Spiritual-vigilantes-book-danny-shelton

I am assuming that you know that Danny Shelton is the founder and current president of 3ABN, one of the most influential Adventist independent ministries. Recently, he published a book dealing with the Ten Commandments entitled “Spiritual Vigilantes.”

The publication of this book has historical value, because it is the first time that a well-known Adventist leader has spoken against abortion in this century.

It is no secret that the Adventist leadership has succeeded in keeping the abortion issue out of sight because of its active participation in the financial profit derived from the killing of unborn children starting back in 1970 when Pastor Neal Wilson, the then president of the North American Division of the General Conference publicly declared that the Adventist Church was leaning towards abortion.

I read with great interest Shelton’s book and took the time to copy the comments he made regarding the violation of the sixth commandment of God’s Law. Below, you can read his opinion about the morally shameful practice of depriving the unborn of their right to life.

*********

“The sixth commandment, found in Exodus 20, says, “You shall not murder.” This commandment, written by God, the Creator of life, could not be clearer! It’s straight to the point. “Murder is a sin against our fellow men and against God.” [12]

“Abortion is taking the life of the unborn. Until the Roe v. Wade court case of 1973, abortion was considered murder, yet the Supreme Court legalized most abortions. However, the killing of unborn babies is still a sin in the courts of Heaven, which supersedes the United States Supreme Court.” [29]

“As followers of Christ, there are step we can, and should take, to uphold the “You shall not murder” commandment. Those who vote for candidates that support and champion “Pro-choice” abortion groups should ask themselves whether or not, in the courts of Heaven, they are accessories to murder. Over 60,000,000 unborn babies have been murdered since Roe v. Wade became the law of the land in 1973.

There may not be degrees of murder, but wouldn’t you agree with me that murder against the most defenseless human beings in our society—the unborn—seems especially atrocious?” [35]

“I would challenge each reader to research Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.” [35]

“Her statements were “code” aimed at reducing the population of the black population in the early 1900s.” [36]

“But what if you find out that the candidate of your choice ran over that small child with the intention of killing him/her?” [36]

“Or, let’s say that you not only witnessed the murder of another human being, but you actually handed the attacker the blunt instrument to make it happen. Should you be charges as accessory to the crime? [37]

“The fact that the United States Supreme Court ruled abortion to be legal does not negate the fact that it is still murder according to God’s Ten Commandments. [43]

Note: Shelton’s book “Spiritual Vigilantes” is free. You can order a single copy or 100, 200, or even 1,000. Generous donors are donating large sums of money to make this project feasible. One donor gave $100,000. I have ordered so far 210 copies and have distributed half of those to others. I believe that every Adventist should read this book.

Link for Ordering: https://3abnstore.com/

Advertisements

Genera Conference

En primer lugar quiero dejar bien en claro que la mayoría de los miembros de la iglesia adventista—especialmente fuera de los Estados Unidos de America del Norte– rechazan el aborto como una opción aceptable para un cristiano.

Sin embargo, la posición official votada por el Concilio Otoñal de la Conferencia General de la iglesia adventista en 1992 adopto un documento conocido como guia del aborto—“Guidelines on Abortion”—que justifica lo que el Señor prohibió en el sexto mandamiento que dice “No mataras.”

El responsable de este cambio tan radical fue el Pastor Neal Wilson, padre del Pastor Ted Wilson, actual presidente de la Asociación General de los adventistas del séptimo día. En 1970, Neal Wilson declaró publicamente que la iglesia adventista se inclinaba hacia el aborto debido a que existía mucha hambre y había mucha gente en el mundo.

Esta acción antibíblica sorprendente por parte del Pastor Wilson fue apoyada por muchos lideres adventistas por motivos financieros. Nuestro hospital adventista ubicado en el Estado de Hawai se encontraba en aprietos económicos. El temor de Dios saltó por la ventana y el enemigo entró por la puerta abierta de par en par de la iglesia.

El triste resultado fue que esta “guía del aborto” adventista, creada por seres humanos falibles, reemplazó el sexto mandamiento de la ley de Dios por un documento de creación netamente humana. El mandato divino fue reemplazado por una tradición inventada e impuesta por la “Iglesia Remanente.”

En esto, nuestra iglesia adventista fue mas rápida en reemplazar uno de los mandamientos de Dios por una tradición humana que la iglesia católica—cuyo abandono de uno de los mandamientos divinos llevo varios siglos. Nosotros los adventistas lo hicimos en uno solo.

En esto se manifestó el gran misterio de la iniquidad. El enemigo logró introducirse dentro de la iglesia de Dios como consecuencia del miedo a la bancarrota de un hospital adventista. Por supuesto, este deseo de aumentar los ingresos financieros se propagó a otros hospitales adventistas que vieron la ventaja económica de participar en la matanza de niños por nacer.

En una reunión publica de jubilados adventistas llevada a cabo en la ciudad de Redlands, California, en 2011, Nic Samojluk, autor de dos libros sobre este tema, pregunto a Ted Wilson acerca del aborto electivo en nuestros hospitales adventistas. El pastor respondió que el numero de abortos en nuestros hospitales se ha reducido a “casi cero.”

