Why Abortion Should Be Allowed in the Early Stages

Status
Not open for further replies.

JerseyChristianSuperstar

Active Member
Feb 25, 2018
141
159
26
New Jersey
✟70,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I'm an evangelical Christian who believes that although abortion is sinful, it isn't murder, at least in the early trimesters before fetal viability, and that it should be permitted until the unborn child can survive on its own, as the mother is a living human being with her own rights and autonomy over her body.

I consider it to be murder post-viability in the third trimester, and would oppose it except for the life health of the mother.

Murder can best be defined as the unjustified killing of a living human being.

And contrary to what many people say, the Bible does not say that life begins at conception, but at ensoulment.

Genesis 2:7 - And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

Adam didn't become a living being until he was fully formed, until God created and infused a soul in him, not when he was still a collection of dust that God placed in the garden.

Obviously, this was a special case though, every human being alive now spent nine months as a fetus in their mother's womb, but the question is when was the fetus ensouled?

St. Augustine said that "
The law does not provide that the act abortion pertains to homicide,
for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation."

Thomas Aquinas said that "the intellective soul [true person] is created by God
at the completion of man's coming into being."

Jacques Martin said that to "admit that the human fetus receives the intellectual soul from the moment of its conception,when matter is in no way ready for it, sounds to me like a philosophical absurdity. It is as absurd as to call a fertilized ovum a baby."

Indeed. Just like it is absurd to call a planted acorn a tree.

You see, while Augustine felt abortion at any stage was sinful, he did not believe that early abortion —the first three months—was murder because the fetus had not been animated by a God-given soul yet. Likewise, Thomas Aquinas, and Popes Innocent III and Gregory XIV also believed that early abortion was not murder, while later ones were, after quickening, when the fetus starts moving and kicking.

As such, terminating a fetus in the early trimesters does not kill a living human being. Therefore, it is not murder. I agree with that principle.

Imagine if a woman, in a fit of jealously, rammed her car into her cheating boyfriend, grievously injuring him and irreparably damaging one of his vital organs. As a result, if he doesn't get an organ transplant he will likely die or be dead in two yearsfrom complications.

His girlfriend happens to be a perfect match; can the state force her to donate her organ to save her? No, they can't, and neither should they be able to, for she has bodily autonomy over her person, and no state can take that away from her.

The state can and should charge her with aggravated assault and, if he dies, vehicular manslaughter. But they should not be able to forcibly strap her to a medical exam room and extract a kidney from her, relegating her from womanhood to being a simple incubator.

The same logic applies with abortion, women are allowed to get abortions before viability because she has bodily autonomy, and she can't be forced to live as a human incubator.
 

brinny

everlovin' shiner of light in dark places
Supporter
Mar 23, 2004
248,783
114,476
✟1,339,553.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
I'm an evangelical Christian who believes that although abortion is sinful, it isn't murder, at least in the early trimesters before fetal viability, and that it should be permitted until the unborn child can survive on its own, as the mother is a living human being with her own rights and autonomy over her body.

I consider it to be murder post-viability in the third trimester, and would oppose it except for the life health of the mother.

Murder can best be defined as the unjustified killing of a living human being.

And contrary to what many people say, the Bible does not say that life begins at conception, but at ensoulment.

Genesis 2:7 - And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

Adam didn't become a living being until he was fully formed, until God created and infused a soul in him, not when he was still a collection of dust that God placed in the garden.

Obviously, this was a special case though, every human being alive now spent nine months as a fetus in their mother's womb, but the question is when was the fetus ensouled?

St. Augustine said that "
The law does not provide that the act abortion pertains to homicide,
for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation."

Thomas Aquinas said that "the intellective soul [true person] is created by God
at the completion of man's coming into being."

Jacques Martin said that to "admit that the human fetus receives the intellectual soul from the moment of its conception,when matter is in no way ready for it, sounds to me like a philosophical absurdity. It is as absurd as to call a fertilized ovum a baby."

Indeed. Just like it is absurd to call a planted acorn a tree.

You see, while Augustine felt abortion at any stage was sinful, he did not believe that early abortion —the first three months—was murder because the fetus had not been animated by a God-given soul yet. Likewise, Thomas Aquinas, and Popes Innocent III and Gregory XIV also believed that early abortion was not murder, while later ones were, after quickening, when the fetus starts moving and kicking.

