Christianity and Abortion Don't Mix

[buchalady]

Nowhere does it say that a man's life is required.

It was right there in my post.

But if it be perfectly formed, he shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." Exodus 21:22

 

[blong4133]

How can a Christian justify voting for a pro-abortion candidate? Polls show that Christians vote this way on a regular basis. After all, aren't we all held accountable for the choices we make in life?

I hope I don't offend anyone by saying what I'm about to say, but this is how I view abortion and how it pertains to politics.

I am very, very pro-life. Every life on this earth is God's life, and we as humans have no right to decide when that life ends.

But during my time at law school, I have noticed the "other side" of the argument, and although I still am pro-life, the inherent risk that we would be terminating by outlawing abortion would then be passed along to the people who decide to have abortions via other means.

If you take a look at history, and pay attention to everything that the government has placed a prohibition on (alcohol, drugs, etc.) what happened? A massive underground market was created. So instead of having the government overseeing the process that goes into producing these prohibited items, you've got people that are producing them for money, convenience etc. without the safety of the people who use them in mind.

If you ban abortions, you're still going to create an underground market for them to happen. People are going to have them done regardless of whether or not it is illegal. But instead of having the government oversee the process, you'll have people having abortions at unsanitary places that aren't faced with serious penalties if they decide to cut corners. So then, you place the mother's life at risk. Instead of saving a number of lives, you're placing the lives of a different group of people at risk. Sure, outlawing abortion will save lives of the babies, because naturally less people will be willing to have one if it is illegal. But at the same time, I don't think that anyone actually plans on having abortions. Abortions are drastic reactions by people who either cannot afford to care for a newborn child, or have some other issue that prevents them from giving birth. So people will still find some way to have abortions. And if you have this happen, then you're going to see a much greater death rate for the mothers.

Yes, it is wrong to have an abortion in the first place, but whether it is legal or illegal, lives are still going to be taken away one way or another.

There's really no way to prevent that.

Also, abortion is illegal due to a Supreme Court precedent. (Initially in Roe v. Wade, and overruled, but still legal under Planned Parenthood v. Casey). Legislatures/politicians cannot make abortion illegal as long as Casey is good law. It will take a Supreme Court case that overrules Casey, and bans abortion in order to make it illegal. The Legislature cannot decide that it's going to enact laws that are contradictory to Supreme Court Precedent. That was established in the case of Marburry v. Madison.

So, in other words, electing a pro-choice politician is irrelevant because they have absolutely no say in making abortion illegal. The Legislature must abide by rulings of the Supreme Court, otherwise, the Court would lose all of its power. The only way to really make a push for a ban on abortion is to elect a pro-life president who appoints pro life Supreme Court Justices, and event that in itself is not a guarantee, because it would take approval from Congress to appoint that Justice, and the Supreme Court would have to have a majority vote to overturn Casey and make abortion illegal.

So again, I am pro life, but I think the emphasis should be on preaching abstinence, and general responsibility so that people don't feel like they need to have an abortion, because abortion is not likely to be made illegal anytime soon.

 

[steadfastchristian]

Abortion is definitely a complicated issue. Believe me when I tell you that I have plenty of compassion for the scared teenager or the woman who is raped, or a victim of incest who chooses abortion. These people are only doing what society as a whole has allowed them to do by legalizing abortion.

It would result in the same thing if society legalized the killing of children 1 year of age or less. In this case, most people would not kill their child even if it was legal but tragically, some of those who became desperate would exercise their rights, killing their child. This is exactly what occurs with abortion today.

Even secular science has proved that an unborn baby is a living being. Knowing that, only a rationalising (distressed) mind could ever justify the abortion of an unborn baby. I will continue to pray hard especially for those who are confronting an abortion. The last thing they need is to feel hated by Christians. As others have said here, showing love is the best way to change their hearts.

That said, I have not forgotten about the innocent baby who has no rights or say in this matter. No matter which way you spin this, abortion kills the unborn child. Therefore, I am not here to condemn the mother of the child but rather help protect those without a voice.

 

[TheMightyTurtle]

It was right there in my post.

But if it be perfectly formed, he shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." Exodus 21:22

I put what you are seeing in bold. I read that another way. "But if it be perfectly formed," meaning the child is born healthy, then "he shall give life for life" etc. for harm done to the child after being born.

 

[buchalady]

I put what you are seeing in bold. I read that another way. "But if it be perfectly formed," meaning the child is born healthy, then "he shall give life for life" etc. for harm done to the child after being born.

The only reason that a life would be required, is because a life has been taken. But you are free to twist it to fit your preconceived idea.

 

[TheMightyTurtle]

The only reason that a life would be required, is because a life has been taken. But you are free to twist it to fit your preconceived idea.

So now I'm twisting it, am I? Let's look at it a bit further, shall we? Eventually, the verse comes to "tooth for tooth." I'm sure that somewhere a child has been born with a tooth, but the norm is for a child to be born toothless. Why then would a tooth for a tooth be needed in regards to harming a fetus unless the child has been born, and has grown enough to have teeth?

 

[buchalady]

So now I'm twisting it, am I? Let's look at it a bit further, shall we? Eventually, the verse comes to "tooth for tooth." I'm sure that somewhere a child has been born with a tooth, but the norm is for a child to be born toothless. Why then would a tooth for a tooth be needed in regards to harming a fetus unless the child has been born, and has grown enough to have teeth?