Samojluk pidió evidencias de la veracidad de esta declaración. Pasó mas de media década y Samojluk todavía esta esperando la prometida documentación de parte del presidente de la asociación general. La evidencia es que los hospitales adventistas en América del Norte siguen las normas creadas por la guía sobre el aborto que permite la muerte de niños por nacer bajo una variedad de circunstancias.

El Rey David cometió dos violaciones de la ley de Dios, se arrepintió y confesó sus pecados y el Señor lo perdonó. Esta puede ser la experiencia de la iglesia adventista también, pero sin arrepentimiento acompañado de confesión no hay perdón.

Esto lo enseñamos a todos los futuros miembros de la iglesia adventistas. Ahora es el momento de enseñar mediante el ejemplo!

Posted by: adventlife | November 6, 2017

History of Abortion in the Adventist Church, by Nic Samojluk

Castle

When I joined the Adventist Church through baptism seven decades ago, I never imagined—not even in my wildest dreams—that the denomination I was joining would one day abandon the pro-life stance on abortion ardently defended by our Adventist pioneers and eventually actively participate in the killing of innocent unborn children for the sake of dirty profit.

A Dramatic Departure from Moral Duty

What prompted the Adventist leaders to make such a drastic departure from the right path? The answer is quite simple: Financial gain. Our Castle Memorial Hospital [CMH] located in the State of Hawaii was faced with a serious financial dilemma: The State legalized abortion, and the non-Adventist physicians at said institution demanded the right to offer elective abortion services to their patients.

CMH managers elevated this issue to the North American Division. Our church leaders panicked, they realized they had to choose between the lives of innocent unborn children and money. It was a tough choice, and unfortunately, they made the wrong decision. They chose profit over the right to life of the unborn.

A Reliable Source of Historical Facts

If you are not familiar with this sad chapter of Adventist history, I suggest you take the time to inform yourself about this issue. The most reliable and comprehensive history of abortion in the SDA organization was written by George Gainer:

Ref.: “Abortion: history of Adventist guidelines”

Link: https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1991/08/abortion-history-of-adventist-guidelines

George Gainer: “The Wisdom of Solomon”

Link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/160731861/The-Wisdom-of-Solomon-or-The-Politics-of-Pragmatism-The-General-Conference-Abortion-Decision-1970-71

An Incredible Public Announcement

Gainer describes the dramatic change that took place when Neal Wilson publicly announced to the world that the Adventist Church was leaning towards abortion because there was too much hunger and there were too many people in the world. And bear in mind that this incredible explanation was made in the richest country of the world—a country that had a huge oversupply of food and that at that time was the greatest creditor in the world.

“Though we walk the fence, Adventists lean toward abortion rather than against it. Because we realize we are confronted by big problems of hunger and overpopulation, we do not oppose family planning and appropriate endeavors to control population.”

Ref.: George Gainer, The Wisdom of Solomon? Spectrum 19/4 (May 1989): 38-46.

He also tells us that prior to 1970, Adventist hospitals were already offering what is known as “therapeutic abortions” to their patients.

Adventists Open the Door to Elective Abortion

When the leaders of the church approved the guidelines on abortion, the door for elective abortions was left wide open, and many Adventist hospitals took advantage of this opportunity to increase their profits.

We seem to ignore this important event in the history of our Adventist denomination. The emphasis on abnormal pregnancies by those defending abortion is evident by the fact that their view is focused on therapeutic abortions while ignoring what happened when the church abandoned its pro-life position and embraced non-therapeutic elective abortions.

They seem to act as if nothing major had taken place in 1970. Without those guidelines, our church would be still limited to therapeutic abortions. This represents a major flaw in their position.

A Lesson From Abortion Statistics

We need to remember what happened when the legalization of abortion took place in the U.S. mainland in 1973. According to statistics there were that year 700,000 abortions. That number doubled by 1983.

To assume that the  publication of the Adventist Guidelines on abortion had no effect on the number of elective abortions in our Adventist medical facilities is illogical and contrary to common sense.

It is true that we do not have all the statistics we would like to have, but our conclusions are solidly based on common sense and reason. Take the time to watch what a young pro-life researcher discovered about this:

“PROOF: 15,000+ Abortions in Seventh-day Adventist Hospitals”

Link: https://youtu.be/v71UcT_p2ZQ

Here is an anecdote hat illustrates this: Gainer relates how a couple decided to seek the services of our physicians at our “Washington Adventist Hospital” a few decades ago. The wife was pregnant, and the first question the doctor asked was: “Do you want to keep the baby?” The man got up and said to his wife: “Honey let’s go. We must be in the wrong place.” He had assumed that a question of that nature would never be asked in a Christian medical facility.

Teresa Beem relates how when she called the General Conference office, a GC representative made the following admission: “Our Washington Adventist Hospital is an abortion mill.”

Dramatic Discoveries by a Hard-Working Investigator

What we need is not additional documented facts, but rather to pay attention to all the facts we already have. We are fortunate to have among us a young, very talented, researcher who has made a long list of dramatic discoveries connected with the issue of abortion in the Adventist church.