As such, terminating a fetus in the early trimesters does not kill a living human being. Therefore, it is not murder. I agree with that principle.

Imagine if a woman, in a fit of jealously, rammed her car into her cheating boyfriend, grievously injuring him and irreparably damaging one of his vital organs. As a result, if he doesn't get an organ transplant he will likely die or be dead in two yearsfrom complications.

His girlfriend happens to be a perfect match; can the state force her to donate her organ to save her? No, they can't, and neither should they be able to, for she has bodily autonomy over her person, and no state can take that away from her.

The state can and should charge her with aggravated assault and, if he dies, vehicular manslaughter. But they should not be able to forcibly strap her to a medical exam room and extract a kidney from her, relegating her from womanhood to being a simple incubator.

The same logic applies with abortion, women are allowed to get abortions before viability because she has bodily autonomy, and she can't be forced to live as a human incubator.

God abhors the shedding of innocent blood. It is listed amongst the seven abominations that God abhors/hates.

Just as God heard Abel's blood crying out to Him, as well as the blood of the martyrs crying out to Him, He hears the cries of the blood of those who are the "least of these" without a voice of their own.

Even if we do not hear their silent cries, the living God does.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel9v9

Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Supporter
Jun 5, 2016
1,928
1,714
38
London
Visit site
✟393,838.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
It may be interesting to know that the early church believed abortion was murder. From the Didache - a very early catechesis: "thou shalt not procure abortion, nor commit infanticide"
 
Upvote 0

crossnote

Berean
Supporter
May 16, 2010
2,903
1,593
So. Cal.
✟250,151.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As man, we are not to play God and decide viability is a sign of human life, or next in line will be the handicapped, the infirmed and all those who don't conform to society's standard. Nazi Germany should have taught us that lesson.
 
Upvote 0

Kenny'sID

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 28, 2016
18,185
7,001
69
USA
✟585,304.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I'm an evangelical Christian who believes that although abortion is sinful, it isn't murder, at least in the early trimesters before fetal viability,

I'm sorry to hear that.

I wonder if any of you ever considered, we just don't mess with something this serious/precious as a soul, no matter what we think of the stages or this and that?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,649
6,108
Massachusetts
✟583,329.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
as the mother is a living human being with her own rights and autonomy over her body.
The mother has the right to make sure she does not do what can get her pregnant. But her unborn has rights. If she chooses to take action which results in conception, the child then has rights.

Also, it is God's choice if He wants to have the child. This goes beyond her so-called rights. We all need to submit to God's will, and not be autonomous and independent.

And contrary to what many people say, the Bible does not say that life begins at conception, but at ensoulment.
Love starts before conception. If a person is trying to dictate her or his own way, instead of entrusting one's body to how God guides us, this is anti-love, not only anti-life.

The Bible says the life is in the blood, and blood is flowing its fluids somehow through the conception product. Also, I would say Jesus was Jesus in Mary's womb, as soon as the Holy Spirit conceived Jesus in Mary's womb. So, if this is true, then life starts at conception; and, in any case, God loving Jesus started before conception.

So, Biblically this is not a matter of a woman in isolation, or else what she is doing is anti-family and anti-love and anti-social . . . deeper than only what she does with her unborn.

Also, there can be various hate crimes included in processing a woman to kill her own unborn with whom she could learn how to love. Ones in some number of cases are being pressured by supposed friends and family members. Their lives and social and family acceptance can be held hostage in order to coerce them to kill their own unborn one with whom they could learn how to love.

So, there is in a number of cases this hostage-holding thing, intended to make her meet the demands of people she is involved with. So, yes this is psychological terrorism > holding things and even relationships hostage in order to make her meet people's demands. And because the women do not have secure love, they go along with such things, of unloving people.

Insecure love, then, can be a major part of the problem. And we see how already, in various situations, there is such damaging of people because love in the United States is not sure. We see a fifty-percent or higher divorce rate, at least partly because people do not know the difference between love and feelings for self-seeking pleasure. And this inability to love can have ones doing reproductive activities before they get married while they have no interest in having children.

Possibly, inability to love has been passed down from unstable married parents and also from copy-cat church culture which has not deeply changed and fulfilled their parents and has not produced adults who are examples of how to love.

