Political Forum
     

Go Back   Political Forum > Political Issues > Abortion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2005, 11:02 AM
livefree livefree is offline
Commentator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 919
livefree is on a distinguished road
Credits: 22,360
Default the truth about abortion

Jesus never talks about abortion, as it is recorded in the Bible. Yet most modern Christians, particularly Fundamentalists, seem to labor under the misapprehension that the Christian Church has always condemned abortion as murder. Did you know that until 1869, abortion in the first trimester was pretty much OK with the Catholics? They didn't officially think that the 'soul' entered the embryo until later in the pregnancy. A very strange idea arose fairly recently, historically speaking, that said that God throws newly made infant souls down into bodies at conception, when there are only two cells in the body, and if they are not born and don't get to hear about Jesus, then they have to hang out in Limbo for all eternity. This is a sort of comic book version of Christianity and totally perverts the merciful and loving God that Jesus talks about, into a sort of demonic god who arbitrarily condemns little babies for something someone else does. Comic book Christianity. The people who believe that particular superstition don't seem to have actually understood the 'good news' that Jesus taught - the truth that we are all deathless spirit, and that, in our essence, we are all children of that divine spirit, sometimes called God, that is the true being at the heart of everything,. No 'soul' is ever lost through the death of a body. Most cultures, including our own until just recently, have believed that the divine spark unites with the physical body at birth or late in the pregnancy. Most of the wisdom teachings of the world say that souls are old and wise, not newly created whenever a sperm cell happens to meet an egg, and that they don't have to associate with a body that isn't going to come to term. In any case, 'souls' don't die with the death of the body. A tissue cluster the size of your fingernail may be a potential vehicle for a human birth but no one is in the vehicle yet so when one of these zygotes is aborted, no one has been "murdered", as the comic book christians so hysterically claim. Did you know that a large percentage, perhaps more than half, of all fertilized human eggs, all potential human bodies, are spontaneously and naturally aborted and flushed from the womb? Does that make Mother Nature (or God) the biggest abortionist of all? This whole current controversy over abortion is based on bad, politically motivated theology and is being hyped by political power trippers who manipulate the credulous and ignorant among us by claiming that "babies are being murdered". The same people who seem so fierce to protect the "lives of the unborn" are also the ones supporting Bush's illegal war which has killed tens of thousands of innocent women and children in Iraq. Which shows just how much they really care about "right to life". Their whole position stinks of hypocrisy. They are against abortion but they are also against sex education and availability of birth control, two things that reduce the need for abortions. The truth is that, apart from their befuddled belief that a soul is "lost" whenever a fetus doesn't come to term, most abortion opponents are sucked into that position, not because of some great concern for life, but because they were subjected to enormous sexual repression when they were growing up. So now anything to do with sex produces a negative reaction and they are easily manipulated by those politicians who know how to push their hot buttons. Subconsciously they feel that if a woman gets pregnant, indicating that she had sex, then she is guilty and SHOULD be punished by forcing her to bear the child, even, for many of these misguided nutjobs, in the cases of rape and incest.
Here is a short, partial history of abortion.

Quote:
In ancient times, the "delayed ensoulment" belief of Aristotle (384-322 BCE) was widely accepted in Pagan Greece and Rome. He taught that a fetus originally has a vegetable soul. This evolves into an animal soul later in gestation. Finally the fetus is "animated" with a human soul. This latter event, called "ensoulment," was believed to occur at 40 days after conception for male fetuses, and 90 days after conception for female fetuses. The difference was of little consequence, because in those days, the gender of a fetus could not be determined visually until about 90 days from conception, and no genetic tests existed to determine gender. Ultrasound devices were millennia in the future. Thus contraception and abortion were not condemned if performed early in gestation. It is only if the abortion is done later in pregnancy that a human soul is destroyed. By coincidence, this 90 day limit happens to be approximately equal to the end of the first trimester, the point at which the US Supreme Court decided that states could begin to restrict a woman's access to abortion.

There were three main movements within early Christianity. Two did not succeed: Jewish Christianity and Gnostic Christianity. The third, Pauline Christianity, flourished and evolved into the Christian Church. It was surrounded by a mosaic of other competing religions within the Roman Empire, including Judaism, the Greek state religion, Mithraism, the Roman state religion, and various Mystery religions. With the exception of Judaism, most or all of the competing religions allowed women to have abortions and allowed parents to strangle or expose (abandon) new-born babies as methods of population control. There are many writings, letters and petitions of early Christian philosophers and Church Fathers which equated abortion with infanticide and condemned both as murder.

