Is the Fetus a Human Being?

[ubicaritas]

Champ, your ignorant foot is so far in your mouth you should really just stop at this point.

At least I don't get my sense of decorum about grief from some Catholic manualist from the 17th century. I believe in letting humans be humans, and not having to reframe their whole religion around being anti-choice.

 

[brinny]

Of course but why does that require a funeral? It's potentially politicizing a sacred rite.

You begrudge a grieving mom and dad expressing their inexplicable pain of loss and grief?

Seriously?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I'll go way out on a limb and say what's best for a woman's body is probably not to have it dismembered in the womb and scraped into a pulp.

(half of all aborted babies are female)

And clearly, what is best for man, woman, child, baby in utero or not,
is
what God says clearly , with no ambiguity,
and
it doesn't matter what a woman opposed to Yahweh (or a man) says.

 

[ubicaritas]

Politicizing? Where do you get that? Since when is a funeral a political event???

When you insist burying embryonic or fetal tissue is somehow appropriate for everybody. Like what the religious right attempted to do in Texas.

 

[ubicaritas]

I'm done arguing. You guys can have your anti-choice religion but I'm just a regular mainline Christian that recognizes that we live in a sinful world and this side of heaven there's no such thing as moral purity.

 

[brinny]

At least I don't get my sense of decorum about grief from some Catholic manualist from the 17th century. I believe in letting humans be humans, and not having to reframe their whole religion around being anti-choice.

Read post #57.

It might be best to heed it.

 

[redleghunter]

The way i see it "children" are the substitute for the word "fetus". But if you're correct then God is saying that it if a child is killed the punishment is monetary but if an adult woman is killed the punishment is the death. I do not think this is what the passage that i quoted means.

This is what the passage says:

Exodus 21: NASB
22“If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. 23“But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, 24eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.


The woman gives birth prematurely. Yet no there is no injury there is a fine for the premature birth. However, if there is further injury to the prematurely born child (which back then was a very high probability) then life for life, eye for eye etc. This is the very first recorded fetal homicide law as explained here.

 

[SPF]

At least I don't get my sense of decorum about grief from some Catholic manualist from the 17th century. I believe in letting humans be humans, and not having to reframe their whole religion around being anti-choice.

I don't actually know what this means.

If you're a Christian as your label suggests, then you should be striving to frame your belief system around what Scripture teaches. Scripture is our authority, right?

If I wasn't a Christian, I can tell you right now I would not be opposed to abortion on moral grounds.

As a Christian, I have insight, and so do you, into reality. We know that God exists, and that there are absolute, and objective morals that are real because they stem from the immutable and perfect nature and character of God.

We should also agree that Scripturally, God has revealed to us that mankind is unique among all of His creation in that we alone are created in His Image. We alone possess the Imago Dei. There is an inherent moral worth and value to all human beings because we are created in the image of God.

That's what I believe because I believe Scripture. It really is just that simple. Therefore, with that as my foundation, how can I not look upon abortion as immoral? We know when a new human being comes into existence! We know that a new and unique individual, that spends roughly the first 25 years of its life growing, begins at fertilization!

It really is that simple. I think it would be morally wrong for me to decide I no longer wanted to be a father and to suffocate my 9 year old, or my 7 year old, or my 2 year old, or any of the other babies my wife and I may be fostering. I think it would be morally wrong for a mother in the hospital who just gave birth to a baby, to suffocate her newborn because she changed her mind and didn't want to raise the child.

And it would therefore, logically, be just as wrong for the mother of an unborn child to decide they don't want to go through the pregnancy - for any reason - because the baby, regardless of its age, location, or reason for existence, possesses the same moral worth and value as any other human being.

You have yet to give a single, not even one either logically valid, or Scripturally based reason to justify abortion.

 

[brinny]

ubicaritas said: ↑
At least I don't get my sense of decorum about grief from some Catholic manualist from the 17th century. I believe in letting humans be humans, and not having to reframe their whole religion around being anti-choice.

I don't actually know what this means.

If you're a Christian as your label suggests, then you should be striving to frame your belief system around what Scripture teaches. Scripture is our authority, right?

If I wasn't a Christian, I can tell you right now I would not be opposed to abortion on moral grounds.

As a Christian, I have insight, and so do you, into reality. We know that God exists, and that there are absolute, and objective morals that are real because they stem from the immutable and perfect nature and character of God.

We should also agree that Scripturally, God has revealed to us that mankind is unique among all of His creation in that we alone are created in His Image. We alone possess the Imago Dei. There is an inherent moral worth and value to all human beings because we are created in the image of God.

That's what I believe because I believe Scripture. It really is just that simple. Therefore, with that as my foundation, how can I not look upon abortion as immoral? We know when a new human being comes into existence! We know that a new and unique individual, that spends roughly the first 25 years of its life growing, begins at fertilization!

It really is that simple. I think it would be morally wrong for me to decide I no longer wanted to be a father and to suffocate my 9 year old, or my 7 year old, or my 2 year old, or any of the other babies my wife and I may be fostering. I think it would be morally wrong for a mother in the hospital who just gave birth to a baby, to suffocate her newborn because she changed her mind and didn't want to raise the child.

And it would therefore, logically, be just as wrong for the mother of an unborn child to decide they don't want to go through the pregnancy - for any reason - because the baby, regardless of its age, location, or reason for existence, possesses the same moral worth and value as any other human being.

You have yet to give a single, not even one either logically valid, or Scripturally based reason to justify abortion.

You have yet to give a single, not even one either logically valid, or Scripturally based reason to justify abortion.

Indeed.

 

[ubicaritas]

I don't actually know what this means.