So, church culture can be part of the problem, too. People doing abortions are not acting in isolation, but they and their activities are to some extent the product of how marriages and church culture have not provided children with examples of how to share with God and relate in love.

So, whatever is true about when life begins, we need to deal with how love needs to begin, and not be only or mainly struggling with what is a product of problems.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
The second trimester is not an early stage. Some fetuses are considered viable before the third trimester. Also, the first two months they are embryos, not fetuses.

There is no innecent blood to be shed before the body is complete. Using those verses, abortion is OK if it happens before the embryo has a cardiovascular system.
 
Upvote 0

brinny

everlovin' shiner of light in dark places
Supporter
Mar 23, 2004
248,783
114,476
✟1,339,553.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
The second trimester is not an early stage. Some fetuses are considered viable before the third trimester. Also, the first two months they are embryos, not fetuses.

There is no innecent blood to be shed before the body is complete. Using those verses, abortion is OK if it happens before the embryo has a cardiovascular system.

God is Himself knitting this li'l one together, as it is written, and this li'l one is made in His image, just as John the Baptist was when he leaped in his mother's womb when Mary, carrying the only begotten Son of the living God, came to visit Elizabeth, John's mother who was carrying him.

It is abhorrent to shed the blood of this li'l one, no matter how very tiny they are, simply because they are the most helpless and defenseless, and have no voice of their own. WE are to speak out for and defend those with no voice of their own, as it is written in Isaiah, and throughout God's Word.

We may not hear their silent cries, but God does.
iu
 
Upvote 0

Shiloh Raven

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2016
12,509
11,495
Texas
✟228,180.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
God abhors the shedding of innocent blood. It is listed amongst the seven abominations that God abhors/hates.

Just as God heard Abel's blood crying out to Him, as well as the blood of the martyrs crying out to Him, He hears the cries of the blood of those who are the "least of these" without a voice of their own.

Even if we do not hear their silent cries, the living God does.

Amen. We're created in God's image and we're fearfully and wonderfully made by Him. And God made Himself abundantly clear about His view of the unborn: What does the Bible say about abortion?
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,560
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm an evangelical Christian who believes that although abortion is sinful, it isn't murder, at least in the early trimesters before fetal viability, and that it should be permitted until the unborn child can survive on its own, as the mother is a living human being with her own rights and autonomy over her body.

I consider it to be murder post-viability in the third trimester, and would oppose it except for the life health of the mother.

Murder can best be defined as the unjustified killing of a living human being.

And contrary to what many people say, the Bible does not say that life begins at conception, but at ensoulment.

Genesis 2:7 - And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

Adam didn't become a living being until he was fully formed, until God created and infused a soul in him, not when he was still a collection of dust that God placed in the garden.

Obviously, this was a special case though, every human being alive now spent nine months as a fetus in their mother's womb, but the question is when was the fetus ensouled?

St. Augustine said that "
The law does not provide that the act abortion pertains to homicide,
for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation."

Thomas Aquinas said that "the intellective soul [true person] is created by God
at the completion of man's coming into being."

Jacques Martin said that to "admit that the human fetus receives the intellectual soul from the moment of its conception,when matter is in no way ready for it, sounds to me like a philosophical absurdity. It is as absurd as to call a fertilized ovum a baby."

Indeed. Just like it is absurd to call a planted acorn a tree.

You see, while Augustine felt abortion at any stage was sinful, he did not believe that early abortion —the first three months—was murder because the fetus had not been animated by a God-given soul yet. Likewise, Thomas Aquinas, and Popes Innocent III and Gregory XIV also believed that early abortion was not murder, while later ones were, after quickening, when the fetus starts moving and kicking.

As such, terminating a fetus in the early trimesters does not kill a living human being. Therefore, it is not murder. I agree with that principle.

Imagine if a woman, in a fit of jealously, rammed her car into her cheating boyfriend, grievously injuring him and irreparably damaging one of his vital organs. As a result, if he doesn't get an organ transplant he will likely die or be dead in two yearsfrom complications.

His girlfriend happens to be a perfect match; can the state force her to donate her organ to save her? No, they can't, and neither should they be able to, for she has bodily autonomy over her person, and no state can take that away from her.

The state can and should charge her with aggravated assault and, if he dies, vehicular manslaughter. But they should not be able to forcibly strap her to a medical exam room and extract a kidney from her, relegating her from womanhood to being a simple incubator.

