How can any Christian vote for pro-abortion politicians?

[Akita Suggagaki]

Wow, such hate.

No hate. how do you read that? I think it ironic that the poster brought in the devil, known as the Father of Lies, in this defense of Trump who we all know has no respect for truth.

 

[Bobber]

Except I would hope that we all agree, or at least the vast majority of us would agree, that driving 60 in a residential zone is dangerous. We don’t all agree that life begins at conception.

And can you assert that as an absolute fact? And I see you're Lutheran. What if God at the end of life's journey says you were wrong?

 

[Archivist]

And can you assert that as an absolute fact? And I see you're Lutheran. What if God at the end of life's journey says you were wrong?

Yes, I can assert as absolute fact that that the majority of people would agree that driving 60 is a residential neighborhood would be dangerous. I think God would agree with that.

I think that God will say that each of us was wrong about many things. And He will forgive us.

 

[RCrihfield]

Why is it unrelated? They are both about taking lives aren't they?

I am glad you concede that abortion is taking a life. Who is speaking for those lives?

Wars are not morally equivalent to abortion. Nor are they morally equivalent to murder. A bit of honesty would go a long way in this discussion.

Abortion up to and including delivery day is now under discussion. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that is evil.

Abortion is more frequent now than in the 70's not the other way around. You are deluding yourself if you think pro-choice politicians intend to limit this barbaric practice.

This isn't a Christian morality. It is human morality. It is a question of human decency.

 

[Arcangl86]

I am glad you concede that abortion is taking a life. Who is speaking for those lives?

Actually I'm not convinced that abortion is taking a life. But I know enough people do that I want to work to reduce them. And imo, a ban isn't the way to do so.

Wars are not morally equivalent to abortion. Nor are they morally equivalent to murder. A bit of honesty would go a long way in this discussion.

I never said they were morally equivalent. They are different, as is abortion. But we've recognized that wars can be justified some times, but abortion is never justified? That's the thing I have an issue with.

Abortion up to and including delivery day is now under discussion. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that is evil.

Just because something is being discussed doesn't mean it's likely to happen. I'm also not convinced these conversations are anything more then a handful of fringe cases.

Abortion is more frequent now than in the 70's not the other way around. You are deluding yourself if you think pro-choice politicians intend to limit this barbaric practice.

This is objectively false. In 1979 there were 347.3 abortions per 1k live births, and 25 per 1k women from 15-44. The corresponding numbers from 2016 were 186 per 1k live births and 11.6 per 1k women. I'm not aware of numbers more recent then that, but I seriously doubt it doubled in 4 years. Data & Statistics - Reproductive Health | CDC

And I never said that they intend to "limit" abortion, which I take as you meaning more restrictions. They do however intend to implement policies that would lower the amount of abortions by reducing the demand for them. Bans don't stop anything, they just increase the price and risk of obtaining the banned product or service, and if the demand is high enough the numbers actually don't change. It's why Prohibition was such a disaster and why the War on Drugs is getting nowhere.

 

[Archivist]

I am glad you concede that abortion is taking a life. Who is speaking for those lives?

Wars are not morally equivalent to abortion. Nor are they morally equivalent to murder. A bit of honesty would go a long way in this discussion.

Abortion up to and including delivery day is now under discussion. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that is evil.

Abortion is more frequent now than in the 70's not the other way around. You are deluding yourself if you think pro-choice politicians intend to limit this barbaric practice.

This isn't a Christian morality. It is human morality. It is a question of human decency.

Wars are not morally equivalent to abortion? I think my former Amish neighbors would disagree. Remember, if you attack an Amish person, he or she won't raise a finger in self-defense.

 

[Albion]

Oh, I don't know, maybe it has. Abortion is the be-all and end-all of Christian politics in the US as far as I can see (and the OP bears this out).

Well, it isn't.

But I can see that you will believe what you want to believe, so there's probably nothing we can discuss. No offense, but I still don't know how you come by your conclusion and you don't see willing to explain that.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Well, it isn't.

But I can see that you will believe what you want to believe, so there's probably nothing we can discuss. No offense, but I still don't know how you come by your conclusion and you don't see willing to explain that.

Sorry I thought I had.

It is quite possible I am getting a biased viewpoint, particularly as I am an outsider looking in, but I have never been happy with Christians endorsing any candidate as though God has chosen them and that seems to be quite common in US politics, but it was worse during the 2016 election where big names seemed to support Trump to the embarrassment of Christians worldwide. Fair enough it was against Clinton, but one can easily put all the candidates up against Jesus and see that they all fall short. Therefore voting for one on the basis that they are more Godly is pointless.