If you're a Christian as your label suggests, then you should be striving to frame your belief system around what Scripture teaches. Scripture is our authority, right?

I'm a Lutheran, not a generic Christian. We have never believed the Bible is an exhaustive guide to ethics or conduct. That's a Reformed emphasis we do not share. Christianity is not primarily a belief system, like a comprehensive worldview, but trusting in God's promises of salvation.

Prior to the 70's Protestants did not consider abortion a political matter. It was not political until Francis Schaeffer made it political. Before then it was mostly a Catholic issue.

 

[redleghunter]

Inducing a miscarriage through a violent altercation is punished by a fine, not by death, according to your reading of it, Rebel.

That's perfectly consistent with my position that the dominant consideration should be the woman's own body, and not the fetus.

Considering the Hebrew term for "miscarriage" is not present in the verses, I have to say you are quite mistaken:

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/is-the-fetus-a-human-being.8073500/#post-72949737

 

[Phil 1:21]

When you insist burying embryonic or fetal tissue is somehow appropriate for everybody. Like what the religious right attempted to do in Texas.

He did no such thing. He simply stated that a friend of his and his wife had a memorial service for a son they lost in utero.

And you attacked them for it.

 

[BraveJoan14]

Firstly, your initial post quotes a verse which is essentially saying "if you hit a pregnant woman and she delivers pre-maturely, but the baby is okay, you won't be charged with taking a life. But, if the baby dies, you will be tried for murder (a 'life for a life')". Not sure how you got "a fetus isn't a human being" out of it.

There are, however, many verses declaring the personhood of the unborn. My favorite:

Psalm 139 "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made"

The unborn child fits every scientific criterion required to be considered alive. So, regardless of your opinion, it is scientifically a living human being and killing it is, therefore, murder. From conception, unique DNA, bodily processes, metabolism of compounds, and growth are present.

Professor Hymie Gordon from Mayo Clinic states: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

 

[redleghunter]

The ancient and medieval churchmen did not believe this, at least not unanimously . They mostly seemed to go long with Aristotle and recognize that ones humanity developed slowly during pregnancy, the rational soul being present at the time of quickening. Though some did consider any abortion as punishable by the church or state as a kind of murder or killing, but these same types had similar attitudes towards masturbation, perhaps due to a misunderstanding of human biology.

The earliest church teaching after the canonical books is the Didache.

The Lord's Teaching to the Heathen by the Twelve Apostles:

1 There are two ways, one of life and one of death; and between the two ways there is a great difference.

2 Now, this is the way of life:…

The second commandment of the Teaching: "Do not murder; do not commit adultery"; do not corrupt boys; do not fornicate; "do not steal"; do not practice magic; do not go in for sorcery; do not murder a child by abortion or kill a newborn infant. "Do not covet your neighbor's property; do not commit perjury; do not bear false witness"; do not slander; do not bear grudges. Do not be double-minded or double-tongued, for a double tongue is "a deadly snare." Your words shall not be dishonest or hollow, but substantiated by action. Do not be greedy or extortionate or hypocritical or malicious or arrogant. Do not plot against your neighbor. Do not hate anybody; but reprove some, pray for others, and still others love more than your own life.​

Perhaps Medieval scholasticism incorporated more worldly ideals, but we today are without excuse. We know the settled science of conception.

 

[redleghunter]

A zygote doesn't even resemble what we would recognize as human. Neither does an embryo. In fact during certain stages its very similar to the embryos of other species.

However, this has nothing to do with one being a human being. That is determined at conception given both parents are human beings. 23+23=46 human being begins at conception. The human being life begins it journey of development for the next 20 odd years or so.

Being human has nothing to do with what we look like, it has to do with our genetic makeup and more importantly as such created in the image and according to the likeness of God.

 

[ubicaritas]

BTW, here is a link to an article describing the ridiculous and humiliating law that Texas has on the books concerning fetal burial:

https://rewire.news/article/2017/05/23/miscarriage-taught-texas-fetal-burial-legislation/

and another news story from just a few hours ago:

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/cou...w-shames-women-abortion-providers-argue-trial

 

[Aldebaran]

When you insist burying embryonic or fetal tissue is somehow appropriate for everybody. Like what the religious right attempted to do in Texas.

I didn't insist on that. I simply mentioned that my friends had a miscarriage and they had a funeral for the baby they lost. They did it because they were grieving for their loss. They didn't do it to make a point of it to anyone else. The point is that the mother didn't see it as just dead fetal tissue that was never alive.

 

[ubicaritas]

I didn't insist on that. I simply mentioned that my friends had a miscarriage and they had a funeral for the baby they lost. They did it because they were grieving for their loss. They didn't do it to make a point of it to anyone else. The point is that the mother didn't see it as just dead fetal tissue that was never alive.

But giving a Christian burial to things that were once merely alive is not exactly a dignified use of a sacred rite. Some people make fun of how some Episcopalians, for instance, perform church funerals for dogs, and perhaps rightly so.

 

[brinny]

But giving a Christian burial to things that were once merely alive is not exactly a dignified use of a sacred rite. Some people make fun of how some Episcopalians, for instance, perform church funerals for dogs, and perhaps rightly so.

But giving a Christian burial to things that were once merely alive

"things"?

 

[BraveJoan14]

Some people make fun of how some Episcopalians, for instance, perform church funerals for dogs, and perhaps rightly so.

You're placing a miscarried human being on the same level as a deceased dog? Seriously? How dare you invalidate the feelings of these mothers who have lost a child!? That is pure evil and until you have to deliver and see the face of your dead child, keep your mouth shut as to how they should mourn.