The same logic applies with abortion, women are allowed to get abortions before viability because she has bodily autonomy, and she can't be forced to live as a human incubator.
You're welcome to believe whatever you want. But consider... at conception, the DNA code is written and what that new form of life can potentially become is written. Eye color, hair, skin, everything... all written at conception. By the time a woman even learns she is pregnant... there is a heartbeat. If she doesn't figure it out within the first month, then by the time she does there is brain activity.

So you have a unique form of life, separate from the mother, that is human with a heartbeat and brain activity and killing it isn't murder? God knew Jeremiah before he was in the womb, but He doesn't know these flesh pieces we can discard? That just makes no sense to me. Sorry.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JerseyChristianSuperstar

Active Member
Feb 25, 2018
141
159
26
New Jersey
✟70,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
God abhors the shedding of innocent blood. It is listed amongst the seven abominations that God abhors/hates.

Just as God heard Abel's blood crying out to Him, as well as the blood of the martyrs crying out to Him, He hears the cries of the blood of those who are the "least of these" without a voice of their own.

Even if we do not hear their silent cries, the living God does.

Yes, of innocent living blood. If a scientist were to shed the blood of a donated corpse for medical research, it would not bother the Lord.

And fetuses in the early trimesters are not living yet, as they do not have souls.

Third-trimester abortion for reasons other than to save the mother's life are heinous and murder, and I would be opposed to that.
 
Upvote 0

brinny

everlovin' shiner of light in dark places
Supporter
Mar 23, 2004
248,783
114,476
✟1,339,553.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
Yes, of innocent living blood. If a scientist were to shed the blood of a donated corpse for medical research, it would not bother the Lord.

And fetuses in the early trimesters are not living yet, as they do not have souls.

Third-trimester abortion for reasons other than to save the mother's life are heinous and murder, and I would be opposed to that.

The li'l one is growing, and developing and therefore "living". Otherwise there would be no growth. There would be no "living" cells. This li'l one would be an "inanimate object".

My question to you is, when were you NOT human or NOT a living being?
iu
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,162
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,635.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,162
16,006
Flyoverland
✟1,223,635.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
And fetuses in the early trimesters are not living yet, as they do not have souls.

Third-trimester abortion for reasons other than to save the mother's life are heinous and murder, and I would be opposed to that.
What exact criteria do you use to distinguish between 'not living' to something where it would be 'heinous and murder' to kill the same human being?
 
  • Like
Reactions: antiquarian
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mantishand

Active Member
May 31, 2018
326
317
Murica
✟49,972.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Jeremiah 1:5Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

When I was living in sin I got a girl pregnant and she didn't tell me. She got an abortion and I had no idea. Well I had a dream before I was a christian and my deceased grandmother was in it crying and talking about an abortion. I recently realized she was talking about the abortion I caused by fornication. God will hold you accountable for your sin.
 
Upvote 0

Shimokita

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2019
599
260
PA
✟17,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I'm an evangelical Christian who believes that although abortion is sinful, it isn't murder, at least in the early trimesters before fetal viability, and that it should be permitted until the unborn child can survive on its own, as the mother is a living human being with her own rights and autonomy over her body.

I consider it to be murder post-viability in the third trimester, and would oppose it except for the life health of the mother.

Murder can best be defined as the unjustified killing of a living human being.

And contrary to what many people say, the Bible does not say that life begins at conception, but at ensoulment.

Genesis 2:7 - And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

Adam didn't become a living being until he was fully formed, until God created and infused a soul in him, not when he was still a collection of dust that God placed in the garden.

Obviously, this was a special case though, every human being alive now spent nine months as a fetus in their mother's womb, but the question is when was the fetus ensouled?

St. Augustine said that "
The law does not provide that the act abortion pertains to homicide,
for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation."

Thomas Aquinas said that "the intellective soul [true person] is created by God
at the completion of man's coming into being."

Jacques Martin said that to "admit that the human fetus receives the intellectual soul from the moment of its conception,when matter is in no way ready for it, sounds to me like a philosophical absurdity. It is as absurd as to call a fertilized ovum a baby."

Indeed. Just like it is absurd to call a planted acorn a tree.

You see, while Augustine felt abortion at any stage was sinful, he did not believe that early abortion —the first three months—was murder because the fetus had not been animated by a God-given soul yet. Likewise, Thomas Aquinas, and Popes Innocent III and Gregory XIV also believed that early abortion was not murder, while later ones were, after quickening, when the fetus starts moving and kicking.

