Is abortion ever acceptable?

[SPF]

Because you won’t answer the question. You still won’t answer the question. Please, engage in discussion or leave the forum. Please answer this question:

Based upon the Luke 1 account of John the Baptist leaping for joy and being filled with the Holy Spirit while in his mother’s womb - do you think he had a soul at that point?

 

[dreadnought]

Because you won’t answer the question. You still won’t answer the question. Please, engage in discussion or leave the forum. Please answer this question:

Based upon the Luke 1 account of John the Baptist leaping for joy and being filled with the Holy Spirit while in his mother’s womb - do you think he had a soul at that point?

You give no consideration whatsoever to the raped woman.

 

[SPF]

Ok, I’m going to assume that it’s readily obvious to you as it is to everyone reading that at the very least John the Baptist, while still in his mother’s womb had a soul.

So if we see from Scripture that while still I’m the womb we have a soul, wouldn’t it be nothing short of wreckless on our part to endorse abortion when the life of the mother is not in danger?

Because again, the morality of abortion stands or falls with how we understand the nature of the life in the womb.

The “how” in which a new human is formed has no bearing upon their moral worth and value.

So for me, I don’t see how I could support the 98% of abortions which are committed for non-life threatening reasons.

There are many emotional reasons why women want abortions, some very understandable, some not. But when we take a step back and recognize that having an abortion is literally killing another human being that is equally created in the image of God, I don’t see how any Christian can support that.

We serve a God who can heal, restore, and redeem any situation. I do not believe that the answer He would want for any woman would be to kill one of His children.

While I am the father of my children, I still see them as God’s children and that it’s my responsibility to raise them in a way that honors and glorifies God.

 

[Tutorman]

Abortion terminates a pregnancy. If the baby has died but is still in utero - the mother is still technically pregnant.

We will have to disagree, I do not see it that way.

 

[Tutorman]

The point isn't to kill the unborn child. The point is to spare a woman the pregnancy if it's the result of rape. Would you grant her an abortion if her life was in danger because of her pregnancy?

So because this happened to a women you want her to be a murderer. Two wrongs do not make a right, all abortions are murder

 

[kiwimac]

Please can you provide the Biblical reference that states that a person becomes a person once they have a functioning brain. (And if only those with functioning brains are 'people', would you support the killing of adults whose brains cease to function? Presumably, they lose their soul at this point, according to your beliefs?)

Seriously? And how many others have been brought into the world in the way that Adam has?

Scripture reference for this please?

This is referring to Adam who was created as an adult (man), directly by God. I don't see how you can compare this to the conception, development and birth of a foetus.

I'm not really interested in Jewish or any other kind of theology without Scripture to back it up. 'Theology' has come up with all sorts of ideas, including totally contradictory ones. So, please back up your claim with the Scripture references this theology comes from.

It is not my job to do your research. Your insistence in reading into the scriptures what you think is there is obvious.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The above does help me understand your approach to the subject. It’s based on a materialistic worldview.

God's material world.

Now taking your argument that if the brain is removed (which is a materialistic presupposition), I could too argue the brain does not function without getting oxygen which requires a circulatory system. I could just as strongly argue if one critical organ or system is missing then the brain does not work, thus negating a position based on neural activity.

I don't think you are following the discussion. One can substitute another heart, even an artificial one. One can transplant an artery or a vein. The person remains during all such operations. Take away the brain and the person is no longer there.

Secondly, using your materialistic presupposition, I could argue that at all stages of life a human being is exactly the way it should look and function.

And why that advances your argument you haven't yet shared.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

It was you who offered the absurdity of a human toe as an equivalent to a human fetus.

That's not what I did at all. Are you now going to deny that my toe is human? Because if you accept that my toe is human, and not a person, then you are forced to admit something can be human and not a person. That forces you to consider when defining what makes something a person that you can't get away with merely saying it is human. Are you up to that challenge?

 

[redleghunter]

We don't that the unborn child has a soul. We do know the woman was raped.

Is the child made in the image and likeness of God or not? When do you think you personally became so?

 

[redleghunter]

God's material world.

Indeed but He is Creator of all that is seen and unseen.

However, what part of a soul/spirit is material? Or is your materialistic view humans do not possess from God an immaterial soul/spirit or inner man as Paul calls it?

I don't think you are following the discussion. One can substitute another heart, even an artificial one. One can transplant an artery or a vein. The person remains during all such operations. Take away the brain and the person is no longer there.

All the systems rely on the others. Even with transplants. Again this is a materialistic view of how one has an immaterial soul\spirit. Unless you deny such an existence of an immaterial soul.

And why that advances your argument you haven't yet shared.

I have several times. We are made in the image and likeness of God as human beings regardless of stage of development. God is Spirit and there is never a time when we are not made in His image and likeness. “Do the math.”

 

[redleghunter]

That's not what I did at all. Are you now going to deny that my toe is human? Because if you accept that my toe is human, and not a person, then you are forced to admit something can be human and not a person.

Complete sophistry. Your toe belongs to you and has the same DNA as you. If you cut it off and send it to the lab it will have the exact same 46 chromosomes as the rest of your body. When you cut it off you did not make a new distinct human life as what happens at conception.

That forces you to consider when defining what makes something a person that you can't get away with merely saying it is human. Are you up to that challenge?

