What do you think the OP was? And as such why do you belay the responses to such absurdity as put forth in the OP?
A nice non-sequitur. But in which paints you in a corner. For someone to argue we should wait and see if someone comes off life support means one should do no harm with life in the womb.
No. Over 97% of all abortions procured in the US are on demand when both the woman and child are healthy.
Again consider the OP which is extreme.
Which just exacerbates the false equivalencies and false dichotomies.
Healthy mother and healthy child are the vast majorities of abortions. What do you call a premeditated termination of a human life against their will? Exodus 20:13 covers this.
Another false equivalency as you are trying to introduce abortion as a means of self defense.
It begs the question to you to determine when life begins as observable science puts human life beginning distinct from the human parents at conception. Which is abundantly evidenced:
Here
Here
And the Holy Scriptures provide evidence that YHWH is involved with our human development in the womb as evidenced here:
Psalm 139:13-16 - For you created my inmost being; you knit me to...
Jeremiah 1:5 - “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, be...
Psalm 127:3-5 - Children are a heritage from the LORD, offsprin...
Genesis 1:27 - So God created mankind in his own image, in the...
Psalm 8:5-7 - You have made them a little lower than the ange...
Job 31:15 - Did not he who made me in the womb make them? D...
Psalm 22:10 - From birth I was cast on you; from my mother’s ...
Isaiah 49:15 - “Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and...
Isaiah 49:15 - “Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and...
The science confirms the Scripture in this case quite nicely. See above links.
Another non-sequitur. First how would I know and second why would One not think in pastoral terms?
It’s completely about morality. The abortion debate comes down to whether or not one sees the human being in the womb is of equal moral worth to humans of every developmental stage. As created in the Image of God, Imago Dei, all human beings have moral worth. Their stage of development and location has no bearing on their moral worth.
Those who consider human life in the womb as sub human usually create subjective standards based on a false premise to justify abortion on demand.
Again what do you call the premeditated termination of human life against their will?
Again in this situation there are two equally moral lives involved where the health of one is dependent on the other.
This is not the issue of abortion the OP is discussing as some type of mercy killing to avoid abuse and suffering. Nor is this the situation where a healthy mother and healthy human fetus are the vast majority of abortions on demand.
Getting rid of medical necessity to save a life has never been the debate. Even before Roe the life of the woman was protected by law. So another false dichotomy you present.
Yet in the case of cancer and advised by an oncologist that treatments should begin immediately, the very seriousness of the condition would certainly endanger both the mother and the child in the womb. If she does not take the treatments the child will most likely die with her. If she takes them then the child may die or survive with her.
A pastor friend had a daughter who decided to delay treatments to have her child. The decision she made post Roe was the same available pre Roe.
And which does not address the above 97% of all abortions procured where the mother and child are healthy.