The conclusion is that fundie logic doesn’t make sense. I think we can close the debate with that. Do not even bother creating logic out of it because it is impossible. It’s impossible to create logic out of something that is illogical. If something is illogical at the basic level, then everything about it won’t make any sense. There is no logic to religion, which is why the only defense to it is faith. The definition of faith is that “it just is.”
It makes sense IF (as the OP did) you make the assumption that the person doing the killing is already totally depraved and going to hell anyway. By that, strictly following the premises laid out in the OP, the net happiness of the cosmos IS increased by those murders.
Unless those premises are incorrect or insufficient, but no one’s actually argued that yet.
No, the conclusion is that the argument set up in the OP don’t make much sense.,
If a child who has not yet reached the age of reason & accountability is guaranteed a spot in Heaven, then killing him or her before that age is reached prevents damnation from ever being an issue. Thus killing fetuses would be an overall good thing, even if it damned the killer.
If one accepts the premise that God already knows (and presumably has determined) the fate of each individual soul (as you seem to), and also that some souls are destined for hell and others for heaven, then you’re correct that killing innocents to keep them from damning themselves is pointless. However, I would say that a God who has already chosen some souls to be damned and others to be saved (as the doctrine of double predestination clearly implies) is an evil monster.
That God, if he existed, could go fuck off.
Right, the same argument applies to young kids. By fundie logic, if young kids get a pass to heaven, and if they have a significant risk of going to hell after the magical age of reason, then any parent who believes this and does not immediately murder their young kids is a monster. Even if it would mean that the parent goes to hell.
No, very few fundies are Calvinists. Although most of them haven’t thought this through, either, because they’re always talking about how God has a plan for their life, and that seems to imply that he knows the future. But I don’t think you’d find very many of them who would say that their final destination is predetermined.
Eve had the Apple, and Adam had the Wang.
No, the argument applies to anyone who would be assured of going to Heaven right now should they be killed, but not tomorrow if they were left to live. That means the unborn, the young child and the individual who is a die hard Christian today. But, you know, I’ve yet to see many, any actually, Fundies who have ever argued, or even believed, that (1) it’s possible to “prevent” someone from Hell by killing them and that (2) it’s okay to murder someone to “prevent” them from going to hell.
What it seems we have here is that some people have set up a rather blatant straw man-- a fairly bad caricature of Fundie beliefs-- and then proceeded to knock it down.
One, I’m going to need a citation for the bold, for that seems like a statement made out of convenience for yourself and your position. Two, a tenet of Fundamentalism is Biblical inneracy. The Bible clearly states that God is all-knowing. Therefore, Fundies treat God as all-knowing. Three, there’s a difference between God predetermining where you’re going to go (either Heaven or Hell) and having knowledge of your ultimate destination. Outside of Calvinism, Christians-- Fundies, included-- tend to believe that God knows the ultimate outcome, but that that outcome is ultimately decided by one’s actions.
(You can think of it as having watched a movie and knowing the end. The fact that you know the end of the movie doesn’t stop the characters from acting of their own wills within the movie. That’s an imperfect example, of course, but it illustrates the point.)
Not so. By fundie ethics, sacrificing your life to save the life of someone else is a virtue, but only because there is a heaven to reward you afterward for your sacrifice. Damning your soul to prevent the damnation of other souls, does not follow the same principle because there’s no structure in place to reward you for that.
I.e. heaven and hell exist to turn complex ethics into simple reward maximization.
Where is it written that Fundamentalist Christians are aiming to achieve a net increase in the happiness of the cosmos? And how do you define “happiness” wrt Fundamentalist Christianity except as something the God wants to be?
It’s not about saving the children. As the OP points out, they’re blameless victims.
The people the believers are trying to save are the mother and the people who are performing the abortion. They’re the ones, according to the believer’s faith, who are in real danger. They’re committing a serious sin that is putting their soul in jeopardy.
So pro-lifers are trying to outlaw abortions in order to protect abortionists.
(And do you need to say fundies? It’s offensive even to non-believers like myself.)
No. It’s all of them-- the children, the mothers and the doctors. Saving the children for life, and saving the mothers and doctors from eternal damnation.
I grew up steeped in Fundamentalist Christianity. The goal is to get as many people saved as possible, and being saved means you’re forever happy and rewarded in Heaven, therefore the goal can be said to be “increase happiness by increasing the total souls in heaven.”
Considering they worship one of the most popular baby killers (flood, starvation, bears, many cities etc.), why wouldn’t they support abortion?
Oh, right, I forgot the fundie prerequisite: Do NOT read your bible. 
I beleive it was more like, “Since I murdered all of my creations except you guys, please use incest to be fruitful and multiply just like I asked Adam and Eve. But I really hated their son Abel.” 
Also, Paul insisted that women do not bear children for the rapture was expected to happen in HIS lifetime, certainly not ours.
Why do you assume incest? It was not necessary (Bold mine):
[QUOTE=Gen 6]
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
[/QUOTE]
No, the prerequisite is: Do NOT try to UNDERSTAND your bible. 
That’s best left to the Pastor, who’s so much smarter and better educated than you. He’ll explain what it all means for you. Generally by pretending you never asked the hard questions. 
I struggled with abortion for a long time before I finally saw what it really is. The pro choice people have some good arguments. However I finally realized it is just bumping somebody off because they are inconvenient to us.
…Okay, so I see the intellectually superior (I’m guessing) non-religious folk have shown up.
The same logic would say you should kill somebody right after you baptize them.
Yeah? So?