In a relatively short time, he was able to create a long list of well-documented, high impact videos that are available online for us to enjoy. His name is Andrew Michell. Here is one of them:

“Shocking History of Abortion in Seventh-day Adventist Church”

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6tY4yC0Xlc

But if you are really motivated to explore this issue in more detail, I recommend that you take the time to watch as many of his pro-life videos as you can. Here is a link that will help you do this:

“List of Andrew Michell’s Pro-life Videos”

Link: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkxW6bodjOh_Ais9HSUGTL3HFC1WwTZ1g

Posted by: adventlife | October 31, 2017

Who Broke the Baby? by Nic Samojluk

Unborn 17

Yesterday morning as I was walking to church, a video title popped into my mind: “Who Broke the Baby.” This morning I decided to Goggle this title and found the story behind it. A woman was busy with her computer and the image of an aborted baby flashed on the screen. Her three-year boy saw the image and asked with alarm: “Who broke the baby? Of course, there is a video and a book by said title. Today, I want to tell you the answer to the boy’s question:

“Who Broke The Baby?” by Dr. Jean Staker Garton

Link: https://youtu.be/ioNDbrPQJKU

The State of Hawaii

The first to break the baby was the State of Hawaii. This took place in 1970 when the Supreme Court of said State decided to legalize the killing of the unborn.

Pastor Neal Wilson

Who else broke the baby? It was Pastor Neal Wilson, the president of the North American Division of Seventh-day Adventist Church when he publicly announced that the church was leaning towards abortion:

“Though we walk the fence, Adventists lean toward abortion rather than against it. Because we realize we are confronted by big problems of hunger and overpopulation, we do not oppose family planning and appropriate endeavors to control population.”

The Castle Memorial Hospital

You may wonder why would a church with a long tradition of defending the validity and permanence of the Ten Commandments of the Decalogue would compromise with evil by allowing the killing of innocent unborn children in our Adventist Castle Memorial Hospital located in Hawaii for the sake of profit. The reason was financial. The fear of bankruptcy led the hospital management and the church to compromise with evil. The fear of men entered through the door and the fear of God went out the window.

The Washington Adventist Hospital

A similar reason led our Washington Adventist Hospital in the State of Maryland to take financial advantage of this loophole provided by the church.

Ref.: George Gainer, The Wisdom of Solomon? Spectrum 19/4 (May 1989

The situation there got so bad that when Teresa Beem called the General Conference office, Dr. George Reid, head of the Biblical Research Institute, made the following comment: “Washington Adventist Hospital in Tacoma Park has become an abortion mill.”

Ref.: Teresa & Arthur Beem, “Why we left” Former Adventist Fellowship Online (18 Nov. 2002).

Loma Linda University

Our Loma Linda University did not lag behind in this new popular way of breaking the baby. In order to facilitate this drastic departure from the Hippocratic Oath that had protected the right to life of the unborn for long centuries, this flagship Adventist university decided to replace said oath with it own Physician’s Oath that recognized for the first time in Adventism the preeminence of the pregnant woman’s wish regarding the future of the unborn.

Here is what the LLU Physicians’ Oath says:“I will respect the rights and decision of my patients” So what happens when the woman’s wish is to have an abortion? You can use your own imagination.

Ref.: https://medicine.llu.edu/about-us/physicians-oath

White Memorial Hospital & Glendale Adventist Hospital

You may ask: Who else broke the baby? One of them was the Adventist White Memorial Hospital. Pro-life researcher Andrew Michell produced a video documenting the alarming increase of abortions in said hospitals during the 1970-198- decade.

Ref.: “PROOF: 15,000+ Abortions in Seventh-day Adventist Hospitals”

Link: https://youtu.be/v71UcT_p2ZQ

At Least 12 Adventist Hospitals

Such a drastic change in church policy regarding the sacredness of human life resulted in the participation by many Adventist medical institutions in the profitable business of killing human beings at the most vulnerable season of their lives. Here is a list of medical institutions that participated in this new facet of medical service which involved killing in addition to healing:

“Castle Medical Center, Hadley Memorial Hospital, Hanford Community Hospital, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Porter Memorial Hospital, Port land Adventist Medical Center, Shady Grove Adventist Hospital, Shawnee Mission Medical Center, Sierra Vista Hospital, Walla Walla General Hospital, Washington Adventist Hospital, and White Memorial Medical Center.”[5]

Ref.: http://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1991/August/abortion-history-of-adventist-guidelines

Dr. Edward Allred

A young and talented 1964 graduate from Loma Linda University saw in the relaxed attitude towards abortion by the Adventist organization a golden opportunity to become really rich. He built a chain if over 20 abortion clinics, and became the most notorious serial killer of unborn children. He terminated the lives of at least 250,000 unborn children during his career and shared a significant portion of this blood money with Glendale Adventist Academy, La Sierra University, and Loma Linda University.

In a grateful recognition of these generous philanthropic donations, his name was placed on one of building at LSU, and several plaques with his name among the most mnotable benefactor at LLU.

The Guidelines on Abortion

This new policy regarding the violation of God’s Law was documented by what is known as Guidelines on Abortion, a document that was eventually approved by Adventist representatives from the entire world and greatly influenced the breaking of the unborn babies. This took place at the 1992 meeting of the General Conference Autumn Council. Said document is currently followed by the Adventist Health System.