St. Augustine (354-430 CE) reversed centuries of Christian teaching in Western Europe, and returned to the Aristotelian concept of "delayed ensoulment." He wrote that a human soul cannot live in an unformed body. Thus, early in pregnancy, an abortion is not murder because no soul is destroyed (or, more accurately, only a vegetable or animal soul is terminated). He wrote extensively on sexual matters, teaching that the original sin of Adam and Eve are passed to each successive generation through the pleasure generated during sexual intercourse. This passed into the church's canon law. Only abortion of a more fully developed "fetus animatus" (animated fetus) was punished as murder.

Early in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of "quickening" - when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. After ensoulment, abortion was equated with murder; before that time, it was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human life, not human life.

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) also considered only the abortion of an "animated" fetus as murder.

Pope Sixtus V issued a Papal bull "Effraenatam" in 1588 which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty. Pope Gregory XIV revoked the Papal bull right after taking office in 1591. He reinstated the "quickening" test, which he said happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).

In the 17th century, the concept of "simultaneous animation" gained acceptance within the medical and church communities in Western Europe. 9 This is the belief that an embryo acquires a soul at conception, not at 40 or 80 days into gestation as the church was teaching. In 1658 Hieronymus Florentinius, a Franciscan, asserted that all embryos or fetuses, regardless of its gestational age, which were in danger of death must be baptized. However, his opinion did not change the status of abortion as seen by the church.

Pope Pius IX reversed the stance of the Roman Catholic church once more. He dropped the distinction between the "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus" in 1869. Canon law was revised in 1917 and 1983 and to refer simply to "the fetus." The tolerant approach to abortion which had prevailed in the Roman Catholic Church for centuries ended. The church requires excommunication for abortions at any stage of pregnancy.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist.htm


Copyright © 1997 to 2004 incl. by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Latest update: 2004-MAR-7
Author: B.A. Robinson

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
__________________
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it. " --Noam Chomsky
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Red Cross - Donate Today    Save the Rainforest
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2005, 11:30 AM
heikstheo heikstheo is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa County, Ohio
Age: 46
Posts: 4,923
usa us ohio
heikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to behold
Credits: 19,004
Default Yup.

Actually, the old Roman law required that one must raise all of the sons and the eldest daughter. However, one could abandon daughters numbers two and thereafter.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 11-01-2005, 02:05 PM
apotropoxy apotropoxy is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,483
apotropoxy is on a distinguished road
Credits: 17,059
Default Girls

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by heikstheo";p=&quot View Post
Actually, the old Roman law required that one must raise all of the sons and the eldest daughter. However, one could abandon daughters numbers two and thereafter.[/quote]
Yes they did. It was quite common.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 11-02-2005, 09:58 AM
Hansmoleman's Avatar
Hansmoleman Hansmoleman is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Posts: 3,281
Hansmoleman is on a distinguished road
Credits: 19,055
Default Please

Don't confuse the teachings of the Catholic Church with the teachings of Christ, they are in no way similar.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 11-02-2005, 10:01 AM
JavaBlack's Avatar
JavaBlack JavaBlack is offline
Site Moderator
Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 29
Posts: 16,334
usa us michigan
JavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 109,433
Default Occasionally

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hansmoleman";p=&quot View Post
Don't confuse the teachings of the Catholic Church with the teachings of Christ, they are in no way similar.
I agree with Moleman
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 11-02-2005, 10:06 AM
livefree livefree is offline
Commentator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 919
livefree is on a distinguished road
Credits: 22,360
Default OK

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hansmoleman";p=&quot View Post
Don't confuse the teachings of the Catholic Church with the teachings of Christ, they are in no way similar.
OK, moles, so what are Christ's teachings about abortion? Cite chapter and verse for us.
__________________
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it. " --Noam Chomsky
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 11-02-2005, 11:55 AM
JavaBlack's Avatar
JavaBlack JavaBlack is offline
Site Moderator
Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Michigan
Age: 29
Posts: 16,334
usa us michigan
JavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond reputeJavaBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 109,433
Default He said nothing specifically...

but his basic philosophy is toward preserving life, responsible sexual behavior, and having faith tha the Lord will provide. Put it together.
On the other hand, he preached tolerance and nonjudgement so pro-lifers aren't off the hook.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 11-02-2005, 02:29 PM
heikstheo heikstheo is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa County, Ohio
Age: 46
Posts: 4,923
usa us ohio
heikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to beholdheikstheo is a splendid one to behold
Credits: 19,004
Default Yup.

