I'm Pro-Life, but I'm not Anti-Killing

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,172
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ecclesiastes is one of my most favorite books of the Bible.

Life is the only thing we know, and even then, is fragile and temporary. There is no life after death, no judge other than ourselves, no absolute morality or ethics, and no means of absolute knowledge. Even so, I think the excessive killing of people should be focused on as a whole issue of "Why do we allow this to happen without social repercussions?" rather than as compartmentalized into a religious issue.
Do you mean mass shootings? Are you asking why don't more Christians rise up to advocate strongly to do more to stop mass shootings? Well, we are just individuals, and here in a discussion forum, often people are just trying to convince others about their own viewpoints. Speaking for myself, I've tried to tell others they should value society's regulating weapons, and I'm very willing to give up some freedoms in order that other people are more safe. Even a lot if needed! -- even to a 1rst Corinthians chapter 8 and Romans chapter 14 level: even something as good and enjoyable as eating meat could be sacrificed, if that is what it takes to save someone's ultimate Life.... But that's exactly because I understand that this temporary life is a place of choice, and that there is a deeper reality that our choices will matter ultimately. It will matter ultimately how we treat others.

You are already agreeing to that in a way, in that you value life, and that's a value, instead of having no valuing. I don't want to bring in a wrong connotation from like calling it 'morality' (possibly adding some extra sense or flavor I don't want to address here). I mean you have a value system there, even with just 1 principle, already.
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,262
6,943
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟371,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
@jayem ,
  1. What would you say was the percentage of pregnancies that required such medically necessary abortions?
  2. Were these women seeking abortions when they were told that they must have one?
  3. Are those circumstances relevant to the vast majority of pregnancies...?

The link (which is a pro-life website) compiles data for 2017 from Guttmacher (an affiliate of PP) and the CDC. 3% of abortions are performed for fetal issues. 4% are done for "physical health problems." Which I assume are maternal health issues. As I said, it's is not common. These are exceptional circumstances. But it's the exception that proves the rule. Which is that any rights imputed to the unborn, are subordinate to the rights of the mother.

U.S. Abortion Statistics

This doesn't mean the unborn have no value. I'm a pragmatist, not an idealist. I'm more concerned with practical matters than philosophical perfection. The most reasonable solution is a compromise to split the difference. The average pregnancy is 40 weeks. So up to 20 weeks of gestational age, abortion should left as a private medical decision between doctor and patient. After 20 weeks, the states can restrict abortion to life or health threatening medical reasons only. This is sensible, workable, and fair to both sides. Is this wrong?
 
Upvote 0

Silverback

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2019
1,306
853
61
South East
✟66,756.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
But abortion may sometimes still be necessary. I worked 40+ years in health care and have seen such cases. I've seen a pregnant woman have a major heart attack at 6 weeks, and develop congestive heart failure. Cardiac output must increase 30-40% during pregnancy, and even a specialized cardiology team experienced in treating heart disease in pregnancy couldn't determine if the mom's damaged heart could meet the demand. Not to mention that some of the drugs needed to treat her condition could cause fetal damage at such an early stage in pregnancy. She decided to terminate the pregnancy. It was definitely not an outcome she wanted in any way. The unborn child committed no crime. It didn't cause her heart disease. It was simply an innocent bystander. Ending its life was tragic, but was morally justifiable because of the biological fact that a fetus makes a direct physiologic demand on its mother's body. And if hard decisions have to be made, the mother's welfare takes priority over the unborn child's unless she decides otherwise. Fortunately, these aren't very common occurrences. But I cannot imagine any other circumstance where killing a newborn would be even remotely considered because its mother is ill.[/QUOTE}

Agreed...There could also be mental health reasons that could justify an abortion, but again they would also be rare. Their is no ethical nexus between being pro-life and pro capital punishment, two separate issues.
 
Upvote 0

Silverback

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2019
1,306
853
61
South East
✟66,756.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Semantics, as said before in this thread - being pro-life describes a very specific position on one issue, usually for religious reasons.

Side bar: I've never understood the high proportion of American conservatives that advocate for the death penalty. This is a group of people who define themselves in opposition to handing power to a Government, and then go on to welcome giving this same Government the right to decide which of its citizens lives and dies.

Actually, the person who committed the crime made the choice, people who break the law know what time it is, they chose to murder someone,
or, a group of people, or, torture them for hours first and then kill them...it was their choice, they spun the wheel, and lost.