If you read these guidelines on abortion with care, you will discover that they contain a list of circumstances under which it is justifiable to take the life of an innocent unborn child, including when an unwanted pregnancy affects the mental health of a pregnant woman. Of course, any unwanted pregnancy will no doubt result in mental depression, which means that elective abortion is justified in practically all cases unwanted pregnancies.

Ref.: http://www.adventist.org/en/information/official-statements/guidelines/article/go/0/abortion/

The U.S. Supreme Court

Of course, he entity that opened the door widely for the breaking of the baby more than any other individual or agency was the Supreme Court of the United States. Based on false statistics, the Court ruled that the mass killing of innocent unborn children was a legal right of women. It must be noted, though, that our Adventist Church lead the way for the legalization of abortion. The dates confirm this, because The our church began offering elective abortions three years prior to the Roe v Wade that legalized abortion in the U.S. mainland.

The Adventist Health System

I have hard evidence that our Adventist Health System follows the Guidelines on Abortion. I did write to this entity and got a response confirming that the hospitals they control do follow the policies outlined in said document

It is high time for the Adventist Church to repent of this terrible departure from the right path and do away with the notorious document known as Guidelines on Abortion. I have been criticized for raising this ugly issue, but here is what the Bible says:

“Lift up your voice like a trumpet; Tell My people their transgression, And the house of Jacob their sins.” [Isaiah58:1]

Dear friends,

Here is a video that explains this rather clearly:

“What about saving a mother’s life

Perhaps your understanding of our pro-life position is limited and incomplete. We are not against saving the life of the mother.

The sacred duty of a physician is saving lives. If a doctor can save only one life instead of two, he is still performing God’s work.

This I have explained on numerous occasions. You probably have never read a full explanation of our pro-life position.

The key word is motivation. If the motivation is to save lives, the work is justified; if the motivation is killing, it is not.

Saving lives is sacred work. Killing to save the lifestyle of a pregnant woman is not–it is murder.

I hope this video succeeds in clarifying this for you and others!

 

Posted by: adventlife | October 26, 2017

A Ray of Hope on the Horizon, by Nic Samojluk

Hope

Dear Adventist Pro-lifers,

I am writing to you while the rest of Loma Linda people are sound asleep. I woke up at 2:15 AM and started thinking about the future of our Adventist Church. After trying to go back to sleep for an hour or so without success, I decided to get up and write to you.

The Reason for my Concern

You may wonder what is the reason for my deep concern. The reason is quite simple. The hour for the Loud Cry is here and the church is asleep at the wheel. Those who founded our denomination were decidedly pro-life, but 47 years ago, Pastor Neal Wilson, the father of Ted Wilson, publicly announced that our church was leaning towards abortion because there was too much hunger and there were too many people in the world.

Financial Worries and a Wrong Turn

What prompted Wilson to make such a surprising announcement? It was a special situation at our Castle Memorial Hospital in Hawaii. The State of Hawaii had legalized abortion, and the non-Adventist physicians at said medical facility demanded the right to offer abortion services to their patients and threatened to take their patients elsewhere in the event their request was not satisfied.

This special situation was elevated to the North American Division. Fear of bankruptcy gripped the mind of Wilson and other leaders of the church, and the decision was made that the church would allow abortion as another service to be offered to the public at our medical facilities. The fear of men entered through the door and the fear of the Lord jumped out the window.

Blinded by the Sight of Financial Profit

Both Wilson and many others leaders of the church saw in this an opportunity for profit. Many of our Adventist hospitals decided to participate in this new service to the community. Thus KILLING soon became an integral part of our HEALING ministry. Someone estimated that approximately 15,000 innocent unborn children suffered the baleful result of this new policy at the hands of our own physicians.

A Case of Unusual Financial Success

A young 1964 LLU graduate, who initially wanted to be an evangelist but later switched to medicine, inspired by this unusual altered church policy saw in it a chance to make money.

In a relatively short time, thanks to his ingenuity and hard work, he built a chain of over twenty abortion clinics, managed to kill at least 250,000 innocent unborn children, became a millionaire, and donated a sizable portion of this blood money to several Adventist educational institutions, including Glendale Academy, La Sierra University and Loma Linda University. He also built a church at his horse race facility.

Evidently the leaders of these educational institutions saw nothing wrong in accepting said philanthropic donations, LSU put his name on one of his newly erected buildings, and each one of these institution placed plaques in their buildings in grateful recognition of such magnanimous financial donations.

The Moral Problem

The moral problem is that the God’s Remnant Church, the one keeping ALL of God’s commandments and charged with preaching the final warning message to a lost world saw nothing wrong in profiting from the violation of God’s Holy Law.

Can the church succeed in fulfilling its sacred ministry under these circumstances? You decide! We used to criticize the Catholic organization for altering one of God’s commandments, but we have done the same, and in a much shorter time. We replaced the sixth commandment with a humanly created tradition known as Guidelines on Abortion.

Our Humanly Created Guidelines on Killing

I have solid evidence that our Adventist Health System, that controls a large number of Adventist medical institutions, are following the norms established–not by the Lord, but rather by humanly created guidelines on killing the most innocent members of the human race—the unborn.

The Lord used four words to prohibit the shedding of innocent blood. We used 1314 words to modify and void said prohibition. The document is known as Guidelines on Abortion and is followed by our Adventist Health system. Said guidelines were created 47 years ago, were modified and voted by the General Conference Autumn Council in 1992.