You are challenging with complete sophistry as mentioned above. Your entire premise is false to begin with.

 

[AnnaDeborah]

According the the bible an unborn foetus is of little value. Life, according to the Bible at least, begins at first breath.

It is not my job to do your research. Your insistence in reading into the scriptures what you think is there is obvious.

I am not asking you to 'do research' for me. You have claimed that life does not begin until the first breath according to the Bible, yet your only example is that of Adam, whose creation by God as a fully formed adult was unique. You also claim that an unborn foetus has little value according to the Bible. I am just asking for the Scripture references that support your claims.

I'm not trying to 'read' anything into the Bible. And I am certainly not looking for a way to prove an unborn child's humanity regardless of what the Bible says. Quite the opposite. It is my understanding of the Bible that leads me to believe that a baby is human at the point of conception and therefore, that aborting a child is taking a human life. Yet on the other hand, I can imagine the shock, horror and distress experienced by a woman who discovers that she is pregnant by her rapist. I would love to be able to say that terminating such a pregnancy would not be destroying a life. But I can't, based on what I read in the Bible.

 

[Archivist]

Choice determines our moral worth?

No, I never said that.

 

[Archivist]

What is your Christian justification to kill a human life for a life that was not taken?

A potential human life, not a human life.

 

[Archivist]

Probably because most of the people engaged in this discussion are men. Here's a female's voice in the discussion though:

"I'm not saying this is an easy decision to make. IF I'm honest, I don't know if I would have the courage not to have an abortion in those circumstances. But what I do know is that if I did have an abortion, it would be wrong, and I would be guilty of destroying an innocent life in an effort to make my own life less difficult." -AnnaDeborah

Yes, I can read. I saw that. That is why I said most.

I think though for all of us, our position on abortion ultimately does come down to how we view the life of the child inside the womb. If a person doesn't consider the unborn child a human being that possesses the same inherent moral worth and value as a human being outside the womb - then they're likely to be OK with abortion.

However, for those people that do believe that human beings are morally valuable from conception, there is no logically consistent view to hold other than that the 98% of abortions which are done for convenience reasons are immoral.

But we aren’t talking about abortions for convinence, we are talking about rape victims.

I view a fetus as a potential human life, not a human life. To me life begins at birth. That doesn’t mean that the fetus has no moral worth, But the rights of the rape victim trump those of the fetus. She has the right to not be forced into a pregnancy that was caused by an illegal act that was entirely against her will. To force a rape victim to do that would be indentured servitude. If she wants to carry the fetus to term then more power to her, but she should not be expected to do so.

 

[Jon Osterman]

Please can you provide the Biblical reference that states that a person becomes a person once they have a functioning brain.

Genesis 1:27
27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

A foetus without a functioning brain is not in His own image.

 

[SPF]

I view a fetus as a potential human life, not a human life. To me life begins at birth. .

Now that's interesting. For me, honestly the only reason that I think abortion is immoral is because I believe that humans beings are unique among God's creation and possess inherent moral worth and value. This inherent moral worth and value extends to all human beings, regardless of race, age, and gender - all of us are created in the image of God.

And as you obviously know, I place the beginning of a human being's life at fertilization. Therefore, in order to be consistent, I necessarily must hold the view that all abortions committed for non-life threatening reasons are immoral. I don't see another option for me.

For you, you are suggesting that a human being's life does not begin until birth. Can you explain a little more about what that means? Specifically, I'm asking if first off if you even agree with me that human beings possess inherent moral worth and value. If the answer to that is yes, can you explain when it happens that we gain this inherent moral worth and value? Is it at birth? Is it after fertilization but sometime before birth?

 

[AnnaDeborah]

To me life begins at birth.

If life begins at birth, then presumably, abortion at any point up until birth is acceptable? Which then brings in the interesting point that babies can survive outside the womb months before their due date. I have a relative who was born 2.5 months early and survived. Presumably, at his point of birth, you would regard him as human. Yet if he had stayed in the womb another 2 weeks and then died, he would not have been human. Your humanity therefore becomes based on your place of residence.

Genesis 1:27
27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

A foetus without a functioning brain is not in His own image.

This is still talking about the creation of the original couple who were directly formed by God as fully functioning adults.

 

[redleghunter]

No, I never said that.

Ok that is where the “carrying a child to term is slavery for a woman who chooses not to abort” leads to my comment.

If the human being developing in her womb has equal moral worth to her as made in the image and likeness of God, then there is no moral justification to end that life even for a serious moral evil imposed on her. The Christian response in this case is evil should not beget evil. Aborting in this case would be a moral evil considering both mother and child are equally morally valued in the eyes of God as His creation “Imago Dei.”

What your view suggests is the rape victim gets to decide the moral value of the child developing in her womb. That the human being growing there is in her womb and whatever she chooses becomes the correct moral decision. Therefore you are employing situational morals.

To expose this further this means we as humans who are developed to the point of self sufficiency get to decide what we think defines, subjectively, which lives have moral value. It becomes an arbitrary subjective “sliding ruler” to justify our actions.

Needless to say history is quite full of examples of the subhuman treatment of various groups of unwanted and undesirable people who were viewed as inconvenient.

 

[redleghunter]

A potential human life, not a human life.

What is a potential human life scientifically and theologically?