I will assume that “support” means something like “not make illegal; permit under law.”
IANA Christian, but perhaps my observations will hold water on their own merit.
First and foremost, as has been said above, it obviously depends upon your denomination. Catholicism judges abortion a serious sin: I don’t see a lot of wiggle room GIVEN that Catholicism is (there’s probably a term for it) a “priestly” Christian denomination. It is for the priesthood and the body of Christ that is the Church to interpret God’s word; if the Bible seems to say otherwise (or not say anything), so much the worse for the Bible.
For those denominations that depend upon the received Bible to present God’s word and will, it seems fair enough to ask what the Bible actually says on the subject. I don’t think it says much at all. There is the business in the OT about the penalty for causing a woman to miscarry, which hardly makes it a crime of significance–as I recall, it’s more like the theft of livestock. I recall nothing in the OT or NT–especially nothing in the sayings of Christ–that deals with deliberately causing the termination of pregnancy. One has to assume, and it’s a bigger assumption than I think justified, that “thou shalt not commit murder” includes abortion.
Some take the line that some passages imply that the unborn child is already “ensouled,” and thus falls under the aforesaid “shalt not.” But this assumes a second point–that “preservation of the ensouled body” is the reason for the prohibition of murder. However, that is not what is said; indeed, no particular justification or rationale is given. “Having a soul” may have nothing to do with why murder is a sin. We don’t know.
If abortion were as grave a sin as, say, the Catholics believe, I would think non-Catholics would have a right to expect that God would have said so: “Thou shalt not murder any human flesh from its beginning” or “Thou shalt not impede the birth of the descendants of Adam and Eve” or even “Thou shalt not murder the life in thy womb.”
But God was silent on the subject. So we must judge not as Christians, but as persons.
Scott,
I sited this scripture in another thread. No one really responded to the difference God saw between man and fetus so here I go again.
EX 21:12 – Cause the death of a person and what is the punishment?
EX 21:14 – Kill a neighbor and what is to happen?
EX 21:15 – Kill yo mama or yo daddy (EX 21:17 or even curse them) and what?
This is God talking to Moses, the same God that gave Moses the ten commandments, the same God that I think each of you are spearing of in this thread.
EX 21:22 – Cause a fetus to die and God doesn’t demand the same punishment. It is whatever the husband thinks the fetus is worth. This scripture makes painfully obvious the God sees a distinction between a fetus and someone that has been born.
As for the Catholic Church throughout history they have been wrong, wrong, wrong about anything of social significance. Event now they don’t know what to do with pedophiles.
From EX 21:22 we see that God left the decision up to man as what to do about killing a fetus.
Thanks for the cites, which are, in fact, the verses I remembered. Isn’t it astounding that in all the various news articles and “backgrounders” on the abortion question–in all the statements by pro-choicers trying to rebut the religious pro-lifers–this very OBVIOUS refutation of the (Bible-based) anti-abortion view just doesn’t get mentioned.
i know many catholics who support abortion, use condoms and still go to mass on a sunday. papal infallibility is not an idea believed by all catholics, after all history shows that previous popes have made many serious errors of judgement.
i think those fundamentalists who murder doctors who carry out abortions and attack women seeking to terminate a pregnanct are sick, they are the ones who have truly perverted their religion.
**Right. They are completely full of shit on that whole “you shouldn’t steal or lie” line of teaching. And that blarney regarding loving your neighbor–please! When are they going to get a single thing right?
Apparently a sense of balanced reason, at least regarding the RCC.:rolleyes:
Until eighteen plus years have passed and that ‘baby’ who was given up for adoption shows up at her door with no regard to the impact it’ll have on the life she ‘got on with’.
Maybe she’s married by then to someone who doesn’t know she had a baby and gave it up for adoption because at the time she was really young and wanted to put the whole thing behind her. The damage that could come from her wanting to ‘get on with her life’ and putting a kid up for adoption could cost her pretty dearly.
I can tell you that at least one person in the world would not consider adoption for that reason. There’s too much to potentially be lost down the line when the kid wants to find its ‘biological mother.’
You are seriously advancing the “if the birth mother has any chance of having embarassment or difficulty as a result of the child continuing to exist, by all means kill him” school of thought?
