What is a pro-choice Christian?

[SkyWriting]

We as society do a terrible job at helping the less fortunate. We are selfish, and think about ourselves more than we ought. And we hold onto our possessions more tightly than we ought. But that doesn't in any way have any bearing at all on the morality of abortion.

The answer is that abortion is immoral and we should discourage it at every turn. But we should then also be doing everything we can to support the widows, orphans, and poor. It's a both and that we should be striving for.

I agree the moral thing to do is to offer to adopt any and all babies.
Because you KNOW that talk or even laws will not stop abortions.
I fervently discourage any other decision you make.
Good choice!

 

[SkyWriting]

Attempting to justify abortion because the child may have a hard life if born is a categorical mistake.

Yes it is. How many lives are you willing to save by adopting new-borns?

 

[Oldmantook]

It is my job to follow God's commandments, not to look for others who arent. It doesnt make me feel good to point out sinners and call them bad and condemn them. If that makes you feel good, by all means, you have free will to do so and face the consequences of your actions, be it good or bad. I can warn you, but i will not watch you to make sure you listen and condemn you if you dont......which you seem to believe you are to do with those who dont share your view of "Pro-choice".

Let me warn you now....When you judge......you ARE judged. Im not going to follow you and point out when you judge going forward....I will leave you to your free will to choose to accept or reject, and i will not view you good or bad for choosing either one.

Look how angry the judgers seem. They sound as if they are being hurt by reading words. where is the peace, love and joy? Where is the confidence that God is in control and allows and disallows what he will. Who by worrying can add one cubit to their stature?

What about the power of your prayer? do you have power? Can you pray that Gods will be done without you having to judge along with him? Does he need my help. Am I more godly by judging good and evil? I was told that once, and believed it......then i got kicked out of Eden.

Try one day, just one to go without judging and your life will change for the better. And I wont condemn you either, if you dont believe me.

With all due respect, "feeling good" has nothing to do with this. Why do you bring your subjective emotions into it when we are dealing with propositional truth? If feelings were pertinent, then Jonah who did not want to go to Nineveh should have not conveyed God's warning to the Ninevites correct? After all, according to you we shouldn't judge others. God doesn't care about your feelings (or mine) when dealing with the subject of sin. He loves us which is why he points out what is sinful in our lives. When we respectfully point out sin in the lives of others we are helping them - not doing them a disservice. It warns them about not falling into sin. The NT is replete with warnings about falling into sin. It's clear that the epistle writers did not refrain from judging because of "emotions" did they?
"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor verbal abusers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9-10). In this passage, the Apostle Paul is judging sin and warning people to refrain form it or else they will not inherit the kingdom of God. His "feelings" about not judging are noticeably absent.

Also respectfully, a warning from you about me judging others is unnecessary since you mangle the interpretation of the text. You must properly interpret the text in order to properly apply it which you fail to do. "Do not judge, or you will be judged. For with the same judgment you pronounce, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye" (Matt 7:1-5).
This passage is not about judging others. It is about one's own hypocrisy in judging others. When one judges others without noticing the sin in his own life, one is of course a HYPOCRITE. One must first take out the beam in one's eye, THEN one can remove the speck from a brother's eye.

Contrary to your opinion and the scriptures, judging sin is not the "angry" thing to do. The scriptures maintain that it is exactly the opposite - the LOVING thing to do:
"My brothers, if anyone among you might wander from the truth, and someone should bring him back, let him know that the one having brought back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover over a multitude of sins" (James 5:19-20).
According to this scripture, if you are a Christian, judging sin and turning people away from sin is the thing you should be doing - without hypocrisy and in a respectful manner of course. When you see a child about to touch a hot burner you don't refrain from saying anything do you? In the same way, warning people not to engage in sin (in the case of choosing to abort) IS the responsible and loving thing to do.

 

[Living Soul]

So you're willing to adopt the babies under any circumstances
to save their lives? That is a great step to solving the problem!
Far fewer babies will be killed then.

That's absolutely not true. The probability of a woman carrying her baby to full term, only to give it away immediately after birth is practically zero if the other option is a quick abortion within the first trimester.

