Are very early (1-2 weeks) abortions wrong?

[dms1972]

I'd like to hear peoples views on this. I know that pro life argue that life begins at conception. Is it a greater wrong or sin to have an abortion later in the pregnancy? Does ensoulment take place at conception, or later on?

 

[Danigt22]

I'd like to hear peoples views on this. I know that pro life argue that life begins at conception. Is it a greater wrong or sin to have an abortion later in the pregnancy? Does ensoulment take place at conception, or later on?

The lord Jesus Christ was a baby at one point. Im pretty sure the holy ghost impregnated the virgin Mary with the word of God at conception.

 

[Halbhh]

Does ensoulment take place at conception, or later on?

If a person represented/claimed that ensoulment takes place at conception, that would...seem to suggest (wrongly I think) that that God is aborting a lot of souls in the womb, since only about 1/2 of fertilized eggs are viable enough on their own to be able to survive naturally, and make it to term.

Would God place a soul in a non-viable fertilized egg/embryo that He can foresee isn't going to even last 4 weeks in the womb?

If we think of soul as being the result of a spirit being in a body, then it suggests that somehow the soul is associated or connected with the physical side of consciousness, the physical brain.

And scripture seems to suggest that, though it's a mystery also --

Ecclesiastes 12:7 before the dust returns to the ground from which it came and the spirit returns to God who gave it.

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

So, it seems that the spirit is put in the body, and the resulting outcome -- soul -- is somehow connected to the physical life of the body.

Seeming that soul and consciousness are somehow connected, instead of just nearby to each other unconnected.

So, if the brain becomes a home to the soul, which would seem to fit, then we can consider that in the womb, the physical brain only begins to grow around 5 weeks after conception. Not before. This is also a time by which a developing human body has already shown itself passing many tests of viability. It's made it that far, unlike so many that do not make it that far and are naturally aborted by the body, the non viable ones naturally aborted by God's design.

 

[NerdGirl]

I'd like to hear peoples views on this. I know that pro life argue that life begins at conception. Is it a greater wrong or sin to have an abortion later in the pregnancy? Does ensoulment take place at conception, or later on?

The moment of "ensoulment" is unclear to me, since God knows us from before we're even conceived.
Life begins at conception, however, and whether an abortion takes place at 1 week or 40 weeks, it's murder. Most women aren't even aware that they're pregnant until their first missed period, which means the baby could already be 4 weeks old. It's only a week later, at 5 weeks gestation, that a heart will begin to beat.
Per the CDC 2016 data, more than 90% of abortions take place in the first trimester, before 13 weeks gestation. At 13 weeks gestation, "Your baby's tiny fingers now have fingerprints, and her veins and organs are clearly visible through her skin. If you're having a girl, her ovaries contain more than 2 million eggs." (Source: BabyCenter.com)
Your 13 week old child is already an individual, with fingerprints, heartbeat, his or her own DNA and genetic makeup, reproductive organs, blood type, and brain waves. This is not a clump of cells or tissue, nor is it a part of the mother's body.
However, 1.2% of all abortions occur after 21 weeks gestation. This is when a baby begins to be viable outside the womb, with medical intervention. That's almost 7,500 viable children being murdered legally in the United States each year.

 

[NerdGirl]

If a person represented/claimed that ensoulment takes place at conception, that would...seem to suggest (wrongly I think) that that God is aborting a lot of souls in the womb, since only about 1/2 of fertilized eggs are viable enough on their own to be able to survive naturally, and make it to term.

Would God place a soul in a non-viable fertilized egg/embryo that He can foresee isn't going to even last 4 weeks in the womb?

If we think of soul as being the result of a spirit being in a body, then it suggests that somehow the soul is associated or connected with the physical side of consciousness, the physical brain.

And scripture seems to suggest that, though it's a mystery also --

Ecclesiastes 12:7 before the dust returns to the ground from which it came and the spirit returns to God who gave it.

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

So, it seems that the spirit is put in the body, and the resulting outcome -- soul -- is somehow connected to the physical life of the body.

Seeming that soul and consciousness are somehow connected, instead of just nearby to each other unconnected.

So, if the brain becomes a home to the soul, which would seem to fit, then we can consider that in the womb, the physical brain only begins to grow around 5 weeks after conception. Not before. This is also a time by which a developing human body has already shown itself passing many tests of viability. It's made it that far, unlike so many that do not make it that far and are naturally aborted by the body, the non viable ones naturally aborted by God's design.

This is a really fascinating angle! Thanks for sharing. I'm going to ruminate on this.

 

[Andrewn]

Most women aren't even aware that they're pregnant until their first missed period, which means the baby could already be 4 weeks old.

Actually, the embryo would be 2 weeks old, since ovulation takes place around day 14.

Per the CDC 2016 data, more than 90% of abortions take place in the first trimester, before 13 weeks gestation. At 13 weeks gestation, "Your baby's tiny fingers now have fingerprints, and her veins and organs are clearly visible through her skin. If you're having a girl, her ovaries contain more than 2 million eggs." (Source: BabyCenter.com) Your 13 week old child is already an individual, with fingerprints, heartbeat, his or her own DNA and genetic makeup, reproductive organs, blood type, and brain waves. This is not a clump of cells or tissue, nor is it a part of the mother's body.