I do understand what your saying though, and for the record, I know liberal's who are much more pro capital punishment than myself, I actually think we execute to many, imprison to many, and our sentences, are to long. I also know a lot of pistol loving liberals that fully support the 2nd Amendment as well, and are more militant on the issue than myself, but that's another story for another time.

Just say'n

Also, until President G. W. Busch was elected, the biggest difference between an American Conservative, and an American Liberal was how much the Government should be involved in our free market system.
There were other issues from time to time, however, that was the main issue. And their was always a difference in American politics between a liberal, and a leftist.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Silverback

Well-Known Member
Feb 13, 2019
1,306
853
61
South East
✟66,756.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
But innocent people are sentenced to death by our justice system. That's . . . not cool.
and

Perhaps, no one really knows, however, since 1782
The odds are pretty good that we have. But I will tell you that the cases I have looked into in my spare time, based on what I have read everyone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but, I have not read all the case histories, for everyone on death row. Personally, I think we execute to many people in the US, we also incarcerate to many, and the sentences handed down are in many cases outrageous. This is just my opinion, but once a person adjusts to prison, and learns how to live there, the punishment, and deterrent effect is lost. It may be a specific deterrent, since he's locked up and can only prey on other prisoners, but he's not really being punished all that much, and nothing is really being gained.
 
Upvote 0

Jonaitis

Soli Deo Gloria
Jan 4, 2019
5,191
4,204
Wyoming
✟122,609.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
It is only consistent. If you believe it is murder, then treat it as murder. In doing nothing to criminalize it, we minimize the seriousness of it. Christians (or people in general) who are "pro-life," but aren't for the punishment (ex. death penalty) of it are hypocrites.
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,262
6,943
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟371,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Not necessarily an ethical mismatch.

But it does indicate that "pro life" is typically the wrong term for an anti-abortion position. Its way too general, and most "pro life" people are fine with killing in a great number of circumstances.

What I see as a glaring mismatch, or at least a blatant logical contradiction, is that some people opposed to elective abortion also oppose easy access to contraceptives. I think it's now a less common viewpoint in the pro-life community than it once was. Or it's kept more under wraps. It's utterly beyond comprehension that anyone wishing fewer abortions are done would stand against a rational means of achieving that very goal.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: durangodawood
Upvote 0

Sabertooth

Repartee Animal: Quipping the Saints!
Supporter
Jul 25, 2005
10,491
7,061
62
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟952,359.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But it's the exception that proves the rule.
Which rule?
  1. That fetuses are property (to be be disposed of, at will), or
  2. That fetuses are humans (with attendant rights) that sometimes, in extreme cases, must be sacrificed out of medical necessity?
The second model parallels the ethical considerations surrounding the separation of conjoined twins.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟377,931.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Born babies with anomalies not fixable by medicine left to die in the hospital (they should be killed, imo).
They do that with people of all ages, when medicine can't help them anymore. They're put in hospice.

Innocent people convicted of crimes they didn't commit and killed by the government.
Due to errors in the court system, which is an acknowledged problem that the government has worked to reduce and fix with the appeals process and in some states, stricter conditions for the death penalty. Yet abortion on demand remains legal.

People who left their guns out for their children to kill themselves with and who are not convicted of murder.
Because that's not murder. It's negligence and manslaughter, which carries penalties under the law. One could also call such incidents accidental. Abortions are by definition not accidental.

Police who kill people who haven't been convicted of a crime, but who are running away from the police.
They can get charged for that. Doesn't seem to happen enough. Yet abortion providers do not get charged except in rare cases, the unborn baby is utterly incapable of running away, and abortion also seems to do more to cut short minority populations by preventing births among them. How many black women have abortions in a single year vs how many black people get killed by cops in a single year.

