It’s perfectly acceptable for you to make this judgment call for yourself. It’s not acceptable for you to make it for someone else. The courts have not agreed with you that a fetus is a person with equal rights so your arguments concerning the our founding documents are personal opinion with no legal standing.
I’ll add a bit more.
For the laws of the land to apply to our incredibly diverse population what any one individual or group thinks or feels can only be nominally relevant.
No person can legitimately claim to* know* when a conception results in a person. No person can realistically claim to* know* how their particular deity views abortion. {Unless there’s some recent prophet who has made some clarification I haven’t been informed about}
If we value human life we can value the potential that exists at conception. We can make the effort to teach others to value that potential and do what we can to offer safe economical sensible alternatives to abortion. We can, with effort, demonstrate our value of human life by doing a better job of caring for the lives that are already in the world.
Other than that I propose we also value people’s freedom to choose for themselves according to their own beliefs and conscience and let whatever god may or may not be there make the judgment about those choices until we have evidence which is more distinct.
From a theological pov I asked a conservative friend of mine if God’s will can be frustrated? Just as scientific breakthroughs allowed us to save lives by conquering disease we also have different choices to make now than society’s had several hundred years ago. Is there any way for mere mortals to prevent a soul from coming into the world that God intended to be here?
It’s quite utilitarian and at the same time moralistic. Since you can live without kidneys and many people are dying from ill kidneys shouldn’t prisoners give something back to the community to save lives?
As I’ve said much of the Old Testament has been superseded by Jesus’ New Covenent.
Tell me where Jesus addresses the abortion issue, please.
Taking something from someone without their permission for the good of the community-isn’t that Communism?
I can’t see how you could object to this. People who crimes give back to their community, several thousand lives are saved, and everyone except criminals are happier for it.
How about:
-Because the purpose of prison is (supposed to be, anyway) rehabilitation, not punishment.
-Because not all prisoners are not evil unreformable lunatics.
-Because it’s wrong to forcibly mutilate and steal from someone’s body, no matter who the victim is.
HEY! 
Where does the New Testament say that abortion is bad?
I love how Christians use this argument to cherry-pick parts of the OT that they like and throw out the rest.
“Can’t wear clothes made of 2 different materials? SUPERSEDED!
Can’t play football? SUPERSEDED!
Can’t eat pork chops? SUPERSEDED!
We should kill homos? We’ll keep that one.
Fetus’ aren’t counted until 1 month after birth? SUPERSEDED!”
But I’ll second the request that you cite some NT verses that contradict the ones that I’ve posted. (or even OT)
It kind of makes sense when it comes to following codes and laws, and saying that something that previously was forbidden no longer is. It makes no sense at all to say that something which was NOT forbidden in the OT suddenly BECOMES forbidden, even if the NT says nothing about it.
The OT does not forbid the chewing of gum. Does that mean the chewing of gum is now forbidden because of the new covenant?
Aside from the fact that this is a stupid idea and obviously murder, it would cause more deaths by diverting health care resources from people who are already sick. So it’s not moralistic, it’s just bloodlust.
There seems to be a lack of understanding on your part on the role of kidneys. You say people can live without kidneys, then you say people are dying from ill kidneys.
Kidneys are needed to live. Dialysis can substitute for kidneys for a while, but with a lot of increased morbidity and mortality. Kidneys do the job much better than dialysis, at a much lower cost, with much less damage to the body.
But then how become a Jedi, will you?
What crime did a rape victim commit that she should be forced to give up use of her body for 9 months and risk permanent damage to her physical and mental health? Forcing a rape victim to bear a child against her will is completely different than forcing a convicted criminal to give up an organ against his will.
A better analogy would be if I when I was in hospital after my car accident the surgeons who were puting my kneecap back together decided that since another patient was admited to the hospital in renal failure they might as well take one of my kidney’s out and give it to them without bothering to wake me up to get consent. After all Alphaboi only needs one kidney to live and the other patient will die without one. No rational person would think that scenario was anything less than monstrous, yet forcing a woman to bear a child againset her will is somehow okay. :dubious:
Especially on a prison diet of “Mystery Loaf”. I mean, it’s practically undigestable anyway. You don’t need your stomach or intestines either.
Jesus, this OP is mixed up. Abortions=bad, harvesting organs from living prisoners=good?
Yikes, that’s a selective brand of morality that even this normally quasi-conservative can bear.
I am sure Jesus would not approve of forcible removal of organs from living people that were under no threat of imminent death. Well, except for the organ removal process, of course.
I don’t see the contradiction myself - they’re both about punishing people of whom the OP disapproves.
I can understand the argument against abortion. I cannot understand the argument for harvesting organs from living people just because they are prisoners. Jesus was an advocate for redemption, a quality the OP is ignoring by claiming it’s OK to do so.
What about innocent people being imprisoned (and then subjected to that treatment)?
What about a rehabilitative environment for prisoners?
The OP wants it both ways…he wants to claim New Testament covenant when it suits him and Old Testament wrath and revenge-style punishments when it suits his argument.
Personally I find the idea of harvesting organs from unwilling, living people to be absolutely horrifying, whether they are prisoners or not.
I didn’t say the positions were well-reasoned, only that they didn’t contradict each other.