I was in DC last week at the time of the march, the fanatical people I met there were simply people I didn’t want to know. Their views were extreme (In one sentence I heard someone put down homosexuals, birth control, natural family planning, democrats, the green party, and education on AIDS to children).
I hold the life of the sentient person and her decisions to higher regard than I do the existence of a fetus that’s not wanted or the potentiality for her to lose her future family should that kid come back, yes.
It isn’t worth losing my family and the life I’ve worked to build because someone else has a moral problem with abortion, and I do not want any children. I don’t ever want my genes walking around out there.
I do think it’s a decision to be made before there is a breathing, crying kid, and would support limitations on abortion based on time of gestation, but all in all it isn’t up to me to tell a person what they have to risk (their health, physical and mental, their family, their job, their alienation) to assauge my morals.
I wouldn’t even dare to presume to tell someone what decision to make when I’m not the one in those shoes, and they shouldn’t be telling me what I have to risk.
I am a Christian, and I believe that abortion is an intensely personal issue. I support the freedom of women to choose to have abortions regardless of the reasons. I have never had to make that choice; I don’t know that I could have an abortion if I was in that situation.
I believe that the decision is between a woman and her doctor. It is not the right of those who speak out against the procedure to make that decision for the woman. It is not the right of vigilante activists to murder physicians who perform abortions.
The freedom to choose abortion should never have become a political or legal issue. When there are protesters outside abortion clinics and people who are willing to slay doctors to prevent “even one abortion,” our freedoms are under attack.
The abortion issue has become one of stark divisiveness in our society which is truly needless. One cannot successfully force one’s own opinions or beliefs or morals upon anyone else.
As for being a Christian and balancing that with my pro-choice leanings, it is not my job to judge others. That burden is left to God. Christians are supposed to “Love the sinner, hate the sin” (which is a sugary-sweet way of saying that we are to continue to love and respect and tolerate others despite the faults, which we all have merely beause we are humans).
If you go back a read the OP, the point I was trying to understand was how Christians who support abortion decide whether the feuts has a soul or not. And how they came to that decision. That seems like it should be the crux of the matter for a Christian.
I am not a religious person, and I do support abortion (up to some point during pregancy) for any reason the mother chooses. But if I were a believing Christian, I would be hard pressed to say I was certain just when the soul enters the being of the baby, and could, therefore, probably NOT support it. It would clearly be murder. In that case the whole “I wouldn’t force my morals on someone else” just doesn’t fly.
Well, I’d think you’d have to look no further than the Biblical statement that the death of a fetus is worth only what the husband of the pregnant woman decides it’s worth.
I’d say that based on that, if the husband of the pregnant woman thinks no harm is done in killing the fetus, then no harm was done.
So I guess if it’s your (general) wife, it’s up to you (general) whether abortion is moral. AFAIK, nothing in the bible provides for anyone but the husband deciding damage, so if he wouldn’t want to punish the woman for having an abortion, whose business would it be?
Well, John, my “kids” (taken in as teens) have children of their own, and have made inordinately many decisions as to what they will be taught, where they will live, what they will wear, what behavior is permissible and what verboten, and so on. I see only a difference of degree between that situation and honoring a woman’s right to make moral choices about whether she will devote her body to the support of an unborn person, whether “souled” or not. In short, being male, I have never been a pregnant woman to have to make such a decision. If approached by a person contemplating whether or not to have an abortion for advice, I would tend to counsel that she has a moral responsibility, having participated in starting that child, to carry it to term and ensure that it has a good chance at life thereafter (whether by keeping it or giving it up for adoption). But I would stress that it is solely her decision, not one that anyone else may make for her (boyfriend, parents, minister, judge, legislature, or whatever). And as a result, I’m opposed to laws banning abortions. It’s not my body, nor is it the body of those pious pontificators in the state capital who seek to curry the support of the Religious Right for their reelection, whether or not they agree with the issues. It’s her body, and she alone has the right to make the choice as to whether or not to devote it to the support of the unborn child. That’s my rock-bottom principle.
Polycarp, I just don’t get this. I don’t get it when Catholic legislators (e.g., Ted Kennedy) say approximately the same thing, that they personally believe their church’s teaching that abortion is wrong, but that it is a personal decision. Um, your church, Ted, teaches that this is tantemount to murder. How can you simultaneously hold both opinions? It makes no sense to me.
