Abortion [CO]

[jayem]

It is unmistakable in the Hebrew. It doesn't matter what english translations say. The word shakol, which is used for miscarriage is never used.

That's fine. You're entitled to your opinion. I was just pointing out that there are other more authoritative and sensible opinions to the contrary.

 

[ryanb6]

In this verse the strife is with the woman so the child isn't the target yet still loss it's life. The person was to still be punished. Now in the next verse since the strife was aimed at the woman and the woman dies then the death penalty would apply. With abortion the child is the target.

That would be fine if the mother was the target. However the context clearly shows the baby is the target.

 

[Smidlee]

That would be fine if the mother was the target. However the context clearly shows the baby is the target.

It clearly states " if men strife and hurt the woman..." and nothing about abortion. Now the Bible does deal when the child is the target where a woman offer the child in the name of women rights... I meant in the name of idols. So they did "aborted" children even in the Bible days. It's was a lot easily to offer their children to idols than offer themselves and let the children live.

 

[Wyzaard]

Exodus 21:22 actually seems to imply the very opposite.

Errr... no. If the fetus dies as a result of the fight but the mother is otherwise unharmed, then it's a fine. If the fetus dies AND the mother is hurt, then it's eye-for-eye, life-for-life, etc. Fetus's possess the same non-person status as slaves and oxen, whereas the women in this case is afforded full rights for retributive justice.

Got it?

 

[Smidlee]

It doesn't say fetus it says child. Also where does is suggest a slaves is less of a person or the same as an Ox? Exodus 21:20 refers to a rod , an item of correction. Abraham seems to treat his servants very well and treat them as human beings. In fact they fought with Abraham to get back Lot.

 

[ryanb6]

You guys are assuming the child dies, but no the child comes out in the hebrew. The child doesn't die. The harm is referring to the child, not the mother.

 

[BlessEwe]

To the OP of this thread: I work with pregnant women in recovery trying to get on their feet, it is wonderful to see when they can. Have you ever personally experienced this yourself, or been in this type of situation. I do not agree with abortion, but who in the heck are you to tell a women what to do with her body ( for instance) someone raped, or molested by a parent. Are you willing to walk the talk? Get in there an help these women be ready for motherhood, and raise their baby.
Perhaps you do help in one way or another, but I have seen so often the big mouths flappin, but then turn their backs to help.

 

[ryanb6]

So basically your view is an emotional one? We are talking about the bible here.

 

[BlessEwe]

True, it is emotional. And I really don't see your point of asking this in the politics section. I am not sure what you are getting at except of How can we support someone who is for abortion So I answered it...

 

[Wyzaard]

It doesn't say fetus it says child.

"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

"a woman WITH child"... aka, pregnant. The verse speaks of what happens if someone causes a woman to miscarry: if she miscarries and that's all, you pay a fine. If SHE is hurt as well, you pay eye-for-eye.

What's unclear here?

Also where does is suggest a slaves is less of a person or the same as an Ox? Exodus 21:20 refers to a rod , an item of correction. Abraham seems to treat his servants very well and treat them as human beings. In fact they fought with Abraham to get back Lot.

Exodus's views of punishing slaves:
21:20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
[SIZE=-1]http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/torture.html [/SIZE] 21:21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
The bible's a bit wonky on the subject of slavery in general:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/interp/slavery.html

By and large, slavery in Palestine was similar to other forms of slavery in that the slave was not accounted social status; rather, they were mere extensions of the social recognition of their master.

 

[Wyzaard]

You guys are assuming the child dies, but no the child comes out in the hebrew. The child doesn't die. The harm is referring to the child, not the mother.

No.

"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

"The fruit departing" refers to the miscarriage... "mischief" that may follows refers to HER health, not the health of the dead fetus.

 

[variant]

I think if Christian’s condemn abortions then I don't think Christians should have abortions.

Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

By these statistics if Christians would stop having abortions, the number of abortions would drop drastically.