Aside from that, what makes you think that pro-lifers don't adopt or foster kids? However, I can confidently say that people who have abortions certainly aren't thinking about adopting or fostering kids.

 

[grasping the after wind]

If pro-life supporters would financially and spiritually support all pregnancies fully,
then the pro-choice argument would evaporate.

Becasue the pro-choice argument is really about finances and social support
for an endless number of children per family who are avoiding birth control.

And it's also about women having reproductive decisions for themselves.
As soon as technology allows us, we will be able to pay for every fertilized
egg to reach maturity without women involved. We can just go grab those
eggs and raise the kids ourselves.

If a woman using her right to reproductive decisions ( a right no reasonable person would deny exists.) takes the decision to engage in reproductive activity that results in her becoming pregnant why do you propose that that somehow then becomes someone else's responsibility that had no part in her decision? By what stream of logical thought can anyone possibly come to the conclusion that anyone but the woman and her sexual partner had any responsibility for caring for or funding the results of their actions? Tell me how that works because it seems like the biggest line of ridiculous nonsense to me. If i were to go to the casino and lose all my money would it be logical and morally correct for me to insist that I ought to receive enough money to satisfy me in making up for the money I lost at the casino from those that contend I would be wrong to steal it or else those that contend that stealing is wrong would actually be the guilty ones when I stole it?

 

[SteveIndy]

I've seen quite a bit of blood splattered, including brains across the living room floor.
So my Pro-Life view is rather broad-based on the on-going lives of all people
and not so focused on just the small ones.

I see that you have wrapped the cross in the American flag so I would have to take issue with your stance of being pro-life in any sense. I take it that you have sworn your allegiance to that flag in which case you are complicit in all the killing which takes place in the name of that flag whether abortion, capital punishment, or military. Every abortion instrument, bomb, and lethal injection device have your name on it. Christians should be careful to whom or what they pledge themselves.

 

[SPF]

Yes it is. How many lives are you willing to save by adopting new-borns?

On top of the 3 we already have and the children that we continue to foster? I'm not sure. But again, that has absolutely zero bearing on the morality of abortion.

As a Christian, I believe that all humans are created in the image of God and possess inherent moral worth and value. Therefore, I don't see how we can view an abortion as anything other than an immoral form of killing. Abortion kills an utterly innocent human being who possesses the equivalent inherent moral worth and value as you and I. That is something that I don't see how I could support.

 

[Traveling teacher]

Pro choice is nothing more than pro abortion....
You are for it or against it no in between......

Abortion comes from hell and was sold by the devil in the 1970s to stop botched back alley abortions.....

Now if there is a botched abortion with a live bawling baby democrats including Obama have voted to kill a live baby
Its called infanticide.......
Also aborted babies are being cut up and sold by
Planed Parenthood on the black market using government funds......
This is absolutely no different than Hitler with his experiements on the Jews in WWII

 

[RaymondG]

With all due respect, "feeling good" has nothing to do with this. Why do you bring your subjective emotions into it when we are dealing with propositional truth? If feelings were pertinent, then Jonah who did not want to go to Nineveh should have not conveyed God's warning to the Ninevites correct? After all, according to you we shouldn't judge others. God doesn't care about your feelings (or mine) when dealing with the subject of sin. He loves us which is why he points out what is sinful in our lives. When we respectfully point out sin in the lives of others we are helping them - not doing them a disservice. It warns them about not falling into sin. The NT is replete with warnings about falling into sin. It's clear that the epistle writers did not refrain from judging because of "emotions" did they?
"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor verbal abusers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9-10). In this passage, the Apostle Paul is judging sin and warning people to refrain form it or else they will not inherit the kingdom of God. His "feelings" about not judging are noticeably absent.

Also respectfully, a warning from you about me judging others is unnecessary since you mangle the interpretation of the text. You must properly interpret the text in order to properly apply it which you fail to do. "Do not judge, or you will be judged. For with the same judgment you pronounce, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye" (Matt 7:1-5).
This passage is not about judging others. It is about one's own hypocrisy in judging others. When one judges others without noticing the sin in his own life, one is of course a HYPOCRITE. One must first take out the beam in one's eye, THEN one can remove the speck from a brother's eye.