[quote="apotropoxy";p="173262"]
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by heikstheo";p=&quot View Post
Actually, the old Roman law required that one must raise all of the sons and the eldest daughter. However, one could abandon daughters numbers two and thereafter.[/quote]
Yes they did. It was quite common.
Note that I never claimed that abandonment never occurred; I only ever stated that according to the laws of Romulus and Remus one was obliged to raise all of the sons and the eldest daughter and hence the legal right of abandonment applied only to the abandonment of younger daughters.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 12-28-2005, 04:19 PM
Dave's Avatar
Dave Dave is offline
Correspondent
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 216
Dave is an unknown quantity at this point
Credits: 4,395
Default ...

Quote:
so what are Christ's teachings about abortion? Cite chapter and verse for us.
The reason you will not find the word "abortion", or for that matter "planned parenthood" in the Bible is very simple, God never made a distinction between a baby in the womb and a baby already birthed so there was no need to creat the word "fetus". Also, sinse Both are considered a life, then there is no reason to create the word abortion, when we already have the word "Murder". It's your own language of illussion that has become your stumbling block, not the truth of God's Word.

Exodus 20:13 "You shall not murder.

Deuteronomy 5:17 "You shall not murder.

Jesus said:
Matt. 5:19 17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.



Bible Defines Life:

A. Now where uses phrases "human" or "human being"

Uses "man, woman, child, son, daughter, baby etc."

Since these terms are used for unborn children, then we have evidence that human life is present before birth

The Bible makes no distinction of any kind in the terms used to describe a fetus.

Body without spirit is dead: Jas 2:26

The blood is the life: Deut 12:23 fetus has bloodstream at 4 weeks
B. "Begat sons and daughters" Gen 5:3,4,28-30

Begat always refers to conception and fertilization
C. "children & sons in womb" Gen 25:21-22; 2 Ki 19:3; Ruth 1:11

D. "a man child conceived" Job 3:3

notice the difference: day of birth, night conceived see Rev 12:5 "man child born"

E. "mother" of unborn child Num 12:12; Lk 1:43

F. Rom 9:11 for though the twins were not yet born, and had not done anything good or bad

G. "baby leapt for joy" in mother's womb Lk 1:41,44

conceived a "son" Lk 1:36; Acts 7:29

Lk 1:36 Elizabeth conceived a son

Lk 1:57 Elizabeth brought forth a son

H. death of unborn= life for life Ex 21:22-25

There is no indication in the Hebrew that the baby was miscarried
Even if miscarriage is what is meant, the intent was not to abort baby but harm woman,

Literal translation: "Child brought forth"

Notice that the fetus is referred to as a "child" second most common word for child in OT cf: of Moses in Ex 2:3-10

Woman to man, "Why yes, I do use an oral birth control method...the word no!"

I. Is The Life In The Womb A Human Individual?

The fundamental question to be answered is whether or not the life that has been conceived in the mother's womb is a human person, separate and distinct as an individual from the mother. God created only three basic classes of life, each of which reproduces after its own kind: plants, animals, and people. (Gen. 1:11,12,20-25,26-30; 5:1-4). In which of these three categories should a living, unborn baby be classed? It cannot be considered plant or animal because plants and animals reproduce after their own kind. It is the result of human reproduction, and humans are distinct from the plants and animals. Therefore the life in the womb of a human mother must necessarily be human! We next ask: is the life in the womb just a part of the mother's body (like an appendix, so removing it is not murder), or is it a separate and distinct individual from the mother so that killing it is murder? This is the issue we must resolve. The Bible (King James Version and most other versions) nowhere uses the phrases "human" or "human being" to refer to anyone, so we cannot determine whether the unborn is a human individual simply by searching for the terms "human being." Instead, the Bible identifies a human person by calling it simply a "man," "woman," "child," "son," "daughter," "baby," "infant," etc. What we need to know, then, is whether or not the Bible refers to the unborn baby by terms that imply humanity, just as it does for other humans.