Several Adventist pro-lifers have contacted the General Conference asking why our Adventist medical facilities are profiting from killing. The cursory answer they received was: “Read our guidelines on abortion.” Is this the answer we give to people inquiring about the reason we worship on the Sabbath? Don’t we respond with “Read Exodus 20”? Why is it we tell people to go to tradition instead of the Bible when dealing with a question related to abortion?

High Impact Pro-life Videos to the Rescue

Fortunately, in answer to the prayers of many Adventist pro-lifers, a talented young, energetic Adventist artist responded to God’s call and has so far created over 20 high-impact videos which you should watch.

Here is the link to those high-impact videos. Make sure to watch as many of them as you can, but do not overlook Andrew Michell’s dramatic challenge to Adventist leaders such as Kevin Paulson, Stephen Bohr, Mark Finley, John Bradshaw, and every SDA member of our church.

I am convinced that it is our privilege and moral duty to share these videos with as many Adventists as possible

Link: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkxW6bodjOh_Ais9HSUGTL3HFC1WwTZ1g

Posted by: adventlife | October 12, 2017

List of Andrew Michell’s Pro-life Videos

Unborn 6

You might be aware that in an amazingly short time, Pro-life Adventist Andrew Michell has been able to produce 20 powerful and hard hitting pro-life videos that are bing watched around the world

Here is the link to those high-impact videos. Make sure to watch as many of them as you can, but do not overlook Andrew Michell’s dramatic challenge to Adventist leaders such as Kevin Paulson, Stephen Bohr, Mark Finley, John Bradshaw, and every SDA member of our church

I am convinced that it is our privilege and moral duty to share these videos with as many Adventists as possibl

Link: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkxW6bodjOh_Ais9HSUGTL3HFC1WwTZ1g

Posted by: adventlife | August 25, 2017

Our Lopsided Adventist Eschatology, by Nic Samojluk

Sabbath1-150x140

A pro-life Adventist wrote to me: “I am keenly interested in your thoughts on how abortion fits in with Adventist ethics and eschatology, as you see it

Is it possible that our eschatology might be lopsided? We have demonstrated an obsession with the sanctity of the holy day of rest while neglecting the value of human life. Jesus said: “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.”

If the Sabbath was made for man, then it follows that human life is more sacred than the Sabbath. This is where those who killed the Author of life made a fatal mistake. They concluded that sacrificing the life of Jesus was a small price to pay for the sake of the rules they had made for the protection of the sanctity of the weekly day of rest.

We have been teaching that the final test that will determine the destiny of every soul is our attitude towards the correct day of worship. Did Jesus ever teach this eschatological doctrine? Perhaps he did, but I can’t fin any evidence of this.

What he no doubt did teach was that our eternal destiny will be determined by the way we treat the least, and I am having a hard time finding a group of human beings more entitled to the “the least” label than the unborn.

Ellen White did teach that the final test will be connected with the Sabbath, and we should not deny this. Nevertheless, should not what Jesus taught about the final events take priority over what Ellen White’s prediction?

Both teachings are probably correct, but which of the two should be more important for the Remnant Church? Should not Jesus emphasis prevail, and he emphasized the way we treat “the least of these.”

For some reason the Lord did not reveal to Mrs. White anything about the coming large-scale genocide of the unborn. I would venture that this was probably in order to test the faith and faithfulness of God’s chosen people. Unfortunately, we failed the test, and we failed this test in a big way: We even profited from the killing of innocent unborn babies.

Will the Lord apply the three strikes law on his people? First we failed in Nazi Germany by our compromise on the Sabbath and the sixth commandment; then we failed in Rwanda when Adventist engaged in the killing of fellow believers of the wrong ethnicity; finally we failed in 1970 when our leaders embraced the pro-abortion policy for the sake of shameful profit.

There is no time to waste! We need to repent and seek God’s forgiveness for this great sin against heaven.

 

Posted by: adventlife | August 24, 2017

ABORTION PRO & CON ARGUMENTS, by Nic Samojluk

Argument-150x119

A Summary of Pro-life and Pro-choice Arguments

Dispersed throughout this report there is a large number of arguments utilized on behalf of both the pro-life and the pro-choice position on abortion. The material that follows was generated in response to such arguments and it might be of help in determining the moral strength or weakness of our attitude towards the practice of abortion.

Argument: We cannot pinpoint the precise moment human life begins.
Counter Argument: If we don’t know the precise moment human life begins, then we should err on the side of caution.

A: Jesus died to restore our freedom.
C: Yes, but not freedom to kill the innocent. He died to make us free from sin!

A: Christ valued choice over life.
C: Jesus Christ chose to sacrifice his own life for the benefit of others. Women who abort choose to sacrifice the life of others for their own convenience.

A: A victim of rape or incest should be free to choose abortion.
C: If society lets the rapist live, then the innocent baby should be allowed to live as well. Letting the guilty go free while killing the innocent is a travesty of justice.

A: The Bible is silent on abortion.
C: The Bible is also silent about slavery, polygamy, and genocide. Nevertheless, it is not silent about the killing of innocent human beings, nor is it silent about the shedding of innocent blood.

