Christian Goodreaders discussion
Archives
>
Couple conducting Internet poll on whether to abort their baby
date
newest »
newest »
I can't believe a poll like that is even being dignified with responses.
Diane, believe me, I relate 100% to your reaction --it's sick beyond imagining! The only reason I responded to it at all is because of the possibility that my doing so might contribute to saving a life.
I voted for them to give birth. Like Werner, the ONLy reason I did the the possibility of saving a life!
I voted because we all know it is "God's will" this babylives! Concerned about what kind of parents they would be to this child though; considering they would allow a public poll of strangers to decide their baby's fate!?
Werner wrote: "Diane, believe me, I relate 100% to your reaction --it's sick beyond imagining! The only reason I responded to it at all is because of the possibility that my doing so might contribute to saving a..." I voted but without God's intervention, the baby will die. There are tons more for killing the baby than having it. There is even a clear picture of the fetus. These people are animals making a game out of something like this. "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord. I will repay."
"How do you know this isn't just a sick joke"!?? If it is real- we need to all report this child to the child protection agency of their city & state!! So the baby would be raised by good parents!!! You can get photo copies of fetus's!- any place these days.
April, it may be a sick joke (and we can actually hope that it is). But with a life possibly at stake, I'm proceeding on the assumption that it's serious.The question of what kind of parents these two would be has crossed my mind, too. Unfortunately, reporting the case to a child protection agency wouldn't help; God help us, we live in a society where, in the eyes of the legal system, spanking a misbehaving child may be deemed to be "child abuse," but thinking about aborting one is not. (On the other hand, parents who considered that course and were thankfully dissuaded from it often go on to become good and loving parents after the baby is born. And as my wife pointed out, the fact that this couple didn't simply go out and schedule an abortion might indicate some ambivalence about the idea --at one level, their "poll" might be a cry for help.) Of course, the drooling sickies making a game out of voting for the abortion aren't helping. "Animals" is too kind a term; animals act the way they were created to, but these people pervert the moral nature they were created to have.
Werner wrote: "April, it may be a sick joke (and we can actually hope that it is). But with a life possibly at stake, I'm proceeding on the assumption that it's serious.The question of what kind of parents the..."
You're right. I maligned animals. There isn't a bad enough word for these people (sorry. This makes me so angry).
Pat W. wrote: "Werner wrote: "April, it may be a sick joke (and we can actually hope that it is). But with a life possibly at stake, I'm proceeding on the assumption that it's serious.The question of what kind..."
April wrote: ""How do you know this isn't just a sick joke"!?? If it is real- we need to all report this child to the child protection agency of their city & state!! So the baby would be raised by good parents!!..."
Werner, Maybe we need to all unite in prayer that this couple might be reached for Christ; and God turns this ugly truth or joke into a beautiful christian couple who will then be Godly parents and
will have the child and love him or her with the precious Love of Christ! Maybe one of us needs to
at least offer this wonderful alternative to this couple and explain in love why their decision to abort is wrong in God's eyes; instead of judging them and blaming them and being angry-God may want us all to unite In His Great Love & reach this couple for Him!!! In Christ, April
April, prayer for the couple is a great suggestion! My wife and I have been praying some about the whole situation, but I should certainly pray about it more, and I think it would be wonderful if others in the group would unite in prayer as well, as the Lord leads.The couple can be e-mailed through their site, and have indicated that they've received a lot of messages. Hopefully some of those have presented the gospel, and Christian counsel for their situation; but I'm sure that any message such as you describe that they receive can only be helpful. If God leads anyone in the group to send such a message (and He certainly might call more than just one person to do so), I'd certainly encourage it --indeed, I've been prayerfully considering it myself!
April: How wonderful. God brings good from evil. I love your idea. I responded so strongly, I didn't think of the obvious.Sorry. After 25 years of following the Lord, He's still working on me. Maybe when I walk into Heaven the job will be finished.
GOOD NEWS: earlier this evening, I learned that Pete Arnold, who with his wife was the originator of this poll, has admitted to CNN that the couple never had any intention of aborting their child, no matter what the poll results were. They didn't explicitly say that they would, so he maintains the poll was not a hoax --it was intended to inspire widespread discussion of the issue. (Arnold is pro-life; his wife is said to be "pro-choice," but didn't want an abortion herself.)The poll is now closed to further voting (nine days early), with well over 2 million votes cast. The raw total is about 77% in favor of the abortion, but that isn't the last word; the results will be analyzed by a third party computer expert, who can determine the ISP addresses from which the votes were cast. There is circumstantial evidence indicating that a few pro-abortion zealots engaged in multiple voting on a massive scale; so anytime multiple votes, all on one side, are counted from the same computer, all but two of them (so as to allow for spouses using the same computer, etc.) will be thrown out.
In related news, it's been reported that Mrs. Arnold has been fired from her job as a result of the poll. Her employers considered it embarrassing to their company's reputation.
Awesome news, Werner, except for Mrs. Arnold being fired. Freedom of speech just isn't what it used to be. Still praying for them.
In an interesting coda to this story, the final poll results have now been tabulated. There were actually 278,084 legitimate votes cast. Of those, about 74% were in favor of giving birth, and only about 26% in favor of the abortion! In addition, there were some 1,627,279 "fraudulent" votes --nearly a million and a half of them in favor of aborting. Granted, the poll designers didn't make it very clear that multiple voting wasn't allowed. Even so, the latter figure documents a level of sick fanaticism that's frightening in its social implications.
I learned yesterday that a couple in Minnesota have decided to determine whether or not to abort their healthy unborn child by means of an online poll. The poll has been up for some time, runs through Dec. 7, and the link is http://www.birthornot.com . They appear to be 100% serious. The particularly horrendous aspect is that at the moment the voting is running 67% (551,479 votes) in favor of the abortion, and only 32% against (269,470 votes). This follows the inauguration of a vote-for-the-abortion campaign on a pro-abortion porn site, which picked up the news some time ago. That campaign flipped the results from an overwhelming have-the-baby majority. It subsequently flipped back again to a strong have-the-baby majority, but has now switched to the present figure --within a suspiciously short period.
As the poll is set up, there is no sign-in and no mechanism preventing multiple voting. This suggests that multiple voting is allowed and expected. However, the parents are now commenting that because of the drastic switch in the voting trend, they're suspecting "vote fraud," which suggests that they intended a one-person, one-vote rule, though that isn't stated. (If they did, they created no enforcement provision except the honor system, and failed even to make that clear.) I've e-mailed them for clarification, but so far have none; if I get any reply, I'll post the information here. But meanwhile, I would encourage members of this group to vote once, and to publicize the poll as widely as you can among Christian friends and other persons who respect human life.
That a poll like this exists in 2010, in a country whose populace can (at least nominally) read and write and presumably eats with forks and spoons, beggars the imagination. And while we've become well aware that many people, seeing a strange child or infant in mortal danger, would not bother to try to help him/her, the idea that this many people would actually want to actively try to bring about the killing of a total stranger's baby, simply for the sick glorification of the killing, does more than beggar the capacity for moral outrage. We have become a nation and a society that would make our founders vomit.