Is your desire to counsel women as you state supported at all by a belief on your part that the unborn are living persons? If not, why do you care if anyone has an abortion? If so, how can you (or anyone else) possibly rationalize abortion as a “personal” decision when it involves another blameless human being? It’s not only one body. And this is not simply a person deciding passively that she will not provide support. She is actively seeking to have the blameless person dismembered. Are these distinctions really meaningless?
BTW, the fact that you are male is not relevant at all in whether or not your moral argument is sound.
Speaking for myself, I believe abortion is wrong. I also believe that if abortion is made illegal, women will seek out illegal abortions and some of them will die because of them. Why should I expect someone else to die because of my beliefs?
Some of the descriptions I’ve read of techniques used to perform illegal abortions have been just as graphic and brutal as the descriptions of abortion techniques. Should the government really mandate that we exchange one for another?
I’m single, unemployed, and I have no health insurance. If I were to get pregnant today, I literally could not afford to carry a child to term. As the pregnancy progressed and my savings run out, it would be even harder for me to get temp work to put food on my table and a roof over my head. If I were to get pregnant today, what would you have me do? If were to tell you I’m already fighting severe clinical depression because, in part, of my financial situations, would that make a difference? Fortunately, I’m very unlikely to get pregnant because I’m not having sex.
Abortion, for most people, is one of the toughest, most divisive issues we face. There are all sorts of things which Christianity deems immoral but which remain legal, or, if illegal, unprosecuted, most notably adultery and divorce. Even laws outlawing homosexual conduct are coming off the books. Abortion, people say, is murder. Is denying health care to someone in such a way that her death results not murder? It’s less personal, and no, it doesn’t happen all the time, but which is worse – one dead baby or one dead woman? Oh yes. Babies are blameless.
I’m sorry. I believe that abortion is always wrong, and in that sense I am pro-life, but I will fight to keep it legal, because to me the consequences of making it illegal are worse.
I would agree with much of what you have said CJ - I do not think that making abortion illegal is any way to tackle the problem of unwanted pregnancies. I have said it before on these boards, but I would rather work to see abortion become unthinkable than to see it be made illegal - therein lies the hope for change…
That may be all well and good in your eyes but in the case of abortion, you have the life of another human being involved. Do you really think it’s right to snuff out the life of another person at will? We can love the sinner, but there should still be protection for the unborn baby. If you saw someone trying to kill another person, wouldn’t you try to do something, call the police or raise an alarm? I don’t consider protecting unborn human beings to be judging.
As a Christian, if I got pregnant (not possible at this stage) abortion would not even cross my mind unless my life was at stake. I would want to carry the baby to term and give him or her up for adoption. I know I would feel the conviction and grieving of the Holy Spirit if were to kill that baby and the horror at what I’d done would follow me the rest of my life.
That is the crux of it, if you’ll excuse the expression. There are those in the pro-life movement who believe abortion should always be illegal, even if the life of the mother is at stake. Dan Quayle was one such person, I think – he was staunchly anti-abortion – yet, when asked how he would feel if his daughter got pregnant as a result of rape, he said he would want her to have the option of having an abortion. Admittedly I got the impression it was reluctantly.
I’m not in favour of women running around having abortions willy-nilly. In fact, if we ever see a day when no woman has an abortion, believe me, I will be cheering as loud and long as anyone on the pro-life side. Until that day comes, all I ask is that the decision remain with the woman, the father if practical (rapists, of course, are exempt) and their deities and/or consciences if they have them, not with the government.
If only they could make foolproof birth control!
His, I had ana bortion. Its not so easy to say Sure I’ll carry this baby to birth, when you already have a young child with no babysitter to watch it while you give birth, would have to quit your job because of pregnancy, no support from the “father” or anyone.
And I didn’t have any horror as you so quaintly put it, I was releived.
Yes, I’m sorry it had to happen, though I’ve not had sex since (I am smart enough to learn from my mistake).
Well, vanilla, I’m sorry about how rough it was for you and even if I believe it’s wrong, I can understand your dsperation at the time. A couple of questions do come to my mind though. Were you a Christian at the time and did you have a church family? Surely if you did have a church family, your fellow believers would have been willing to help out until the child was delivered. I know that if I ever have any problems, financial or whatever, and I exhaust all avenues I can think of I would probably turn to my church for help.