A: Ellen White is silent on abortion.
C: Ellen White stated that neglecting the health of the pregnant woman is almost equivalent to murdering the unborn baby. If she condemned the almost killing of the baby, would she condone the actual killing of the same?

A: The unborn is not entitled to personhood.
C: Before the American Civil War slaves were not entitled to personhood either, but they were definitely human. In Nazi Germany, Gypsies, Jews, the handicapped, the sick, and the non-productive members of the human race were also legally deprived of personhood.

A: Population control demands the sacrifice of the unborn under certain conditions.
C: It is a shame that this argument is made in the richest country of the world. Killing human beings because there are too many of us is morally abhorrent.

A: The majority of Americans approve of therapeutic abortions.
C: Abortion is no therapy for the unborn baby, and it is no therapy for the pregnant woman either.

A: It is cheaper to provide abortion services to the poor than providing welfare for the pregnant woman after birth.
C: Reducing the welfare benefits to women would be a more humane solution than killing the most vulnerable members of the human race.

A: Abortion will secure the affection of the woman’s boyfriend or husband.
C: Experience has demonstrated the opposite effect. Abortion has the tendency to accelerate the dissolution of relationships between lovers.

A: The legalization of abortion insures that every child is wanted and loved.
C: Statistics have demonstrated that child abuse has increased since the legalization of abortion.

A: Abortion is biblically justified because the unborn have not developed the “power to think and to do” which represents the “image of God” according to E.G. White.
C: The image of God is more than just merely the “power to think and to do.” It is the power to do God’s will. Without this, human beings develop the image of the evil one, who has been a “murderer from the beginning.”

A: Women deserve to be free from unwanted pregnancies.
C: The sexual freedom promised by feminists is a mirage. Abortion is quite often followed by side effects, including guilt, depression, and emotional detachment from any other wanted children the woman may have.

A: There is nothing wrong with abortion, since nature causes spontaneous abortions quite often in the case of serious physical deformities in the fetus.
C: It is morally wrong to imitate nature. Nature kills through tornados, earthquakes, and floods, but people who kill end in jail or the electric chair.

A: The Bible states that “there is a time to kill.”
C: Yes, the Bible condones the death penalty, but it condemns the “shedding of innocent blood.” The Bible does not say this, but there is also a time to sit on the electric chair.

A: The abortion of defective fetuses is prudent, since anencephalic babies, for example, are likely to die soon after birth.
C: The role of physicians is to prolong the life of their patients. Killing people simply because they are going to die anyway is morally unacceptable.

A: An unwanted pregnancy sometimes affects the mental health of women.
C: Mental depression can’t justify the killing of innocent babies. Giving the unwanted baby for adoption is much better than killing it. Nine months of inconvenience cannot balance the guilt of having deprived the baby of life.

A: An unwanted pregnancy may threaten the lifestyle of the pregnant woman.
C. A temporary disruption of a woman’s lifestyle cannot be compared with the total, permanent, and irreversible deprivation of the baby’s life. Adoption is always a better option for unwanted babies.

A: Women should have a right to have total control over their own bodies.
C: The Bible states that God is the rightful owner of our bodies.

A: Functional human life should have priority over potential human life.
C: Was the life of baby Jesus before his birth functional of merely potential human life?

A: Unwanted babies might be better off dead than be subjected to neglect, suffering, and abuse.
C: Can fallible human beings predict with any degree of certainty the future life of an unborn baby?

A: A minor should not be required to carry her pregnancy to term.
C: The Bible states that children should not be put to death for the sins of the parents. If someone needs to die, it should be the man who impregnated the minor.

A: No woman becomes pregnant with the purpose of having an abortion.
C: True! Nevertheless, the abortion is the result of an intentional decision to take the life of an innocent human being.

A: It is unchristian to exhibit a judgmental attitude towards women who are considering the abortion alternative.
C: Would it be also wrong to try to dissuade somebody planning to steal, rape, or sexually abuse a child?

A: It would be unchristian to manifest a condemnatory attitude towards women who had an abortion.
C: Women who have had an abortion need God’s forgiveness. How can these women seek God’s forgiveness, if we justify abortion?

A: Christians need to hold in high esteem the personal autonomy of pregnant women seeking abortion.
C: Autonomy means self rule, and it reflects a godless, humanistic philosophy. Christians recognize that they are subject to God’s rule, to whom they will one day have to give an account for their actions.

A: For a victim of rape, a live baby is a constant reminder of the violent act perpetrated against her.
C: Yes, and a dead baby will be a constant reminder of the violence she exhibited towards her own child. Giving the baby for adoption is a much better option.

A: Jesus did approve abortion when he stated that it would have been better for Judas if he had never been born.
C: Yes! The problem is that human beings do not have a crystal ball to determine the future of a developing baby.

A: Abortion is sometimes the best alternative for a pregnant woman.
C: Death cannot be the best alternative for the baby. For the woman, adoption is always a better alternative than abortion.

A: Nine months is a long time for a woman who is not ready to be a mother.
C: A lifetime of regret and guilt is much longer.

A: Pregnant women are entitled to freedom of choice.
C: Of course, and that choice should be life. The Bible states that wrong choices are accompanied by a curse: “I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. . . .This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live”[1]

A: Abortion is necessary because our planet is already overcrowded.
C: If that is the case, then how about killing the criminals instead of killing the innocents?