I'm convinced that inducing abortion after 13 weeks is a big sin. It's also illegal in Germany, France, and probably the UK.

I can't say that abortion before 13 weeks is OK, or if it is ever OK.

 

[NerdGirl]

Actually, the embryo would be 2 weeks old, since ovulation takes place around day 14.


I'm convinced that inducing abortion after 13 weeks is a big sin. It's also illegal in Germany, France, and probably the UK.

Since many women don't have a perfect 28 day cycle, and conception can still occur several days after ovulation, and pregnancies have been known to occur outside the normal "window" (both before and after), it's somewhat irrelevant to nitpick whether it's 1, 2, 3 4 weeks, etc.

"In England, Scotland and Wales, you can legally have an abortion at up to 23 weeks and 6 days of pregnancy, in line with the Abortion Act 1967." So pretty much right up to 24 weeks gestation, which is horrific.

This is a child born at 24 weeks. It's not a "fetus". It's a baby. A child.

 

[Lost4words]

Any abortion is wrong

Human life starts at conception.

God places a soul into that life.

 

[Tolworth John]

Is it a greater wrong or sin to have an abortion later in the pregnancy?

Try rephrasing your question.

Is an abortion ever right?



Actually yes, where to continue the pregnancy puts both lives at risk as in an entopic pregnancy, but because it is an inconvenience that is always wrong.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Does ensoulment take place at conception, or later on?

Not sure what this means exactly, but I think it's a red herring. When a human life achieves "ensoulement" or "personhood" doesn't actually address the issue of whether or not it's justifiable to terminate a human life in the womb and only raises further moral questions.

For example, let's assume a zygote is not yet a "person" or "ensouled," does it follow that it's therefore justifiable to terminate it? I'm not quite sure how it would be, a priori. It's still the case that a zygote is a human life. If allowed to follow natural processes unimpeded, it would follow the natural course of human growth and development; ideally through birth, infancy, childhood, adulthood, reproduction, and death. At no time does a zygote follow another development process - it doesn't develop into a horse or a liver cell, for example. If "personhood" or "ensoulemnt" is a part of human growth and development, then it follows that if left to follow natural processes, a zygote will become "ensouled" or achieve "personhood" and so the question is not answered and only moved: is it justifiable to terminate a human life that, if left to follow the natural human development process, would achieve personhood? Is it justifiable to terminate a human life at all and if so, when and why? Even better, when is terminating any life justifiable? Even in the case where a life isn't even human, does it follow that we are justified in terminating it for any reason whatsoever?

So I think the question of personhood (maybe what you call "ensoulement") is a red herring.

 

[SPF]

I'd like to hear peoples views on this. I know that pro life argue that life begins at conception. Is it a greater wrong or sin to have an abortion later in the pregnancy? Does ensoulment take place at conception, or later on?

Scripture declares that humans are a unique creation, created in the Image of God. This is why we have inherent moral worth and value. It's nothing we have done, nothing on our part that makes us morally valuable. Our moral worth and value stem from the fact that we are created in the Image of God Himself.

Thanks to advancements in science and biology, we now actually know that a new, unique human being comes into existence at fertilization.

Putting those two together, there is no reason to think that at the moment of our existence, we are not created in the Image of God.

You literally have to discriminate against a human being based upon either their age, their location of residence, their intellectual level, or anything else to argue that they are not morally valuable from the moment of their existence. I don't see anything in Scripture to support discriminating against human beings.

The developmental period of a human is roughly 25 years, beginning at fertilization. There's no reason to think that at any point in our lives that we are not a human being, created in the Image of God. At any point during our developmental period, a healthy human looks exactly like what a human ought to look like. We are developed as we ought to be developed. Yet, we are always created in the Image of God and always possessing inherent moral worth and value.

 

[Archivist]

Not sure what this means exactly, but I think it's a red herring. When a human life achieves "ensoulement" or "personhood" doesn't actually address the issue of whether or not it's justifiable to terminate a human life in the womb and only raises further moral questions.

For example, let's assume a zygote is not yet a "person" or "ensouled," does it follow that it's therefore justifiable to terminate it? I'm not quite sure how it would be, a priori. It's still the case that a zygote is a human life. If allowed to follow natural processes unimpeded, it would follow the natural course of human growth and development; ideally through birth, infancy, childhood, adulthood, reproduction, and death. At no time does a zygote follow another development process - it doesn't develop into a horse or a liver cell, for example. If "personhood" or "ensoulemnt" is a part of human growth and development, then it follows that if left to follow natural processes, a zygote will become "ensouled" or achieve "personhood" and so the question is not answered and only moved: is it justifiable to terminate a human life that, if left to follow the natural human development process, would achieve personhood? Is it justifiable to terminate a human life at all and if so, when and why? Even better, when is terminating any life justifiable? Even in the case where a life isn't even human, does it follow that we are justified in terminating it for any reason whatsoever?

So I think the question of personhood (maybe what you call "ensoulement") is a red herring.

It was once assumed, and some Christians still believe, that ensoulment occurred at the time of quickening. That is why abortion was permitted at Common Law until quickening. Try reading Coke or Blackstone. It is most certainly not a “red herring” as you claim.