When I listen to Xian tradition types in this country (big churches, Focus on the Family, Phyllis Shafley, et al), lots of focus on abortion. Lots of money and efforts toward no choice.

I haven't heard anything in a GC about it, and ime, not in Relief Society, Sacrament, etc. When Mormons tell me, 'Oh, the church stays out of all political issues' (except when they don't which is all the damn time), that isn't a satisfying answer.

I certainly don't think TSCC is pro-choice. But I hear a lot more anti-abortion talk from Christian pastors, organizations.

They're busy bashing homosexuals and porn right now.
It takes all of their focus.
So many vices, so little time...

BECAUSE!! secretly they are not 'against' abortion. Granted most of the members are very pro family/pro life. When the church could-- they pressured young unmarried girls to give up their babies to childless lds couples.
In my experience - my VERY TBM temple loving in-laws pressured me to consider an abortion when my (now ex) husband was again unemployed. I was 3 months along with my 4th pregnancy and feeling fine. So it wasn't like I was sickly & ready to miscarry and they wanted me to hurry it along. My father in law (high council etc) repeatedly said to me: that it would be better to not have another mouth to feed...especially if the baby could be handicapped (his words: retarded). THis determination was made by my oh so kind (sarcasm) sister in law who kept telling her folks & the ex (her brother) that 'for sure' the baby would be handicapped. They even made an appointment for me! I went sobbing to my husband and he sided with his folks and sister (as always) that I should consider terminating the pregnancy. I went to the ob/gyn and told him what was going on--he sent me to a high risk ob and I had a ultrasound (it was in the 80's they were not that common yet.)
The doctors were so puzzled that I was being pressured to end the pregnancy at such a late date when everything was going well. I delivered a healthy baby girl with no problems. But I will never forget my father in law & ex pressuring me to end my baby's life.

annabelle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BECAUSE!! secretly they are not 'against'
> abortion.

This makes sense to me.

I'm so sorry for your experience. All the confusing, contradictory messages. If HF provides for his flock, then there is no stress about 'another mouth to feed'. Except there is. If HF wants all these babies born in the covenant and there is Bishop's Storehouse and whatnot, then there is no shame. Except there is.

No one can make logic from this.

annabelle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BECAUSE!! secretly they are not 'against'
> abortion. Granted most of the members are very pro
> family/pro life. When the church could-- they
> pressured young unmarried girls to give up their
> babies to childless lds couples.
> In my experience - my VERY TBM temple loving
> in-laws pressured me to consider an abortion when
> my (now ex) husband was again unemployed. I was 3
> months along with my 4th pregnancy and feeling
> fine. So it wasn't like I was sickly & ready to
> miscarry and they wanted me to hurry it along. My
> father in law (high council etc) repeatedly said
> to me: that it would be better to not have another
> mouth to feed...especially if the baby could be
> handicapped (his words: retarded). THis
> determination was made by my oh so kind (sarcasm)
> sister in law who kept telling her folks & the ex
> (her brother) that 'for sure' the baby would be
> handicapped. They even made an appointment for me!
> I went sobbing to my husband and he sided with his
> folks and sister (as always) that I should
> consider terminating the pregnancy. I went to the
> ob/gyn and told him what was going on--he sent me
> to a high risk ob and I had a ultrasound (it was
> in the 80's they were not that common yet.)
> The doctors were so puzzled that I was being
> pressured to end the pregnancy at such a late date
> when everything was going well. I delivered a
> healthy baby girl with no problems. But I will
> never forget my father in law & ex pressuring me
> to end my baby's life.

Jerk! Even if you were already considering it, it would be none of his damned business unless you asked for his opinion.

Cuz homosexuals are known for not breading and porn is just an illusion of breading. The 12 needs everyone to bread before they worry about how children are raised or put down.

EXON46 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cuz homosexuals are known for not breading and
> porn is just an illusion of breading. The 12 needs
> everyone to bread before they worry about how
> children are raised or put down.


Maybe I can be private messaged to learn about this 'bread'. ;-) Different than sacrament bread, I'm thinking.

But I totally get your point.

I'm wondering if TSCC doesn't really care if non-Mormons abort? They aren't the chosen ones and everyone gets baptized eventually anyway so who cares?

or against Divorce, the #1 Family Killer...

It probably isn't a huge issue for them at this time.

When my youngest sister got pregnant at age 18, my very TBM mother pressured her into getting an abortion. Made the appointment, took her, paid for it. I was already on my own and out of the church at that time. My sister lived at home and was at the mercy of my parents. I remember getting a call from my mom and she says, "it's done". I wanted to vomit. First of all, wtf?! I thought Mormons were against abortion. Also, can't you lose your temple recommend if you are involved in that like my mom was? Why did this need to be done? She didn't seem sad about pressuring my sister into it. Her attitude was more of 'phew, dodged that bullet. Took care of that problem.' What's worse is that my sister got pregnant again shortly after the abortion. She kept that baby, so the abortion was completely unnecessary. There was no medical reason the pregnancy couldn't continue.