Drone strikes on civilians.
Not in the US. However, it is definitely problematic, but the innocent civilians are not the target. It's usually terrorists that are the target, and the innocent civilians are collateral damage. Abortion on the other hand, always targets an innocent. And ironically, if the unborn child is collateral damage for something else that happens - knocking a pregnant woman over, or accidentally hitting her car, or something like that - she can bring charges for what was done to the baby and not just her. If she gets hit with a stray bullet and dies? Double homicide.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Sabertooth
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

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟377,931.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Side bar: I've never understood the high proportion of American conservatives that advocate for the death penalty. This is a group of people who define themselves in opposition to handing power to a Government, and then go on to welcome giving this same Government the right to decide which of its citizens lives and dies.
I see your argument, but there's a history of extrajudicial punishment in some states (most particularly lynching) that to me, reinforces the need to give the government a monopoly on deciding who dies, under which conditions they die, and who kills them. We have a justice system in our Constitution that defines how that is to happen, and how the rules get written and changed. When people ignored that, unspeakable brutality happened.
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,262
6,943
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟371,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Which rule?
  1. That fetuses are property (to be be disposed of, at will), or
  2. That fetuses are humans (with attendant rights) that sometimes, in extreme cases, must be sacrificed out of medical necessity?
The second model parallels the ethical considerations surrounding the separation of conjoined twins.

The rule is that the welfare of a fetus is superceded by the welfare of it's mother. Unless she decides otherwise. And only until it's born. This is just common sense.
 
Upvote 0

Sabertooth

Repartee Animal: Quipping the Saints!
Supporter
Jul 25, 2005
10,491
7,061
62
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟952,359.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The rule is that the welfare of a fetus is superceded by the welfare of it's mother. Unless she decides otherwise. And only until it's born. This is just common sense.
Did you just dodge my question? There is a huge gap between "welfare" & "whim."
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,262
6,943
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟371,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Did you just dodge my question? There is a huge gap between "welfare" & "whim."

I intended to state it broadly, but it might not have been clear. So I'll clarify: The mother's welfare, as she see it, superceeds the welfare of a fetus. But as I also stated earlier, for legal purposes, after 20 weeks gestation, the state can restrict this.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I intended to state it broadly, but it might not have been clear. So I'll clarify: The mother's welfare, as she see it, superceeds the welfare of a fetus. But as I also stated earlier, for legal purposes, after 20 weeks gestation, the state can restrict this.
Which is about in line with traditional Christian beliefs in place up through the 19th century about when abortion should be prohibited--after the time of "quickening," which generally occurs 18-20 weeks in.
 
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

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I intended to state it broadly, but it might not have been clear. So I'll clarify: The mother's welfare, as she see it, superceeds the welfare of a fetus. But as I also stated earlier, for legal purposes, after 20 weeks gestation, the state can restrict this.
By the mothers welfare do you mean personal preference not to be pregnant
 
Upvote 0

jayem

Naturalist
Jun 24, 2003
15,262
6,943
72
St. Louis, MO.
✟371,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
By the mothers welfare do you mean personal preference not to be pregnant

Of course. If she feels it's in her best interests not to be pregnant, and it's earlier than 20 weeks, that option should be a private decision between her and her doctor. It should not be criminalized by the state.

Just to mention a point that's often overlooked: legal elective abortion isn't a right. No physician can be compelled to perform one simply because a pregnant woman requests it. In the legal sense, it's an immunity. No one can be prosecuted for an abortion performed according to accepted medical standards. That's why I say that terminating an early term pregnancy should be left as a private medical decision between doctor and patient. It's none of the government's business.

This speaks to my real position on abortion. Which is libertarian. I'm more anti-criminalization than I am pro-choice. I actually agree that terminating a pregnancy for less than medical reasons, or sexual assault may be morally suspect. But not everything immoral must be illegal. Using the police power of the state to criminalize abortion at all stages of pregnancy is simply a worse evil. It's an intolerably excessive and authoritarian intrusion of government into a woman's personal life.
 
Upvote 0

Rajni

☯ Ego ad Eum pertinent ☯
Supporter
Dec 26, 2007
8,552
3,930
Visit site
✟1,210,341.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Single
So, is there an ethical mismatch in my stance, or can it be explained by differences in semantics?
It might be more accurate, then, to say you're "pro-birth"
in such a case, imo.

-
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,473
18,454
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,087.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
But not my religion. I'm still an Anglican. "Other religion" is more accurate in the present political climate, where only right-wing Evangelicals are deemed to be real Christians.

I always wondered about that.

I would have thought you were Unitarian or United Church of Christ, perhaps. I know there are alot of liberal Episcopalians, but where I live there aren't many.

As for me, right now I'm a religious none. I do practice meditation, and there are some Buddhist teachers I follow (Thich Nhat Hanh, Tara Brach). So "other religion" fits.

I agree with you in the current political climate, identifying as a Christian is rather meaningless.
 
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