A. God's Terms for the Unborn

Gen. 25:21,22 In Genesis 25:21,22, Rebekah conceived twins, and "the children struggled together within her." That which was conceived was called a "child" between the conception and the birth.

The Hebrew word used here (BEN) is the most common Old Testament word for a child or son. When used for the physical offspring of humans, it consistently refers to distinct human individuals (see Gen. 25:1-4; 3:16; etc.).

Job 3:3
On the very night of Job's conception it could have been said, "There is a man-child conceived." The word for "man-child" (Heb. GEBER) elsewhere means "man," i.e., a human individual (see Job 3:23; 4:17; 10:5; Psalms 127:5; 128:4; etc.).

Job 3:16 Babies that die before birth are called "infants" that never saw light. This is exactly like babies that are aborted. This word (Heb. OLEL) always and without exception refers to human individuals (cf. Hosea 13:16; Psalm 8:2; Joel 2:16).

Numbers 12:12; Luke 1:43 In Numbers 12:12, Moses describes "one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he cometh out of his mother's womb." If a baby dies before it is born -- as in an abortion -- the woman who conceived it is still a "mother."

In Luke 1:43, Elizabeth addressed Mary as "the mother of my Lord" before Jesus was born.

The word "mother" (Heb. EM; Greek METER), in contexts referring to physical human reproduction, always refers to one who has procreated or formed another human individual, a separate and distinct individual from the mother herself (see Num. 6:7; Gen. 3:20; Luke 1:60). A woman who has conceived, even if the child is not yet born and even if it dies before birth, is a "mother."

Luke 1:41,44 Elizabeth conceived (v. 24), and the life "in her womb" is called a "babe" or "baby" (Greek BREPHOS). This is the second-most-common New Testament word for a baby. It is always used for that which is a human individual separate and distinct from its mother (see Luke 2:12,16; Acts 7:19.)

Luke 1:36 Again, the life conceived in Elizabeth's womb, before it was born, is called "a son." The word "son" (Greek HUIOS), in contexts that refer to the physical offspring of humans, always refers to that which is a human individual separate and distinct as an individual from its parents. It is the most common New Testament word for a "son" (see Matt. 1:21,23,25; Luke 1:13,31; 2:7; etc.)

B. Observations on the Verses

That which has been conceived and lives in the mother's womb from conception on is referred to by God as a "child," a "son," an "infant," a "baby," a "man-child," etc. The woman in whose womb it lives is a "mother." No human being anywhere in the Bible is identified by terms that are more distinctly human than these terms. God makes no distinction between born and unborn life. He uses exactly the same terms for both, therefore we should view them as having the same nature. Remember that we established from the beginning that the life in the mother's womb is human life. The only question to be settled was whether it is a distinct individual from its mother or just part of the mother's body. Consider the force of the evidence we have now examined: Does the Bible refer to parts of the mother's body as "child," "son," "baby," etc.? Clearly not. Nor is a woman ever called a "mother" just because she has these body parts. Why is this so? Because the terms "child," "son," "baby," etc., are terms that imply a separate human individual, not just a part of the mother's body. Consider the parallel to the Godhead. We can prove that God the Father and Jesus are two separate individuals by referring to the many passages that mention Jesus as the Son of God the Father. A person cannot be his own father or his own son. A father and his son make two separate individuals (cf. John 8:16-1. Likewise, when a woman has conceived, the life in her womb is her "son" (or "daughter") and she is its "mother." If God the Father is a separate individual from Jesus Christ His Son, then in the very same way and for the very same reasons a mother must be a separate individual from the son or daughter in her womb.

II. HOW SHOULD WE TREAT AN UNBORN CHILD?

The unborn life in the mother's womb is a human individual from conception on. How should we treat this unborn life, and may we deliberately kill it? Surely we must be guided by exactly the same rules or principles we should follow in our treatment of any other "child" or "baby." What are these rules?