That was just repeating of their laws of restitution for the innocent. Read the whole chapter of Exodus 21.

"And if one smite the eye of his man-servant, or the eye of his maid-servant, or the tooth of his maid-servant , he shall send them away free for their tooth's sake." Exodus 21:26

They were to be freed.

 

[marksman315]

If you take the Bible one verse at a time, you miss the entire context and risk building a theology that supports your will over God's will. If you take it in spirit, the case has already been made here several times. We are formed by God in the womb, He knew us before we were born, we are sentient even in utero, and killing a sentient human being is murder in the eyes of the Lord.

Great post!

 

[TheMightyTurtle]

That was just repeating of their laws of restitution for the innocent. Read the whole chapter of Exodus 21.

"And if one smite the eye of his man-servant, or the eye of his maid-servant, or the tooth of his maid-servant , he shall send them away free for their tooth's sake." Exodus 21:26

They were to be freed.

I disagree. Try looking at it objectively.

 

[marksman315]

I challenge you to find me just one quote from the Bible where it is mentioned that the death of an unborn child is wrong...good luck.

Since it's not enough to know that God has explicitly mentioned unborn children, then it might be best to put this another way.

Let's imagine, if Jesus was standing in front of you, in the flesh, and asked you if killing an unborn child is wrong, would you tell Him that there is no problem with it? Would you really feel that confident and comfortable with abortion that you could tell Jesus this?

 

[TheMightyTurtle]

Since it's not enough to know that God has explicitly mentioned unborn children, then it might be best to put this another way.

Let's imagine, if Jesus was standing in front of you, in the flesh, and asked you if killing an unborn child is wrong, would you tell Him that there is no problem with it? Would you really feel that confident and comfortable with abortion that you could tell Jesus this?

Don't dodge the question, now.

 

[buchalady]

I disagree. Try looking at it objectively.

This was the challenge.

I challenge you to find me just one quote from the Bible where it is mentioned that the death of an unborn child is wrong...good luck.

Why was there a mention of harm to an unborn child in Exodus?

 

[buchalady]

Since it's not enough to know that God has explicitly mentioned unborn children, then it might be best to put this another way.

Let's imagine, if Jesus was standing in front of you, in the flesh, and asked you if killing an unborn child is wrong, would you tell Him that there is no problem with it? Would you really feel that confident and comfortable with abortion that you could tell Jesus this?

Good question.

 

[TheMightyTurtle]

This was the challenge.



Why was there a mention of harm to an unborn child in Exodus?

The challenge was to find something regarding the death of an unborn child, and not the harming of. Most theologians will agree that there is but one mention.

 

[Nurbz]

Since it's not enough to know that God has explicitly mentioned unborn children, then it might be best to put this another way.

Let's imagine, if Jesus was standing in front of you, in the flesh, and asked you if killing an unborn child is wrong, would you tell Him that there is no problem with it? Would you really feel that confident and comfortable with abortion that you could tell Jesus this?

I'm not trying to be nasty, but honestly I would tell him "I don't know", and follow up by ask him why he, who is also God, felt he needed to kill David's infant son to teach a lesson about disobeying him, and why he ordered the death of infants and unborn children through Moses and others when it came to the destruction of the Midianite and Amalek people.

I personally have no real firm opinion one way or another biblically and the question of wether abortion is wrong or acceptable cannot be answered with the bible because God's value of children is relative, not absolute.

 

[buchalady]

The challenge was to find something regarding the death of an unborn child, and not the harming of. Most theologians will agree that there is but one mention.

If the unintentional harming of an unborn child is wrong, the intentional murdering of an unborn child would be wrong. Common sense.

 

[marksman315]

Don't dodge the question, now.

I already told you before. Now it's your turn.

If the unintentional harming of an unborn child is wrong, the intentional murdering of an unborn child would be wrong. Common sense.

buchalady, makes a good point here. TheMightyTurtle, we should be capable of figuring out these things ourselves. However, if you really wish to continue in your justification of stopping the beating hearts of the unborn then that's your perogative. It's up to the Holy Spirit to work in your heart now. We have done all we can to help inform you. We have done our "due diligence" in this matter.

 

[marksman315]

I'm not trying to be nasty, but honestly I would tell him "I don't know", and follow up by ask him why he, who is also God, felt he needed to kill David's infant son to teach a lesson about disobeying him, and why he ordered the death of infants and unborn children through Moses and others when it came to the destruction of the Midianite and Amalek people.

I personally have no real firm opinion one way or another biblically and the question of wether abortion is wrong or acceptable cannot be answered with the bible because God's value of children is relative, not absolute.

That's a fair reply.

I won't put words in God's mouth, but I suspect the answer might be that He is God, His ways are higher than our ways. He also might not even answer the question. God did not answer Job when he asked "Why?" God just told basically told Job that He is God and Job is not. Just because God can do something (like create a global flood, and kill the first born of Egypt) doesn't mean we also have license to do so. He is the creator, and we are the creatures.

 

[TheMightyTurtle]

If the unintentional harming of an unborn child is wrong, the intentional murdering of an unborn child would be wrong. Common sense.

Now you're misquoting your own quoted verse.

"And if two men strive and smite a woman with child,

Striving seems fairly intentional to me.

 

[TheMightyTurtle]

I already told you before. Now it's your turn.

No you didn't. You answered my question with a question. You decided to not answer my question.