Contrary to your opinion and the scriptures, judging sin is not the "angry" thing to do. The scriptures maintain that it is exactly the opposite - the LOVING thing to do:
"My brothers, if anyone among you might wander from the truth, and someone should bring him back, let him know that the one having brought back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover over a multitude of sins" (James 5:19-20).
According to this scripture, if you are a Christian, judging sin and turning people away from sin is the thing you should be doing - without hypocrisy and in a respectful manner of course. When you see a child about to touch a hot burner you don't refrain from saying anything do you? In the same way, warning people not to engage in sin (in the case of choosing to abort) IS the responsible and loving thing to do.

Like I said, you are free to do what you want, interpret scriptures how you want and live your life how you want.....And answer to God. I told you what I believe to be true, and you disregard it.... so now what it the loving thing to do? keep bashing you and calling you a sinner? Or should i argue with you and insult your knowledge and intellect? Is that love? Tell you, you dont know anything and your bible knowledge is flawed? Write a bunch of sentences starting with "With all due respect" and ending with "I dont respect your words or beliefs?" I dont find those things to be loving at all, nor is it likely to make you believe that my words come are inspired by the God who is Love. I said what I believe, and I will habor no negative feelings when im not believed, nor will i condemn or judge.

I'd rather lead by example.....when I stop being able to show the way with my life, then i will consider forcing people into my way with my words.

 

[RaymondG]

Pro choice is nothing more than pro abortion....
You are for it or against it no in between......

Abortion comes from hell and was sold by the devil in the 1970s to stop botched back alley abortions.....

Now if there is a botched abortion with a live bawling baby democrats including Obama have voted to kill a live baby
Its called infanticide.......
Also aborted babies are being cut up and sold by
Planed Parenthood on the black market using government funds......
This is absolutely no different than Hitler with his experiements on the Jews in WWII

And what do you feel about the people who dont believe what you say is true?

 

[chevyontheriver]

Plenty of posters on this site believe that contraception is licit, even though we hold it to be intrinsically evil. By the same logic, would it not also be inconsistent for a person to claim to be both "pro-contraception" and "Christian"?

I am not sure how you would distinguish between abortion and other intrinsically evil acts.

Well, a thoughtful Christian should be able to figure out the evils of abortion easily enough and have nothing to do with it. A thoughtful Christian should also be able to figure out the evils of contraception, although I grant it will not be so easy to do. Now an unthoughtful Christian may have no problem with either, and might be saved by sheer invincible ignorance to the Way of the Lord regarding morality, but those who do ponder it with adequate intellectual resources should find that abortion is abhorent and so too for contraception.

 

[Traveling teacher]

And what do you feel about the people who dont believe what you say is true?[/QUO

And what do you feel about the people who dont believe what you say is true?

i would ask them to show me scripture!!!!

Proverbs 6:16-18
Shedding of inocent blood is a curse on the land
And an abomination to God

 

[Archivist]

Well, a thoughtful Christian should be able to figure out the evils of abortion easily enough and have nothing to do with it. A thoughtful Christian should also be able to figure out the evils of contraception, although I grant it will not be so easy to do. Now an unthoughtful Christian may have no problem with either, and might be saved by sheer invincible ignorance to the Way of the Lord regarding morality, but those who do ponder it with adequate intellectual resources should find that abortion is abhorent and so too for contraception.

Since I'm pro-choice and I don't have any issues with contraception, I guess I must not be thoughtful and apparently I lack adequate intellectual resources.

Too bad some people lack the ability to remain polite when discussing this issue.

 

[Fantine]

Once again, SPF, what you call "convenience" encompasses horrific tragedies with lifelong consequences.

You would not refer to them as "convenience" in any other situation. The lack of compassion it demonstrates is why you haven't ended abortion.

Saying that 99% of the situations why women seek abortions are inconveniences makes everyone believe you're stone hearted.

 

[Fantine]

You sound like a good person, Skywriting. What kind of support services do you think a struggling single parent family needs? Do you support policies that would help them? Higher minimum wages? Preschool? Subsidized day care? Food stamps?

 

[Vicomte13]

You would not refer to them as "convenience" in any other situation. The lack of compassion it demonstrates is why you haven't ended abortion.

Abortion has not been outlawed not because of religious arguments either way, but because of political power.