 

[ryanb6]

No.

"If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine."

"The fruit departing" refers to the miscarriage... "mischief" that may follows refers to HER health, not the health of the dead fetus.

I've already shown what this says in the Hebrew. You can't just say something refers to something. It is literally speaking of her children coming out of her(premature birth).

 

[YoungJoonKim]

I think if Christian’s condemn abortions then I don't think Christians should have abortions.



http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

By these statistics if Christians would stop having abortions, the number of abortions would drop drastically.[/font]

....I am shocked.

 

[ryanb6]

I think if Christian’s condemn abortions then I don't think Christians should have abortions.



http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html

By these statistics if Christians would stop having abortions, the number of abortions would drop drastically.[/font]

You are getting into the "What is a Christian" area which is another topic.

 

[Braunwyn]

....I am shocked.

heh, I'm not. It makes sense since the US is predominately Chrisitan.

 

[sashatheman]

I don't think life at conception is a dogmatic statement.

Many Christians put different emphasis on the topic. Some make it the most important and single issue when they vote, while others make it one of the many issues, and they weight in everything the candidate stands for, when deciding to vote.

There is a spectrum of beliefs on the topic. Some would say that abortions should not be allowed what ever happens. Sarah Palin for example shares nearly the same view, with the exception of when the mothers health is at risk.
But what about when there is rape, or incest, or the mother would not die but rather have severe health effects?

Other Christians feel that yes they personally would not get an abortion but they cannot make that a law that effects everyone, due to so many differing views on the topic.

Another way to look at this issue is to draw parallels with prohibition of alcohol. When prohibition was put in place in the 1920's temperance advocates saw the high level of domestic violence, the high rate of accidents at work and health problems, and felt that by banning alcohol completely it would solve everything. Yet the ban was reversed soon afterward as that didn't work, there was so much illegal bootlegging going on that the original problems were not solved.

Alcohol is still legal today , but due to educating the public and enforcing some laws to regulate it properly the abuse of alcohol has been reduced a lot.

I am from Australia, Sydney, and in of the the red-light districts a few years back we had a controversial heroin shooting-gallery open up to medically supervise the use of heroin by addicts. The idea behind it is that addicts will shoot up regardless, but if there is a supervised place then at least they will not overdose on the streets. At the same time the government is attempting to educate people the horrible effects of drugs.

Obama has said that he has a plan to reduce abortions, not by banning it across the country but rather by preventing people from getting unwanted pregnancies that mighty result in abortion by educating people on the issue. Looking on the two examples above, a ban on something doesn't stop people from still doing it illegally.

Anyway that's my view on the issue. But i can't vote anyway.

 

[variant]

You are getting into the "What is a Christian" area which is another topic.

Your question was: How can a "Christian" justify abortion.

And, you specifically wanted to talk about political aspects of it.

How is "What is a Christian" not part of your question?

Does a Christian having an abortion make them not a Christian?

Even if it was considered a sin, Christians don't have a doctrine that they are free of sin.

How is it not relevant to discuss who has abortions, when were talking about Christians justifying abortion?

 

[Wyzaard]

I've already shown what this says in the Hebrew.

Actually, you haven't; you've only CLAIMED that it does.

It is literally speaking of her children coming out of her(premature birth).

Nonsense... there were no preemies in ancient times; giving birth on time was still a fairly lethal activity for mother and child, much less giving birth pre-maturely... are you suggesting they had ICU facilities in Judea?

 

[ryanb6]

Originally Posted by ryanb6

I've already shown what this says in the Hebrew.
​

Actually, you haven't; you've only CLAIMED that it does.

It is literally speaking of her children coming out of her(premature birth).
​

Nonsense... there were no preemies in ancient times; giving birth on time was still a fairly lethal activity for mother and child, much less giving birth pre-maturely... are you suggesting they had ICU facilities in Judea?

You have used an english translation as your proof.