Unplanned, the movie

gym_class_hero · Apr 3, 2019

FireDragon76 said:
White fundagelicals routinely misrepresent our churches' approaches by acting like its merely about a popularity contest for us. No, it's so that the Gospel can be clearly preached. Introducing anti-abortion politics as a sine qua non of the Christian faith distorts and misrepresents that faith, all for narrow culturally conservative interests.

Believe it or not, at one time most American evangelicals did not oppose Roe vs. Wade in the US. It was seen as a Catholic thing. Protestant theology, up until about 30 years ago, did not take natural law based ethics all that seriously. We have tended to considered ethics something that involves an intersubjective relationship between the individual believer, God, and our neighbor.

I'm glad your kind of thinking wasn't around during slavery.

FireDragon76 · Apr 3, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
I'm glad your kind of thinking wasn't around during slavery.

Sorry, abortion is not akin to chattel slavery. If anything, forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will is more akin to the coercion of slavery.

I don't see a moral high ground in invoking the coercive power of the state over a woman's own body, just to fit a debatable notion of when human personhood begins.

Archaeopteryx · Apr 4, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
I'm open to hearing the Bible verses that condone abortion. Thanks in advance

Could you supply us with passages where it explicitly condemns it? The only passages that seem to allude to abortion don't comment on the ethics of abortion per se (Numbers 5:11-31) and relate more to other issues, such as marital fidelity.

FireDragon76 · Apr 4, 2019

Archaeopteryx said:
Could you supply us with passages where it explicitly condemns it? The only passages that seem to allude to abortion don't comment on the ethics of abortion per se (Numbers 5:11-31) and relate more to other issues, such as marital fidelity.

We discussed that some time ago. Some Bibles translate
Exodus 21:22-25 in a way that suggests punishing someone who causes an abortion by death , but most mainstream scholarship and Jews themselves believes that is an incorrect interpretation of the text.

Here is the typical translation favored by evangelicals:

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Here is mainstream scholarship:

22 When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine. 23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

At any rate, from a Lutheran POV, the issue is more complicated since Old Testament law is not necessarily the basis for civil law. But it's still worth clarifying. Given Jewish traditional interpretations, I simply don't understand how American evangelicals see this passage as being applicable to abortion, it's talking about causing miscarriage, and it does not equate it with murder.

gym_class_hero · Apr 4, 2019

FireDragon76 said:
Sorry, abortion is not akin to chattel slavery. If anything, forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will is more akin to the coercion of slavery.

I don't see a moral high ground in invoking the coercive power of the state over a woman's own body, just to fit a debatable notion of when human personhood begins.

Archaeopteryx said:
Could you supply us with passages where it explicitly condemns it? The only passages that seem to allude to abortion don't comment on the ethics of abortion per se (Numbers 5:11-31) and relate more to other issues, such as marital fidelity.

the Bible doesn't explicitly condemn child inappropriate content, so I guess that must be ok?
you could start at Proverbs 6.17 though and go from there. If an unborn child doesn't qualify as "innocent blood", who does?

FireDragon76 · Apr 4, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
the Bible doesn't explicitly condemn child inappropriate content, so I guess that must be ok?
you could start at Proverbs 6.17 though and go from there. If an unborn child doesn't qualify as "innocent blood", who does?

I'm not arguing abortion is "OK". This has to do with the authority of the Church to bind consciences and compel civil authorities on the issue of abortion. We simply don't have that in the Bible.

Child inappropriate contentography is wrong because we as a society have realized that children should not be sexualized, to protect them from exploitation. It does not require appealing to the Bible to understand that, necessarily.

The Lutheran doctrine of the Two Kingdoms makes this issue very clear. The Church is an institution in civil society, it should not control how society functions merely according to its fancy. We need actual reasons to do things, other than "I don't like X". Those who restrain the liberty of Christians in matters that the Scriptures give us liberty, present a scandal to the preaching of the Gospel, and will be held accountable for their actions by God.

gym_class_hero · Apr 4, 2019

FireDragon76 said:
I'm not arguing abortion is "OK". This has to do with the authority of the Church to bind consciences and compel civil authorities. We simply don't have that in the Bible.

Understanding the Lutheran doctrine of the Two Kingdoms would probably be helpful. Civil society doesn't have to be explicitly "biblical" to be just. In the civil realm, we must depend on reason and experience in ordering society justly. The Ten Commandments give us some basic guidelines, but if you notice these are not exclusive to Christianity or Judaism, most of them are understood by any civilized society.

my understanding is we are to follow Christ's example. In my version of the NT, He bound peoples consciences, in a loving way, quite often.

