Is "Pro-Choice" the right "choice" for a Christian to make? Why or why not?

[Douglas Hendrickson]

If you wish. But I really love my mother and respect her authority over my birth decision.
So I would never interfere with another woman's authority over her own situation.

But you may wish to hog tie every pregnant woman to a bed for 9 months,
assuming that is what you would want for yourself and for your mother.

I have seen quadriplegic disabled women getting abortions who did not wish to test their ability to carry a child, and I have seen 12 year olds raped by their step father who mother had them carry the child full term. So mom decided for the 12 year old and then had a 13 yo and a newborn from her boyfriend in jail to raise. I would not interfere with their decisions. So no, I do not agree on deciding the fate of the child for others carrying the child to term.

I agree that the correct pro-life position is to adopt every child possible and raise them,
to reduce the murder rate.

You seem to be advocating for murder.
Are you really?

Adopting actual children may not much reduce the abortion rate, if by "murder rate" you mean "abortion rate."
Of course they are far from being the same thing, yet that is another story.

 

[Douglas Hendrickson]

“[All] organisms, however large and complex they might be as full grown, begin life as a single cell. This is true for the human being, for instance, who begins life as a fertilized ovum.” Dr. Morris Krieger “The Human Reproductive System” p 88 (1969) Sterling Pub. Co

“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.” James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)

Finally:
1) Human beings begin their existence as a single cell

The bottom line Douglas, is that while I am able to sit here all day long and provide textbook after textbook, publication after publication, expert opinion after expert opinion on when a new human being comes into existence - you are incapable of providing anything other than your own opinion. You bring nothing to the table except your immature (lack of life experiences) and uneducated (both scientifically and theologically) opinion to the table. And I'm sorry, but you've never even come close to convincing me that your opinion trumps the past hundred years of scientific discovery.

What you throw out are merely opinions.
(Of some "great professor" or whatever.) Conclusions without any argument for the claims.

What I set forth are clearly articulated facts.
That show your conclusions are spurious at best.

In these examples, for instance, "new life," and "new unique human existence" are problematic.
If they merely mean, "we all come from such a beginning," it is true just like it would be true of the egg and sperm before they unite.
It is also true every human being is unique, and that uniqueness (of DNA) is found first at conception.

But the fact remains that human beings have bodies, for instance, so the zygote cannot itself be a human being. In the normal course of development it may become a human being, but itself is no being, no animal member of the species.