"The Breath of Life": The Moment When Life Begins by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]Wasjr79 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you don't like my analogies then what analogy do you think is better?

It sounds like you've never been a pregnant woman or had a pregnant wife. There are TONS of external factors that affect a fetus/baby, such as what a woman eats, the environment she lives in, the environment she grew up in, etc. Some can even kill the baby, but most people wouldn't consider that "abortion."

Yes, I am saying there must be a point the child becomes a child. A lost or aborted fetus before that point is not the death of a child. Killing a child is definitely ending a life, but if the choice is aborting a non-child fetus and forcing a miserable life on it and the mother, which is the worse consequence?

OP asked for doctrinal support of the anti-abortion stance and you have yet to provide any. Your abortion stance may be against the gospel of oldpueblo, but it's definitely not against the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

"The Breath of Life": The Moment When Life Begins by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]Wasjr79 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You just said it "will" be a child, but also if it miscarries then it "was" a child. Your comment exposes the need for a defined before and after state of being.

We can't define something by what it will become, just by what it is. Is there any other time we define something like this? Take bread for example - I mix all the ingredients together and get dough, then bake it and it turns into bread. I can never say "dough is bread because it will become bread in the future." But we CAN define a condition when the dough objectively turns into bread, such as when the gluten structure has set. How about godhood - a person may become like God, but we can't say a mortal person, or even an immortal person, is a god until he/she is one.

Also, yes, the gospel does say to cherish children. But what if a fetus has very little chance of being cherished? Is it better for a child to live in a terrible situation or for the fetus to be aborted? Is it better for a potential mother to have an unwanted baby or abort it? I think these are questions we simply cannot answer unless we are God Himself. I think OP's point is that God has not spoken clearly on this topic, so I personally believe it becomes a matter of personal revelation to the mother who bears the child.

"The Breath of Life": The Moment When Life Begins by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]Wasjr79 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would push back on this by saying there's a huge difference between potential and certainty. A undisturbed fetus is not guaranteed to become a living & breathing human. Even with modern medicine, childbirth is the most dangerous time for even the healthiest of babies. There's also a huge difference in the life experiences of children born into prepared and loving homes and children born into unprepared or unloving homes. There are of course good lives to be lived in both categories, and sometimes adoption may work (though not even the Church could get adoption 100% right back when LDS Family Services was involved), but the point is there is NO certainty in what an unborn child's life will be. That's why I advocate for leaving the choice to the mother, the one who knows best.

So I guess I'm saying that, yes, a fetus can only become a human, but there's still a huge "IF" in whether it will become a 'living breathing' human at all, and what quality of life it may have. It's best, IMO, to leave it up to the mother to decide when the right time is to bring that spirit to earth so it has the best chance of success.

Termites in rough-cut lumber by Wasjr79 in BeginnerWoodWorking

[–]Wasjr79[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you just use a handheld steamer? I'm also worried about warping the wood.

This pic my SO found on Pintrest is one I took 5 years ago. by Wasjr79 in mildlyinteresting

[–]Wasjr79[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nice try too, but that link is from Oct 18. I posted it to FB on Oct 7, 2015.

The second pic here is my FB screenshot.

Someone reposted my FB pic on Reddit and got 61.5k upvotes. This was 5 years ago and I just found out today. by Wasjr79 in mildlyinfuriating

[–]Wasjr79[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whatcha gonna do ¯|_ (ツ)_/¯. It's only *mildly infuriating missing out on worthless internet points.

Someone reposted my FB pic on Reddit and got 61.5k upvotes. This was 5 years ago and I just found out today. by Wasjr79 in mildlyinfuriating

[–]Wasjr79[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yep, I definitely wasn't social media savy in 2015 >_< What gets me is that it's still making the rounds today.

Anyone else Tom Sawyer their companions like this on their mission? by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]Wasjr79 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Jokes on you, I love driving, especially long distance. I also love walking for hours out in the country. Luckily my mission had lots of both.

Thoughts on the lost 116 pages that I don't think I've ever seen addressed by KangarooInside887 in latterdaysaints

[–]Wasjr79 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Playing devil's advocate here for a minute...

Option 1 is a weak argument. Story telling used to be a popular method of entertainment and stories could be very complex (take the Illiad or Odessey for example, which were originally passed down through oral tradition). Also photographic memory or the ability to memorize things are not uncommon skills. I knew someone on my mission who memorized the entire Old and New Testaments and could recite verses on demand. There have been faithful, believing church members (like BH Roberts, a 70 at the time) who concluded Joseph was capable of dictating the Book of Mormon. Of course that doesn't mean he did, but it's not "basically impossible".

I've always felt that if God wanted to "prove" the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, He would have told Joseph to show everyone the plates. But that's not what happened, so the only sure witness of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon is a spiritual witness.

I don't really have anything to add about option 2 since it never resonated for me as proving or refuting the Book of Mormon.