range from having severe physical birth defects (one with no legs, one totally paralyzed from arthrogryposis, four with cerebral palsy, another with limb deficiencies, and two with down syndrome) to mental handicaps. Some have multiple mental and physical challenges. The trip they are on now will bring home children 14, 15, 16, and 17. One of these has CP, one has Noonan's Syndrome, and two are "normal" but older teenagers (siblings).

I challenge anyone to spend time with any of these children and not be affected by their tremendous spirits. They are all very "special", but in a way that most of us don't understand. One of the most sacred experiences of my life was sitting with five righteous Aaronic Priesthood holders last Saturday night watching the Priesthood session of General Conference. Only two of the five (two of the triplets) are not "special" in some way. but they are all spiritual giants. The spirit in the room was so thick you could cut it with a knife.

Tonight when my wife and I gather around the dinner table with these 13 wonderful children and talk about the four new brothers and sisters that will be home this weekend, and look into their glowing faces, I will again thank God that their birth mother's did not end their lives before they even started. Even though most of their birth mothers, because of medical technology, knew their baby was going to have mental or physical issues, and that they could not handle a child with whatever severe birth defect they had, each of these special, courageous mothers bore their children and then allowed them to go to homes where they could live full happy lives. And yes, most of the kids know and are in contact with their birth mothers.

So to anyone who is thinking that a pregnancy should be terminated because somehow the child will be born with a "flaw", I invite them to come a spend even an hour with Thomas or Benjamin, two of the down syndrome children our daughter has. If you don't leave totally uplifted and edified by just simply being in their presence you are truly spiritual dead. The same goes for all of the other children as well.

Abortion is truly a vile and despicable practice, and we are the true victims for we are robbing ourselves of very real blessings each of these children, "special" or normal, can bring into our lives.
Last edited by Sandinista on April 6th, 2017, 6:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
kittycat51
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1791
Location: Looking for Zion

Re: Forty-Four Years And Sixty Million Dead Babies

Post by kittycat51 »

Okay I may get flack for this, but everybody who is against abortion in one breath but it's okay to inject aborted fetal tissue into you or your child via vaccines is another? Where do you draw the line? There are several ingredients that are in vaccines that you may see: "WI-38" is a diploid human cell culture line composed of fibroblasts derived from lung tissue. Or "MRC-5" which stands for "Medical Research Council 5", human diploid cells (cells containing two sets of chromosomes) Or just plain "human diploid cells" which is just plain aborted fetal tissue. Among the culprits for this are vaccines for chickenpox, rubella, hepatitis A, rabies, smallpox and shingles. This is why planned parenthood can't be stopped; stop them, stop the vaccine industry.

Please sign up to watch for free the docu-series "Truth about Vaccines" With Ty Bollinger. This will give you the pro vs. anti-vaccine debate to help make a better informative decision for your family.
https://go.thetruthaboutvaccines.com/?a ... d=62acb2d5

User avatar
aspietroll
captain of 50
Posts: 62

Re: Forty-Four Years And Sixty Million Dead Babies

Post by aspietroll »

Interesting post. I am now convinced that most pro life groups are just controlled opposition. And the reason for it is to maintain that the supreme Court is something it isn't: all powerful.

By protesting the court and saying it should decide your preferred way on something, that means you're saying that the court has power to decide either way on an issue.

So Ron Paul comes along and offers for a way to fix the court and every major pro life group objects to it.

I remember reading the Constitution and studying it on my free time and was kinda confused as to how the current concept of how the court operates could be extracted from the Constitution. As a matter of fact, the Constitution says very little about the Court, not even that it should have nine justices. The ability of a majority of nine undetected justices to say what the law is is an ability the court gave to itself.

I disagree with OPs understanding of Dred Scott. The Dred Scott Decision was a case of the court "saying what the law is." Implying the only way to fix it was with a constitute amendment implies it is constitutional the court acted as it did

Post Reply