I don’t think I’ve ever heard a pro-lifer argue that they don’t care about the baby being born but are more concerned for the woman, the doctor, the nurses, and the staff’s eternal soul. That would be a new one.
Given your work here, I don’t think you’re very good at guessing, or logical inferences. It shouldn’t be necessary to state this, but given you WAG’s, let me be perfectly clear: None of the Mormons I know would endorse slaughtering an elementary school.
Of course not, that would be horrific. BUT, if they truly believed their religion it really shouldn’t be horrific but lucky. If after 8 years old you are fit to be judged by your Heavenly Father, but before that day you’d have a free pass to the best heaven, logic would dictate that mass-murder of these kids was actually a very good thing to happen. Sure, you’d suffer here on Earth because of humanly feelings of sadness and anger, but that is pretty meaningless in the span of your whole existence.
I don’t want to divert us too far from the topic, but you’re missing some important understanding about Mormon doctrine, like the war in heaven and the purpose of life.
Perhaps I can offer a close alternative to nate’s argument.
First, this is strictly a rebuttal to evangelical Protestants’ take on abortion, and while acknowledging that the beliefs I’m about to ascribe to that tribe aren’t held by all members of the tribe, they’re still what the overwhelming majority of them believe.
So this is just about evangelicals. Catholic theology is very different, and I’m not familiar enough with Mormon theology to address it.
-
As nate says, eternal salvation/damnation is a (literally) infinitely bigger deal from the evangelical POV than this life. Any finite multiple is too small. This life is a blink of an eye compared to eternity. Better to acknowledge your faith even if it means death, than to deny it and live, because the former choice sends you to Heaven for eternity, and the latter choice may send you to Hell.
-
There is an ‘age of accountability,’ such that children are automatically going to heaven if they should die before reaching that age. Whether or not it’s a specific number, or whether it varies from one person to the next, isn’t something that gets spelled out usually. But the general notion is accepted by most evangelicals. Very few of them believe that if a six-month old baby dies in a car crash, it’s going to spend eternity in Hell because it never accepted Jesus Christ as its personal Savior.
-
Most people are going to Hell when they die. In all my years of intermittently hanging with my more fundie brethren and sistern, the guesstimates I encountered of what fraction of the world’s people will be saved ranged from 1/3 at the high end, to 3% at the low end.
-
But the vast majority of children brought up by evangelical families in evangelical churches will make a commitment to Christ, and be saved for all eternity.
Now, the argument, which is pretty simple: if these beliefs are to be accepted, and the women seeking abortions are who evangelicals think they are - baaaad women, and definitely not the sort who’d be caught dead in an evangelical church - then if they give birth to their babies, those babies are overwhelmingly going to Hell when they grow up. Killing them in the womb means they go to Heaven for all eternity.
The evangelical pro-life argument places this life above eternal life, which is backwards just in general from their POV, but in particular, here, it would save ‘unborn children’ for this world while changing their eternal fate from They All Go To Heaven to They Mostly Go To Hell.
And the evangelical argument that this makes sense is…?
First, I agree with **nate **that this would be a new one. In all these decades, I’ve never heard evangelical pro-lifers speak of their concern for the souls of the abortionists or the women who sought abortions.
But the counterargument is pretty simple: by evangelical logic, the women, the abortion docs and nurses and clinic staff, are likely going to Hell anyway. They’re all well above the age of accountability. And they not only fall into the general population that’s mostly going to Hell, but even if they abstained from actually doing abortions, they still think there’s nothing wrong with being an abortionist, so they must be going to Hell.
I agree this is a hijack, but I’m interested in exploring it, so I’ve started a new thread:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=844903
[/hijack]
I think you’re right, even though as another pointed out, religous folk can get whatever answer they are looking for that suits 'em. But even my atheist sources I’ve read from say the word “soul” has been translated from the Hebrew and Greek, and their meaning actually just meant breathing creature or breath.
I think your analogy should include what happened to them after they would killed off though, addressing if they went to Heaven or not since the OP does. Obviously environmentalists as a whole are not in favor of doing this. But I’m sure some extremist environmentalist zealot might sort that all out in his head, that they would be okay to do just that. Not sure if he would think they were going to Heaven though, perhaps he’d be just as content if they all went to Hell.
Suppose you tell us? Personally, I think you’re digging a rabbit hole, because this is the third time you’ve avoided the question, and try to divert it to something else. Anyway, I see where somebody else just gave you your own thread. Let’s see what some war in Heaven has to do with any of it. Bonus points if it doesn’t require a reading a tome. A simple yes or no will suffice here though. Do kids eight and under go to Heaven or not that were slaughtered?
Thanks running coach. So Hurricane, if you agree with that assessment that brings us to the second part of the question. Explain why some shooter wouldn’t be doing these kids a favor that are eight and under by guaranteeing them a sure place in Heaven, vs, if they lived to adulthood, what percentage would make it? Some would surely go to Hell, correct?
And what has also been pointed out, it seems even the shooter, if he asked for forgiveness might still find his legal loophole in Christianity too.
Hey guys. I found this obscure line in the Bible that many folks are unaware of and that might be applicable here:
Thou shalt not kill.
Kill what? God orders, allows, or commits genocide or his favorites to do this quite regularly from the get-go. While you’re here, if you subscribe to the world-wide flood that was supposedly created by God, how many women were child-bearing when this happened? What does that say about how much he really values the fetus?
razncain, You might be interested in this post.
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20669557&postcount=5506
Brilliant thinking. Say, shouldn’t liberals praise thieves since they’re redistributing income?
The major tenant of Christianity is accepting Jesus as your personal savior. It doesn’t matter if you do this at age 5 or 5 seconds before you die. If Charles Manson accepted Jesus as he drew his last breath, he’s in heaven now.
I’ve had run-ins with some anti-abortion protestors, and the disrespect they show to the workers of the clinic and the people going in there is horrific. One of them actually says “There are no doctors in there. Just abortionists.” Hey, buddy - you can have your own opinions, but you cannot have your own facts. They are doctors, like it or not.
My favorite tract is the one that says abortion can make men gay. I am not making that up.
Is that rule for individuals or society-wide? I wish we could ask follow-up questions about this.
If it’s for individuals, we’re golden. The abortion doctor is doing the killing and as The Other Waldo Pepper suggested, even he may be redeemable.
If it’s society-wide, well that seems kind of unfair to individuals within the society that have no role in establishing the society’s moral code. “Well at least I’m not committing murder, and in this free-willin’ universe I only have control over myself, so judging me on the actions of others around me seems unfair.”
But maybe God doesn’t care if it is unfair as he has, in several occasions, destroyed entire peoples for the general behavior of the group. We allow abortion now, and if that is considered murder in the eyes of God, well I guess we’re screwed regardless of how we feel about abortion on an individual level. The only ones who aren’t screwed are the aborted ones. We should all have been so lucky.
You’re talking about evangelical Christianity. For others, it’s a little more involved than just saying, “I accept Jesus as my savior”.
Yep, it’s there.
Obviously, different sectors of Christendom take different things in the Bible seriously, and do so in different ways. Which is one reason I restricted my argument to evangelicals.
For all their love of Roy Moore and others posting the Decalogue anywhere they can, their attitude towards some of the commandments is…relaxed, let’s say.
For instance, the evangelical movement would have been completely different from what it’s been if it strictly adhered to “thou shalt not bear false witness.” Their attitude towards “thou shalt not kill” is somewhat relaxed as well: they take it quite seriously with respect to fetuses, but the death penalty or wars? Go for it.
What Guin said: that’s largely an evangelical thing.
