Sure, that’s true, but they overwhelmingly think abortion should be illegal in ALL circumstances.
65% of Republicans and 71% of Conservatives believe abortion should be illegal under all circumstances. So, baby with no brain? No abortion. Will kill the mother? No abortion.
That article doesn’t ask any ‘middle ground’ questions.
ALL circumstances? Your cite doesn’t say that.
Regards,
Shodan
If you look at the 2nd poll in this link, it says 37% of Republicans think abortion should not be allowed. It doesn’t explicitly say “in all circumstances”, but I think that’s a safe assumption. That puts the number at about half of those who responded to the poll in Chimera’s link (which asked about “all/most” circumstances), but a clear majority (61%) of Republicans in that poll think abortion should be available in at least some circumstances.
However, best to ask “should abortion be allowed if the mother’s life is in danger”, because that’s not what a lot of people are going to think about when they are asked about abortion.
Yup, mistake on my part. Should read ‘all/most cases’.
You’re related to my older niece? And you and I have never met?
Jumping back to where this thread started… The fundamentalist Christians who fiercely oppose abortion do not have any biblical basis for that opinion. Not only is the punishment for striking a woman so the loses the baby much less than the punishment for murder, there’s actually a segment in the Bible that appears to require a ritual abortion in the case of a woman cheating on her husband.
Read Numbers 5:11-5:31 and decide for yourself.
I rather suspect that this describes a real practice, and that the “dust” was contaminated with enough heavy metal to cause a miscarriage, and that the priest probably chose where to gather the dust and how much to add - in effect acting as judge in the case.
They like to claim it is covered under ‘thou shalt not kill’, but ignore that Jewish Law doesn’t consider early abortion to be murder. This is where you have to go with it. Was it legal under Roman and Jewish Law at the time of Christ and the Apostles? YES. Was it considered murder? NO. Ok, so why didn’t Jesus or any of the Apostles single out the practice, which was legal at the time, if they indeed considered abortion to be murder?
That’s the case everywhere - the argument is whether abortions will be safe and legal or unsafe and illegal, not whether they will occur.
Jewish law doesn’t consider the newborn to be fully human until it takes its first breath. God ensouled Adam and Eve by breathing into them. The Hebrew word for “soul” is the same as the word for “breath”. So a fetus isn’t a human being and can’t be murdered. That’s not to say it isn’t something that is nearly a human, and as such, extremely important and valuable and worthy of protection. And it is a violation of Jewish law to kill a fetus (with some exceptions, such as if it is endangering the woman.) But it’s not murder.
If you just do a quick Google search on the apologists explaining this particular set of verses, they will of course claim that it doesn’t really mean an abortion and it’s just something else instead.
Google ‘Jewish Law Abortion’. You’ll get some pages that talk about how it has been considered over the years. By Jewish people, not by people who are trying to fit it into Christianity or any ideology of their own.
Yes, you can find any interpretation you want. I suggest each poster consider what the text says, however, that being the fundamentalist Christian way.
And also consider the passage in Exodus 21 on the penalty for causing a miscarriage.
The Catholic Church follows the Pope. Evangelical Christians theoretically read the Bible for inspiration. It’s quite odd that as a movement, they’ve elevated abortion to be such a central issue, because the biblical support for that view is very weak.
Help given to the mother? While she’s pregnant, sure. Afterwards, not so much. And while adoption is considered an option, I’ve never heard of anyone helping arrange it, and you sure won’t be able to take up an offering for it or anything. And there’s still a sort of gossipy shame involved, since she was still pregnant, and gave up her kid. At least, from what I observed. I can’t speak for all.
But what I can say is that Catholics deal with the issue differently politically. US Catholics often don’t agree about abortion, or are okay with being pro-choice. And even those who aren’t do not tend to make it their only issue, as in the title of the thread.
So I think it’s important to separate the two when discussing the underlying issue.
I covered that in the OP. Ancient Semitic law, passed down from the Akkadians and Babylon, was that if you cause a woman to miscarriage, you owed her 10 shekels, the fine mentioned in Ezekiel.
Murder isn’t a federal crime (or shouldn’t be) and, as bad as murder is, individual murder cases are not a priority for a basic functioning government. Some people maintain principles as well as standards on the proper role and scope of the state at various levels. Without those constraints, we might as well just support summary executions of accused murders in the street, like they do with drug suspects in the Philippines.
Well hello there, distant relative! 
Red-state living agnostic here. The verse of the bible I am given most often from pro-life no abortion ever individuals supporting their beliefs is Jeremiah 1:4-5.
"4 "The word of the Lord came to me, saying, 5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; "
Granted this is god speaking to Jeremiah but this also, to pro-lifers, is proof that god knows everyone even before they are formed in the womb and has a plan for everyone even before they are born and to have an abortion is to usurp god’s power. Or so I’m told.
By their logic, women who have an abortion are more powerful than God. I’m not sure they’ve thought this through.
Yup, conveniently ignoring that ancient hebrew law was based off ancient Semitic law and abortion was legal.
I do think, though, that it is logical for someone to truly believe that abortion is murder and yet be afraid enough of the consequences of blowing up an abortion clinic to not blow up an abortion clinic.
Was it, though? I’m not so much demanding a cite as I have never heard of a particular “legal ruling” on the issue in ancient Hebrew civilization and also whether technology even permitted abortions to be carried out (unless there were some medicine known to induce miscarriages on purpose.) (I find the priest-purposefully-determining-level-of-lead-dust theory mentioned above doubtful)