As such, terminating a fetus in the early trimesters does not kill a living human being. Therefore, it is not murder. I agree with that principle.

Imagine if a woman, in a fit of jealously, rammed her car into her cheating boyfriend, grievously injuring him and irreparably damaging one of his vital organs. As a result, if he doesn't get an organ transplant he will likely die or be dead in two yearsfrom complications.

His girlfriend happens to be a perfect match; can the state force her to donate her organ to save her? No, they can't, and neither should they be able to, for she has bodily autonomy over her person, and no state can take that away from her.

The state can and should charge her with aggravated assault and, if he dies, vehicular manslaughter. But they should not be able to forcibly strap her to a medical exam room and extract a kidney from her, relegating her from womanhood to being a simple incubator.

The same logic applies with abortion, women are allowed to get abortions before viability because she has bodily autonomy, and she can't be forced to live as a human incubator.
It appears that ensoulment is one of your conditions for a fetus to be considered a “living human being”. It is true that we do not know when the moment of ensoulment occurs. It could happen at conception, up to any point before viability, or perhaps even after viability. Given the fact that we simply don’t know, and it is possible that we could be dealing with a living human being” at any point during one of those stages, the appropriate course of action is to presume that a human being exists and to proceed with caution.

The situation is this. Let’s say you see a closed door, and have no idea whether or not there is a person on the other side of the door. It’s not prudent for you to take out a gun and shoot through the door, not knowing whether there is a person on the other side. In fact, if you did that, you would go to jail for murder if there was a person on the other side, or reckless endangerment even if there was not. The mere fact that there is a potential for human life on the other side of the door prohibits you from shooting through it, regardless of whether or not there ends up being a person on the other side.

Your argument is essentially that it is OK to shoot through the door because we don’t know for certain that there is a person on the other side, and most people would find such an argument to be ridiculous, to be frank. With respect to abortion, you are arguing that it is okay to take action that could kill potential life, merely because it cannot be proven with certainty that the fetus meets your particular definition of life. This is not prudent, and the law generally discourages that type of recklessness with respect to action that could potentially harm human life.
 
Upvote 0

JerseyChristianSuperstar

Active Member
Feb 25, 2018
141
159
26
New Jersey
✟70,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The mother has the right to make sure she does not do what can get her pregnant. But her unborn has rights. If she chooses to take action which results in conception, the child then has rights.

Wrong. The life of the already living, breathing woman takes precedence over the potential life in her womb, at least before it is viable and can survive outside the womb.

The Bible says the life is in the blood, and blood is flowing its fluids somehow through the conception product. Also, I would say Jesus was Jesus in Mary's womb, as soon as the Holy Spirit conceived Jesus in Mary's womb. So, if this is true, then life starts at conception; and, in any case, God loving Jesus started before conception.

Wrong. Jesus was Jesus in Mary's womb because, as the eternal Son of God, Second Person of the Trinity, He is eternal, with no beginning or end. As He said to the Father in John 17:4-5, "I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

As to the rest, the reason why a woman gets an abortion on her fetus before viability is irrelevant, as she is not committing murder at that point, although is probably sinning, but it is between her and God, not us.
 
Upvote 0

Shimokita

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2019
599
260
PA
✟17,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
And fetuses in the early trimesters are not living yet, as they do not have souls.
No, you have done nothing to establish that they do not have souls, or to prove that ensoulment occurs only at the third trimester or at the moment of viability.

You have only demonstrated that we don’t know when ensoulment occurs.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

brinny

everlovin' shiner of light in dark places
Supporter
Mar 23, 2004
248,783
114,476
✟1,339,553.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
Wrong. The life of the already living, breathing woman takes precedence over the potential life in her womb, at least before it is viable and can survive outside the womb.



Wrong. Jesus was Jesus in Mary's womb because, as the eternal Son of God, Second Person of the Trinity, He is eternal, with no beginning or end. As He said to the Father in John 17:4-5, "I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

As to the rest, the reason why a woman gets an abortion on her fetus before viability is irrelevant, as she is not committing murder at that point, although is probably sinning, but it is between her and God, not us.
probably sinning

"Probably" sinning?

Why do you say that? What are you basing it on?
iu
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.