Abortion is expedient, for a great number of reasons. People are not willing to give up the option, right, wrong, or indifferent. It is a political matter.

Christians are, in theory, the majority of the American population. But as we see on this thread, Christians are very deeply divided on the matter. The bulk of American political opinion comes down on the side of leaving the option open, so unless a Supreme Court majority can be found that will strike down Roe v Wade (an unlikelihood given the behaviors of the two political parties) the issue will remain one of ideological and theological conflict among Christians, but settled in terms of law.

Given the trend of religion in general, with the number of overall believers diminishing with every Census, it is highly unlikely that abortion will ever be outlawed in America or the Western world at large.

For that to really happen, Christians would have to pull together on the political oars as a united front. Given the enmity among Christians, that is apparently not on the cards.

In the long, long run, the relentless advance of Islam in Europe (because Muslims have babies while Europeans practice contraception to the point of having entered into demographic decline) may mean the eventual outlawing of abortion there. There are already 49 Muslim-majority countries in the world, and abortion is generally outlawed in almost all of them. A Muslim Europe may follow that example.

Then again, Tunisia and Turkey are Muslim countries in the European orbit, and abortion in those places is legal...for now.

Obviously the sort of discourse seen on this board among Christians is not going to get anybody anywhere in the direction of outlawing abortion.

Christians have to figure out how to make peace with each other before there is any hope of doing anything about abortion.

 

[Anguspure]

Why is the only consideration for the potential life of the embryo or foetus and not the actual life of the woman?

Because the actual life of the woman is not at risk, and if it is then that is a different consideration. This is reflected in the law of NZ (although in reality heavily abused).

Clearly, there are many Christians who are not part of the "pro-life" movement (which I think is actually a misnomer and a misuse), such as myself. And we have our reasons, usually flowing out from different theological orientations and traditions.

Absolutely, much theology and tradition, probably a whole lot of philosophy as well. But I will maintain that they do so in disagreement with the Creator.
If a person has value enough for God to remember their name when they are a dead and decomposing corpse in the ground, then they certainly have a value when they are a developing embryo as yet unable to defend themselves. The value that God sets on each human life is expressed in His laying down His own life for each one of us. For myself I would rather agree with Him.

 

[SPF]

Saying that 99% of the situations why women seek abortions are inconveniences makes everyone believe you're stone hearted.

Fantime, once again, I'm afraid you're woefully ignorant of the reasons that women actually have abortions. While you clearly want to believe that women who have abortions have "good" reasons to do so, the stats we have on abortion - meaning the reasons that women actually give when they actually go to have abortions tell a different story. All the statistics and information we have related to reasons for abortion tell us that the overwhelming majority of abortions are not done for life saving reasons.

Once again, SPF, what you call "convenience" encompasses horrific tragedies with lifelong consequences.

Fantime, I wonder, you carry the Catholic title under your name. So are you Catholic? If so, do you agree with the Catholic position that human life begins at conception and that all human life is created in the image of God? Do you believe that an unborn child possesses the same inherent moral worth and value as you? I can only assume that based on what you said you don't. Otherwise, if you want to talk about horrific tragedies, certainly killing an innocent child is a horrific tragedy, wouldn't you say?

 

[Anguspure]

You should only respect their rights to their belief, if you want your rights to beliefs respected. If you dont care about your own rights being respected then the correct course of action would be to try to take away the rights of others. And I respect your right to do so.

I for one do not respect anybody, or their beliefs, who believes that they have the right to take the life of another in order to further their own interests.
What I have a respect for is the one who Loves and lays down His life for all irrespective of what they believe, not out of respect for rights but because of His Own Great Love.

 

[Anguspure]

So where are your tears for those dead women and their children ?

Trust me, I grieve for all who are lost.

There is difference between limiting, and banning altogether . A member of my family died, because in Ireland it was BANNED . She left behind a young family . In fact, she died slowly over months , as they refused to remove a dying baby . You don't need German nazis, when you have them in the Church .

I don't think anybody disputes this. In NZ the law in fact reflects this desire, but the level of abuse is appalling. A woman's life is considered to be at risk because she will have difficulty going to school next year and so another young life is taken as a sacrifice to the god of convenience.