As for abortion being the issue, I think the OP makes it clear - unless it is satire.

 

[Albion]

Sorry I thought I had...
As for abortion being the issue, I think the OP makes it clear - unless it is satire.

Very well. You've referred me back to the OP several times now, so I took a closer look.

First, the OP is purely the opinion of that writer. I don't find in it anything that verifies that this is the way American Christians (or even American Evangelical Christians) approach the matter. Yet that is what you've argued ("be-all and end-all of Christian politics in the US as far as I can see'') .

Second, the OP does not ever refer to God being on someone's side. It does say that God is against murder, which I think we can all agree is true.

 

[Albion]

No hate. how do you read that? I think it ironic that the poster brought in the devil, known as the Father of Lies, in this defense of Trump who we all know has no respect for truth.

That's an unwarranted interpretation of what was posted. What was meant was that Satan is the Father of Lies and the member perceived that lying was being done.

 

[chad kincham]

It would have been better if you had given an actual link to the article, which is here for the record.

But anyway, that's your backup. Now let's compare what your source says to what you claimed:

Well, first, the part you did quote doesn't back you up, as it says nothing about Biden, Hillary, or "all Democratic leaders." But rather oddly, you don't quote the entire final paragraph. Here it is in full with the sentence you removed bolded:

"In a recent survey of all the Democratic candidates, The Washington Post asked whether there should be restrictions on abortion at any point during a healthy pregnancy. Six of the candidates, including Buttigieg, Warren and Sanders, said they support no restrictions. Biden and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) responded that abortion should be unrestricted until the point of fetal viability, usually considered to be between 24 and 28 weeks of pregnancy."

Is there any particular reason why, when offering a quote from this article, you omitted the last sentence of that paragraph, which directly contradicts your claim?

Maybe Biden changed his mind and became more extreme later, but it's hard for me to take the claim seriously when apparently the best source you can find for backup actually contradicts the claim.

I don't like Biden myself, mind you... but again, it's important to judge him by what he's actually said, and (so far) evidence has not been presented that he--or Hillary, or "all Democratic leaders"--favors no abortion regulation at all, and in fact the evidence presented has stated the opposite for Biden.

Thanks for your response.

In the 2016 debates with Trump, Hilary said she supported late term abortions.

As for Biden no matter what he says now to get elected, the DNC platform calls for unrestricted abortion - thus their official position is for late term abortions.

 

[Archivist]

Thanks for your response.

In the 2016 debates with Trump, Hilary said she supported late term abortions.

As for Biden no matter what he says now to get elected, the DNC platform calls for unrestricted abortion - thus their official position is for late term abortions.

What would make sense would be for us to go back to Roe, which permitted abortions during the first trimester, but allowed states to ban them during the third trimester so long as they allowed exceptions to protect the life and health of the pregnant woman.

 

[chad kincham]

your line in the sand is abortion, perhaps others are honesty and integrity. no politician is perfect but Trump seems to be lacking grossly in Christian morals and is using a Christian platform transactionally not sincerely. when we participate in this we too are turning the gospel into a transaction. Simon the Sorcerer tried to buy the gospel as a parlour trick and this is what Peter told him in Acts 8:20-23 "May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin." IMHO this rebuke perfectly fits Trump. I'm not telling you how to vote but keep away from this transaction sentiment as far as possible.

And you’re judging him on past behavior from 20 years ago when Trump had “famous billionaire and TV personality syndrome”, and did some things that he stopped doing.

He’s not acting in any kind of immoral way today as president.

Trump is the most pro life, pro law enforcement, pro constitution and 2nd amendment, pro Israel, and pro Christian president we’ve ever had.

And if you buy into partisan political lies that claim Trump is a bigoted racist in any way, you have been deceived.

Claiming political opponents are racist is the standard Democrat tactic today.

They even use it on each other, like when Pelosi criticized some actions by AOC, she used the race card on Pelosi, accusing her of bias towards “people of color”.

And when a fellow Democrat who was male, ran for speaker of the house, he was accused of misogyny for daring to challenge a woman.

 

[Brightmoon]

How?

. Because toddlers are separate from their parents . They’re people in their own right. Fetuses are not

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Very well. You've referred me back to the OP several times now, so I took a closer look.