A: Interference with a woman’s plan to opt for an abortion is an infringement of her personal freedom.
C: Would trying to prevent a rape, burglary, or murder also be an infringement of the personal freedom of criminals?

A: Those citing the Psalms in defense of the unborn should remember that that portion of the Bible is mere poetry.
C: Does this imply that Jesus made a big mistake when he quoted the Psalms in his discussion with the Pharisees and Sadducees about theological issues?

A: Jesus died in order to preserve our freedom of choice.
C: Did he also die to preserve our freedom to rape, abuse, steal, and murder?

A: The health of the pregnant woman should not be ignored when considering the advisability of an abortion.
C: Yes, provided the health and life of the baby is given equal consideration.

A: A healthy family relationship should be taken into account when deciding about abortion.
C: How can killing a member of the family contribute to the healthy family relationship?

A: Catholics are opposed to abortion because they believe in the immortality of the human soul.
C: James White and the early SDA pioneers did not believe in the immortality of the human soul, yet they condemned the practice of abortion in the strongest terms.

A: Women should be free to have an abortion at least in the first trimester of pregnancy.
C: Most abortions are performed when there is a beating heart pumping blood through the baby’s body. Abortion is a bloody business.

A: A fetus can’t be equated with a real human being.
C: It has feet, hands, a face, and it sucks its thumb. If it is not human, then what is it? An animal? Animals are those who engage in the killing of these creatures for a profit!

A: Some feminists warn pro-lifers: “Get your hands off my body.”
C: Pro-lifers answer: “And you get off your hands off the baby’s body.”

A: Only women have been granted the ability to become pregnant, and they should be the ones making decision related to abortion.
C: It was a group of nine male judges who decided to deprive the unborn of personhood. Men should have the right to undo the damage they have done.

A: Many biblical scholars believe that Exodus 21:22-25 supports the belief that the value of the fetus is not equal to that of the mother.
C: Biblical scholars also agree that in those times the value of a slave was not on par with that of their masters.

A: Babies become alive when they take their first breath after birth.
C: Fish do not breathe either, yet they are definitely alive.

A: The church should not compel women to carry their pregnancy to term.
C: The church has no legal power to force women to carry their pregnancy to term, but they do have the moral duty to offer guidance on this matter.

A: Adventists should give priority to other moral issues, like poverty, hunger, and health.
C: The abundance of food and healthcare can do no good to a dead baby.

A: The most important commandment of the Decalogue is the one dealing with the Sabbath rest, because it will determine the final destiny of human beings.
C: Did Jesus say that? Didn’t he rather say that the eternal destiny of human being will be determined by the way we treat “the least of these”?

A: SDA hospitals do not provide elective abortions.
C: Wrong! Several hospitals owned by the SDA Church have been providing elective abortions, one of them even before the U.S. Congress legalized the practice, and one of them recently was described by a General Conference official as an “abortion mill.”

A: Adventists have opted to avoid both extremes on the issue of abortion, and decided to keep the middle ground attitude.
C: The SDA “middle ground attitude” results in thousand of totally dead innocent babies.

A: Aren’t women entitled to privacy under the U.S. Constitution?
C: The right to take the life of an innocent human being is nowhere to be found in the U.S. Constitution.

A: The decision to sacrifice an unborn life should be made only when it is the best way to make a troubled life tolerable.
C: Tolerable for whom? The pregnant woman or the unborn baby? Why not both? Adoption benefits the pregnant woman unable to raise a child, the baby, and the adoptive parents.

A: There is no intrinsic right to life by a potential human being.
C: Does size determine the moral value of a human being? Is a giant worth more in God’s eyes than a pigmy? Was baby Jesus merely a potential human being before his birth?

A: We don’t know the precise moment human life begins.
C: Then we should err on the side of caution. If you are driving on a foggy night and see something on the road that looks like it might be a human being, you stop and investigate instead of running it over.

A: The moral value of a fetus is in direct relationship to the degree of its development.
C: Did the moral value of baby Jesus start from zero at conception and then increased in size with the passage of time?

A: Both Job and Jeremiah wished they had been aborted, thus approving of the practice of abortion.
C: No biblical scholar has ever suggested that the lives of these men were a mistake. Depressed individuals may wish to be dead, but we don’t kill them. The mental state of a pregnant woman should not be relied upon in deciding what is best for her and her unborn baby.

A: Human life does not begin at conception. It began with Adam and Eve.
C: True, human life began with Adam and Eve. Nevertheless the life of each individual begins with fertilization.

A: Murder is not the appropriate word for describing the abortion of an embryo.
C: Altering the name of depriving a human being of life does not make it right.

A: Potential things are less valuable than actual things. A potential election winner does not have the same rights as an actual election winner.
C: We are not discussing political rights, but the right to life all human being are entitled to regardless of size, stage of development, or place of residence.

A: Some experts have estimated that 56 percent of all embryos spontaneously abort, usually due to the presence of some abnormality in them.
C: Society can’t sue nature for its alleged crimes against humanity, but it can sue those members of the human race who engage in criminal activity.

A: In the case of rape, abortion is a reasonable response.
C: The right response would be to punish the rapist, instead of executing one of the innocent victims of rape.