A. Stewardship: Train, and Protect a Child

Abortion's defenders often argue that, if the mother does not "want" to have the child, she may abort it. But does a mother have the right to not want her child? Psalm 127:3-5; 128:3-5 -- Children are a blessing, a source of happiness and joy to their parents. Yet unborn babies are children, so parents ought to appreciate them as a blessing from God. People who have Scriptural attitudes will never kill unborn babies because they will never want to. Abortion is the grossest form of ingratitude for God's blessing. Proverbs 22:6; Ephesians 6:4 -- God has made us stewards of our children. A steward is a person who has been entrusted with something that belongs to someone else. He is responsible to care for that item and use it to accomplish the purpose of the one to whom it belongs. He will be condemned and punished by the owner or master if he abuses or misuses that which has been entrusted to him (Luke 12:42-46; Matt. 25:14-30; I Cor. 4:2). An unborn child is a particular blessing that has been given into our care just as surely as is a child that has been born. We have the same God-given duty toward an unborn child as we do toward one that has been born. If we kill them, we defeat God's purpose for their lives. How can we "train up" and "bring up" those whom we have killed?! Abortion is the grossest form of child abuse and the most extreme perversion of parental responsibility. God will not fail to hold us accountable.

B. God Says to Love Our Children.

Titus 2:4 -- Young women should be taught to love their children. But an unborn baby is a "child," and a woman who has conceived is a mother even before the baby is born. The Bible tells us how we should act toward those we love (I Cor. 13:4-7), and this teaching definitely does not allow us to kill them (Rom. 13:8-10). We have clearly established that abortion is wrong without even (thus far) examining passages specifically dealing with murder. Abortion does fit the Bible definition of murder. But even if it did not, it would still be sinful because it is unloving, a lack of appreciation for God's blessings, and a gross abuse of our stewardship to raise our children as God directs.

C. Respect for Life: Do Not Kill an Innocent Child.

Many passages teach us not to deliberately kill innocent human beings. Please read Exodus 23:7; Proverbs 6:16,17;

Revelation 21:8; 22:15; Matthew 15:19,20; and Romans 13:8-10. In addition, please consider these specific passages.

Psa. 106:37,38 -- Israel was polluted with blood because the people shed the innocent blood of their "sons and daughters." But unborn babies are "sons and daughters." What then is the condition of our land when over 25 million "sons and daughters" have been legally killed?

Matthew 2:16 -- Herod is considered wicked because he slew the male children in Bethlehem. Luke 2:12,16 calls such children "babes." But Luke 1:41,44 also calls unborn children "babes," so how can it be acceptable to kill them?

Hosea 13:16; 2 Kings 8:12 -- When children or infants are dashed to pieces, it is a great tragedy to any nation. Yet unborn babies are children or infants, and in our nation they are dashed to pieces by the millions!

Acts 7:19; Ex. 1:16-18 -- Pharaoh commanded that Israelite "sons" or "men children" be killed as soon as they were born. But these same terms are used for unborn babies. Would it have been acceptable for Pharaoh to have had abortions performed to kill the babies? Is it any less wicked if people today do it?

Deuteronomy 27:25 -- "Cursed be he that taketh a bribe to slay an innocent person." What clearer description could be given for people who operate abortion clinics?

Conclusion
Abortion is wrong, therefore, because it is a failure to love, appreciate, and care for a human baby. It is also wrong because it constitutes the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. When people defend abortion, their arguments should always be evaluated in light of the fact that the unborn baby is a human being, a separate individual from its mother. Therefore, deliberately killing it would be just as wrong as killing any other innocent human being. What should a woman do if she has aborted a baby and now realizes she did wrong? She does not need to spend the rest of her life with the burden of unforgiven guilt. The Bible says abortion is wrong, but it also offers a source of true forgiveness through the blood of Jesus Christ. God will forgive if we will come to Him according to His conditions. Read and obey these passages: Rom. 1:16; 6:3,4; 10:9,10; Mark 16:16; Acts 17:30; 2:38; 22:16.

Quote:
On the other hand, he preached tolerance and nonjudgement so pro-lifers aren't off the hook.
By tolerance, i'll assume that you mean tolerance of sin? Nonjudgemental? Sounds more like secular humanism to me. Are you sure you read the Bible?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Sponsored Links

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0
Template-Modifikationen durch TMS
vBCredits v1.3 ©2007 by Darkwaltz4
Advertisement System V2.1 By   Branden