First, the OP is purely the opinion of that writer. I don't find in it anything that verifies that this is the way American Christians (or even American Evangelical Christians) approach the matter. Yet that is what you've argued ("be-all and end-all of Christian politics in the US as far as I can see'') .

Do you think the OP is NOT representative of political lobbying by Christian groups? Certainly it how I have seen it, both from news and Christians that I know in the US (even the ones who do not support Trump).

And yes, it does seem to be the be-all and end-all of Christian politics. It may not be, but whenever I have heard Christians in the US talk about voting in the past 20 or so years, abortion is always the issue used to define whether one is for God or not.

I'm open to the idea that there is a Christian political lobby that does not base itself on this issue alone... but I've never come across it, either because it is not newsworthy enough or because they aren't speaking up enough.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Second, the OP does not ever refer to God being on someone's side. It does say that God is against murder, which I think we can all agree is true.

Unfortunately using the terms abortion and murder together ARE the very reason why this is such a contentious issue. I'm anti abortion, but it is not a black and white issue (neither is murder for that matter, when do we switch from killing to murder?).

 

[chad kincham]

What would make sense would be for us to go back to Roe, which permitted abortions during the first trimester, but allowed states to ban them during the third trimester so long as they allowed exceptions to protect the life and health of the pregnant woman.

What would make sense is to go back to morality, to medical science, and to the constitution.

The original Hippocratic oath given to doctors forbade doing abortions.

Even pagan Greeks knew abortion is wrong.

And every medical manual of human embryology states that human life begins at conception- abortion kills a human life.

And there is no right to privacy in the constitution, let alone the right to destroy a baby human in the womb.

In fact, the inalienable RIGHT TO LIFE given us by our creator, includes the unborn, according to James Wilson, a signer of the constitution.

He attended the constitutional conventions, and said that the founding fathers considered unborn humans to be included with already born humans, as having the god-given right to life

Thus abortion on demand is the immoral and unconstitutional killing of an unborn human being, and denies them their right to life.

 

[chad kincham]

Unfortunately using the terms abortion and murder together ARE the very reason why this is such a contentious issue. I'm anti abortion, but it is not a black and white issue (neither is murder for that matter, when do we switch from killing to murder?).

Murder would be the premeditated taking of an innocent human life, by paying money to a medical hit-man, to take a scalpel and slice up the torso, arms, and legs of the unborn baby human, then crushing the skull with forceps, so that he can suction-out the dismembered body parts.

 

[Archivist]

What would make sense is to go back to morality, to medical science, and to the constitution.

The original Hippocratic oath given to doctors forbade doing abortions.

Even pagan Greeks knew abortion is wrong.

And every medical manual of human embryology states that human life begins at conception- abortion kills a human life.

And there is no right to privacy in the constitution, let alone the right to destroy a baby human in the womb.

In fact, the inalienable RIGHT TO LIFE given us by our creator, includes the unborn, according to James Wilson, a signer of the constitution.

He attended the constitutional conventions, and said that the founding fathers considered unborn humans to be included with already born humans, as having the god-given right to life

Thus abortion on demand is the immoral and unconstitutional killing of an unborn human being, and denies them their right to life.

If you are going to cite James Wilson, you need to learn what he actually said.

Wilson believed that life began at quickening, about the end of the first trimester. That was the rule under the Common Law. I have posted that before on CF.

Oh, and Wilson did not deliver remarks on abortion at the Constitutional Convention. After he was appointed to the Supreme Court he delivered a series of law lectures at the University of Pennsylvania. It was as there that he discussed this because it was part of the Common Law. Washington and his cabinet attended the first lecture.

BTW, Wilson twice served time in debtors prison. He was the only Supreme Court Justice to serve jail time while on the bench. He was also the first Justice to die.

I completed a law review article on Wilson over the summer that should be published in 2021, so I know quite a bit about him.

 

[chad kincham]

That is really messed up. You don't even need to believe in any god to know that is wrong. Do you have a source about this? Because i think most people think of abortion to be a fetus no bigger than a thumb or something. Maybe if you post a credible link then others could see where you are coming from.

First of all, it’s still a human life, at the moment an egg is fertilized by a sperm - every medical manual on human embryology states that human life begins at conception.

Secondly, by 2 months pregnancy the fetus has a beating heart - by 3 months, the fetus is fully formed with head, torso, arms with hands and fingers, and legs with fingers and toes.

The abortionist takes a scalpel and slices up the arms, legs, and torso, then takes a forceps to crush the skull with, so he can suction-out the dismembered body parts.

Abortion stops a beating heart, and kills a human life.