A: Society should forbid only elective abortions, and not those resulting from rape or incest.
C: All abortions are elective. A pregnant woman is free to elect adoption instead of death for the baby.

A: The church should stay away from controversial issues like abortion.
C: Smoking and Sabbath keeping are controversial issues. Should Adventists stop preaching and teaching about those controversial issues as well?

A: Women should be free to choose abortion if they so desire.
C: Should we add that man should be free to rape, abuse, and steal?

A: Abortion seems like a wise solution to the large number of unwanted pregnancies.
C: Hitler also thought that killing a certain group of human being was a wise solution to the Nazi German problem.

A: Society cannot ignore the quality of life of the pregnant woman.
C: Is quality of life more important than life itself? If your life is in mortal danger, do you care whether you have one or two cars in your driveway?

A: Abortion frees many unborn from a life of poverty, misery, and abuse.
C: Depression and suicide are rather uncommon among the poor and the handicapped.

A: Because of the predicted persecution towards the members of the remnant church, Adventists highly value personal freedom.
C: Freedom from persecution includes the unborn’s freedom from execution by abortionists who profit from their immoral business.

A: I find the pro-life case less than compelling.
C: Would you change your mind if you were the one doomed to die?

A: A minor is not ready to become a mother.
C: The unborn baby is not ready to become an abortion victim either.

A: The church has no right to usurp the role of the Holy Spirit by preaching against abortion.
C: Are God’s ministers of the Gospel usurping the role of the Holy Spirit when they preach against sin?

A: Abortion is the right response to a violent act.
C: One crime does not justify the commission of another crime against an innocent human being.

A: A rape victim will never be able to forget the violent act perpetrated against her.
C: It will be harder for her to forget the violent act against her own baby in which she was a willing participant.

A: Rape is a cruel act, but as Christians we must be willing to forgive the rapist for whom Jesus died also.
C: Yes, and we must let the baby live as well, more so because it has done no wrong.

A: Truth is progressive. Adventists pioneers were pro-life, but now the church has decided that the time was ripe for embracing the pro-choice position on abortion.
A: There seems to exist a disconnect between the church who encouraged young draftees to refuse to bear arms in self defense in times of war, and the current church which justifies the killing of the most innocent members of humanity.

A: Abortion must be seen as a lesser evil than raising an unwanted child.
C: Giving the child for adoption avoid both of these undesirable alternatives.

A: Jan Paulsen, the president of the General Conference has unequivocally stated that the Adventist church is pro-life.

C: Words must have a specific meaning. Redefining pro-life on pro-choice terms creates only confusion. The official SDA “Guidelines on Abortion” attempts to embrace both the pro-life and pro-choice position on abortion, thus rendering the document irrelevant.

A: Anencephalic babies could be valuable sources of organs for transplantation to patients who otherwise are doomed to die.
C: Yes, but killing one human being in order to save the life of another is morally abhorrent. Besides, if such babies are in fact dead, why do physicians instruct nurses to keep them alive until the harvesting of organs have been secured?

A: If a fetus is genetically human, so is every unfertilized egg in the body of a nun as well.
C: A DNA analysis would reveal that the unfertilized egg in the body of a nun bears the same genetic markers as any other cell in her body. This is not true about the fetus.

A: The unborn do not possess self-consciousness; therefore, they have no intrinsic right to life.
C: If that is the case, then perhaps society should legalize the killing of the newborn, the comatose, the senile, and those who are asleep.

A: Redefining death as the absence of higher brain activity would provide an ample supply of human organs for transplantation.
C: Does issuing a death certificate for a comatose patient or anencephalic baby make them dead? If they are already dead, why the need to kill them? Someone who is really dead, is ready for burial. Would society condone the burial of human beings who are still breathing?

A: The right to life protected by the Declaration of Independence does not include the unborn.
C: Neither does it include women or children. It names “men” only.

A: The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution protects the life of U.S. citizens, and the unborn are not citizens of the U.S.
C: Does this mean that we are free to take the life of immigrants who have not become citizens yet?

A: Adventists have a tradition of defending our religious freedom to worship according to our conscience. It follows that we should stand behind women’s freedom of choice.
C: How about the rapists’ right to choose? Should there be a limit to free choice?

A: Abortion is a lesser evil than a life of poverty, neglect, and abuse.
C: Wrong! Giving the baby for adoption is a better option for the baby.

A: The official pro-choice position of the church accurately reflects the current general attitude of Adventists toward the issue of abortion.
C: Wrong! The final result of my investigation (see Chapter XIII of my “Pro-life to Pro-choice” book) indicates the opposite. Two thirds of those who have expressed their opinions in the leading SDA publications between 1970 and 2006 seem to belong in the pro-life group, and only one third in the pro-choice category.

[1] Deut. 30:19.

Older Posts »

Categories

Advent Life Books

The best books should be free--like air and water!

KEEPLIFELEGAL

EXPOSING THE ABORTION AGENDA FROM THE PULPIT, ON THE SIDEWALK, IN THE MEDIA & AT THE STATEHOUSE.

kelzbelzphotography

My journey - The good, bad and the ugly

Confessions of a Teenage Runaway

My Voice... My Story...

Advent Life

Focusing on Life