I think that my mom pressured her into the abortion because it was her 2nd daughter to get knocked up as a teenager. An abortion was discreet and hush-hush. Another pregnant daughter would have been an embarrassment to my TBM mom. And now I realize she must've lied in her temple recommend interview to be able to maintain it. It's ALWAYS about appearances!! Disgusting!

bluebutterfly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's ALWAYS
> about appearances!! Disgusting!

(Nodding) Yep. Never changes. Seemingly, the right modest dress and white shirt&tie can cover a multitude of sins.

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administer
> ing-the-church/selected-church-policies/21.4?lang=
> eng&_r=1#214

"Birth parents who do not marry should not be counseled to keep the infant as a condition of repentance or out of a sense of obligation to care for one’s own. Additionally, grandparents and other family members should not feel obligated to facilitate parenting by unmarried parents, since the child would not generally be able to receive the blessings of the sealing covenant. Further, unmarried parents are generally unable to provide the stability and the nurturing environment that a married mother and father can provide."

WTF? So now we don't even need to care for our own? And grans, hey, go clean the temple with q-tips for the upteenth time and eff the grandchild, don't feel obligated!

Why does the church hate innocents so much?! Gah.

My mom got clearance from the bishop to get an abortion when she was raped. Under the circumstances, I think it was the right thing.

Devoted Exmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My mom got clearance from the bishop to get an
> abortion when she was raped. Under the
> circumstances, I think it was the right thing.

Damn right it was, if that was what she wanted. She shouldn't have needed any clearance.

"Church members who submit to, perform, arrange for, pay for, consent to, or encourage an abortion may be subject to Church discipline."

^^^^According to this, my mom and sister should've been "disciplined". My sister was coerced, though. My sister was healthy and did not have a pregnancy that was in jeopardy, and she was not raped.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/03/2016 08:56PM by bluebutterfly.

bluebutterfly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Church members who submit to, perform, arrange
> for, pay for, consent to, or encourage an abortion
> may be subject to Church discipline."
>
> ^^^^According to this, my mom and sister should've
> been "disciplined". My sister was coerced, though.
> My sister was healthy and did not have a pregnancy
> that was in jeopardy, and she was not raped.

Yes, but Bishop somehow didn't receive the live feed from HF/HS so someone would have to rat them out.

Cuz we cannot rely on members' consciences. I'm sure she was full paying tither so all good.

? What about Utah abortion laws?
(Idaho, Arizona)

GNPE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ? What about Utah abortion laws?
> (Idaho, Arizona)

What about state laws? Is this a rhetorical question?

are Utah (Arizona, Idaho) laws repressive to abortion like many southern states?

Texas & Missouri come to mind.

I'm surprised to see the CHI online from an official source, but isn't one edition of it 'eyes only'?

As far as I know, they're only officially in favor of abortion in cases of rape or if the fetus isn't going to survive long past birth. I do think if there were a prenatal test for homosexuality, TSCC would require an abortion if the test were positive or face discipline such as losing one's TR. I'm saying that because of how homophobic the leaders are, and for creating the policy of forcing children with a gay parent to wait until adulthood to be baptized, and only after they've disowned their parent.

adoylelb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As far as I know, they're only officially in favor
> of abortion in cases of rape or if the fetus isn't
> going to survive long past birth.

From the link posted above, also incest and a 'competent physician' determines risk to life of the mother. Same stuff we hear from conservatives, 'Rape, incest, life of the mother' in rapid fire when asked.

There are a few famous adults who are glad they weren't aborted even though they are the product of rape. I'm surprised the church supports abortion post rape.

This could be better written as it seems comprehensive and does not acknowledge the exceptions:

"Church members who submit to, perform, arrange for, pay for, consent to, or encourage an abortion may be subject to Church discipline."

So, is it allowed or not? Disciplined or not?

Mary, MoJ, was forcibly impregnated. Didn't ask for it.

carameldreams Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> adoylelb Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > As far as I know, they're only officially in
> favor
> > of abortion in cases of rape or if the fetus
> isn't
> > going to survive long past birth.
>
> From the link posted above, also incest and a
> 'competent physician' determines risk to life of
> the mother. Same stuff we hear from
> conservatives, 'Rape, incest, life of the mother'
> in rapid fire when asked.
>
> There are a few famous adults who are glad they
> weren't aborted even though they are the product
> of rape. I'm surprised the church supports
> abortion post rape.
>
> This could be better written as it seems
> comprehensive and does not acknowledge the
> exceptions:
>
> "Church members who submit to, perform, arrange
> for, pay for, consent to, or encourage an abortion
> may be subject to Church discipline."
>
> So, is it allowed or not? Disciplined or not?
>
> Mary, MoJ, was forcibly impregnated. Didn't ask
> for it.