And in reality I don't need the Bible to prove to me abortion is wrong. Most of us have an inbred sense that protecting the weak is a noble thing to do. Who is weaker or less protected than an unborn child?

FireDragon76 · Apr 4, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
my understanding is we are to follow Christ's example. In my version of the NT, He bound peoples consciences, in a loving way, quite often.

We aren't Christ. We prefer to let Christ speak for himself. The Church attempting to speak for Christ, to compel consciences in matters that are not clearly commanded would render itself an idolater and a blasphemer. It presents the grave risk of scandal, as Matthew 18:6 points out, Jesus does not look kindly on scandal.

The Church should principally speak on one issue unequivocally - the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake. That is why it is so important the Gospel is not politicized with things that are adiaphora, such as abortion politics.

And in reality I don't need the Bible to prove to me abortion is wrong. Most of us have an inbred sense that protecting the weak is a noble thing to do. Who is weaker or less protected than an unborn child?

Sure, that is a good and noble sentiment but human freedom is also important, it is a God-given gift, as precious as life itself is. If one does not believe abortions glorify God and serve our neighbor, the best course of action is to simply not have an abortion yourself.

gym_class_hero · Apr 4, 2019

FireDragon76 said:
We aren't Christ. We prefer to let Christ speak for himself. The Church attempting to speak for Christ, to compel consciences in matters that are not clearly commanded would render itself an idolater and a blasphemer. It presents the grave risk of scandal, as Matthew 18:6 points out, Jesus does not look kindly on scandal.

The Church should principally speak on one issue unequivocally - the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake. That is why it is so important the Gospel is not politicized with things that are adiaphora, such as abortion politics.

Sure, that is a good and noble sentiment but human freedom is also important, it is a God-given gift, as precious as life itself is. If one does not believe abortions glorify God and serve our neighbor, the best course of action is to simply not have an abortion yourself.

if one doesn't believe in slavery, the best course of action is not to own slaves.

Nithavela · Apr 4, 2019

I'm sure it's a wonderfull piece of prolefeed.

Archaeopteryx · Apr 4, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
the Bible doesn't explicitly condemn child inappropriate content, so I guess that must be ok?

Sounds like the Bible isn't sufficient for developing a system of ethics then?

ToddNotTodd · Apr 4, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
my understanding is we are to follow Christ's example. In my version of the NT, He bound peoples consciences, in a loving way, quite often.

And in reality I don't need the Bible to prove to me abortion is wrong. Most of us have an inbred sense that protecting the weak is a noble thing to do. Who is weaker or less protected than an unborn child?

If you don’t believe a first trimester fetus is a person, then...

Tinker Grey · Apr 4, 2019

ToddNotTodd said:
If you don’t believe a first trimester fetus is a person, then...

... clearly, you should be killed.

SkyWriting · Apr 5, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
my understanding is we are to follow Christ's example. In my version of the NT, He bound peoples consciences, in a loving way, quite often.

And in reality I don't need the Bible to prove to me abortion is wrong. Most of us have an inbred sense that protecting the weak is a noble thing to do. Who is weaker or less protected than an unborn child?

A child who is raped by her step-father? (Family Story)

SkyWriting · Apr 5, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
saw it yesterday with my wife. A very powerful film. Would encourage all "pro choice" people to go see it.

Film has the greatest propaganda potential of most any media.
Most laws are written in text rather than as movies.

SkyWriting · Apr 5, 2019

grasping the after wind said:
I have remained pro life despite my Libertarian bent because my pro life position does not require government enforcement.

That is a Pro-Choice position.

Pro-Life does require government enforcement becasue of the insistence that no abortions may be performed anywhere, for any persons.

SkyWriting · Apr 5, 2019

gym_class_hero said:
I'm glad your kind of thinking wasn't around during slavery.

Slavery exists in 4/5/2019.

Nithavela · Apr 5, 2019

SkyWriting said:
Slavery exists in 4/5/2019.

In the USA, too. And some of it is even legal.

SkyWriting · Apr 5, 2019

Nithavela said:
In the USA, too. And some of it is even legal.

I'm not familiar with the legal versions.

In 2001 the United States State Department estimated that 50,000 to 100,000 women and girls are trafficked each year into the United States. In 2003, the State Department report estimated that a total of 18,000 to 20,000 individuals were trafficked into the United States for either forced labor or sexual exploitation.

Nithavela · Apr 5, 2019

SkyWriting said:
I'm not familiar with the legal versions.

They're called prisons.

Unplanned, the movie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Wanderer

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

our world is happy and mundane

Wanderer

Iconoclast

Wanderer

The Librarian

The Librarian

The Librarian

The Librarian

our world is happy and mundane

The Librarian

our world is happy and mundane

Similar threads