Maybe when she said, "Behold Thy handmaiden. Lord. Ready am I to do thy work" or something like that, HF took it as consent. She didn't come right out and say "No" as far as we've been told. Then again, maybe he spiked her milk and honey or whatever she liked to drink before bedtime with some Godly form of Klonopin.

That still doesn't address the incest issue.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2016 05:13AM by scmd.

I agree that it is bizarre that they haven't jumped on the bandwagon on this issue. There is no obvious explanation.

I asked a devout Mormon about this, and the answer was that babies don't have a spirit until they draw breath. Then the spirit enters the newborn's body. An abortion merely blocks a spirit from incarnation. This is old school Mormonism, though, and may be completely obsolete by now, the way they change out doctrine.

Maybe they don't want to take a position one way or another so they don't doctrinally paint themselves into a corner again as they have done with gender.

donbagley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I asked a devout Mormon about this, and the answer
> was that babies don't have a spirit until they
> draw breath. Then the spirit enters the newborn's
> body. An abortion merely blocks a spirit from
> incarnation. This is old school Mormonism, though,
> and may be completely obsolete by now, the way
> they change out doctrine.

This is what I was taught in my youth, although I think the girls heard more about it tan we did. It, like other earlier teachings, may now fall into the category of "I don't know that we teach that."

There used to be some policy - I don't know how official it was or if it was just something passed along by members that had its genesis somewhere but no one knew quite where - that a baby had to take an actual breath for it to be considered that the spirit entered the body.The spirit supposedly just waited for another body. I sometimes read on fB and in blogs of LDS mothers saying they know that they'll be reunited in the C.K. with the babies they miscarried at ten weeks, who could not possibly have taken anything resembling a breath. I'm not an OB man and don't know a hell of a lot about the specialty, but THAT I do know.

I don't know if the church has changed its position, never officially held that position at all, or simply remains quiet when mothers who have miscarried say or write such things as they don't wish to upset or traumatize them any firther than they've already been.

One of my sisters was a twin whose twin did not make it. He lived about five minutes, I've been told. It was a big deal to my parents that he got at least that first breath (and several others, all very labored) in before he succumbed. The twins were born pretty early, and his little lungs just weren't strong enough even with pre-birth hormones.My mom is confident she'll be with him in the next life. In some way, perhaps she's right, although I'd be highly surprised if it were the Celestial Kingdom version that she envisions.

The church's list of "serious transgressions" that can result in disciplinary council includes abortion (along with murder, rape, etc). Not sure why they don't talk about it more, considering they have an official stance against it.

In the church's official handbook for bishops and stake presidents I'm pretty sure the disciplinary council is mandated if the abortion happened for any reason other than rape, incest, life of the mother, or severe birth defects.

As a correction, I checked and the council isn't mandated, but it can happen if the bishop/stake president feel like it.

In YW, it was a very hot topic that only in cases of rape or when the mother's life was at stake that you could have an abortion. Otherwise, it was murder.

I swear there has been GC talks on it...though that was about 10 years ago.

I think abortion is included in the convert Pe-baptism question.
Or at least it was in the past.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2016 08:54AM by blakballoon.

Several years ago when I was listening to him online, KTKK talk show host (and current LDS church member) Jack Stockwell once commented that while the LDS church publicly didn't like abortions, a poor family with too many mouths to feed already could get church approval for the mother to have an abortion if she (or more likely her husband) discussed the matter with their local bishop. I suspect, given the experiences and quotes from the posts above mine, that the LDS church wants it both ways on this issue--it wants to be seen as publicly against abortions as it attempts to make alliances with other religious groups for other reasons, but it also wants to be seen as being humane(?) towards members of its own flock, particularly its largest tithe payers.

How can they gripe about abortion when John C. Bennett and Joseph Smith showed them the way !!!

That's an interesting question. Now that I think about it, I haven't heard talks about abortion in a long time. Since the church is so conscious of PR, I wonder if they don't mind it so much because it usually isn't known if a woman has had an abortion? It is something non-visual, done in private, and usually secretly.

When I look on lds.org, there is plenty of info that the church is against abortion.

https://www.lds.org/topics/abortion?lang=eng

But there apparently haven't been talks about it in many years. The last one I could find was in 2008, printed in the Liahona:

https://www.lds.org/liahona/2008/10/abortion-an-assault-on-the-defenseless?lang=eng

They used to talk about it a lot, maybe because that was the political environment at the time. I remember hearing this talk, and how the last part impacted me, where he quotes Matt. 25:40:

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1975/04/the-sanctity-of-life?lang=eng