Why are Christians generally opposed to abortion?

[pat34lee]

I've never fully understood why many Christians are opposed to abortion and why it seems to be a very controversial subject, particularly in the US. What is the "religious" reasoning behind the Christian stance on abortion, and are there any circumstances where Christians would support abortion?

I read somewhere that god had allowed the death of thousands or possibly millions of unborn babies, for example in Noahs flood and at Sodom/ Gomorrah (if you believe the bible) as there must have been many pregnant women killed in those incidents, does this affect the thinking of Christians in the modern world when abortion is discussed?

Most Christians, and people of conscience know that abortion is the murder of a living child.
That is not only bad, it is totally depraved, killing our own children.

Do you believe in the death penalty? Whether or not you think man has the right, God
definitely does, as our creator and king. Nobody died at his hand without complete justice
being done. Put another way, God cannot be unfair, but he can show mercy.

 

[Dave RP]

Most Christians, and people of conscience know that abortion is the murder of a living child.
That is not only bad, it is totally depraved, killing our own children.

Do you believe in the death penalty? Whether or not you think man has the right, God
definitely does, as our creator and king. Nobody died at his hand without complete justice
being done. Put another way, God cannot be unfair, but he can show mercy.

Clearly this is a subject where emotions run high, which is understandable. I would say that I acknowledge that you will find my answers unpleasant and contradictory but here we go. I absolutely do not support the death penalty and I do not consider abortion to be killing a living child. I have been involved in two abortions to my knowledge, one was many years ago when a girlfriend became pregnant and she had an abortion which I felt was the right thing to do, the second was more recently when a very close relative who decided to have an abortion as she was not in a long term stable relationship and I again believe she made the right decision. These abortions were very early and I do not consider that to be "murder"

I would disagree with you about god killing innocent people. If the bible stories of the flood and Sodom/ Gomorrah are true, the entire human population of the world killed by god in the flood must have had many women who were pregnant, and many children, these were all killed as were the same type of innocent people in the destruction of those two towns. Of course I accept you will say that if god can do anything he wants, but if these stories are true he has certainly killed unborn babies and innocent children,as well as Lots wife of course.

 

[SPF]

I guess that is "murder" in a biblical sense rather than a legal one?

It would be a form of murder in the moral sense. All murder is morally wrong, but not all killing is morally wrong.

For an atheist, like myself, you cannot appeal to the bible and say, see, all human life is sacred.
I agree that a human life starts at conception, but I do not support the government in interfering with the mother's decision on whether to continue with her pregnancy. I do not hold that life as sacred.

I completely understand this and agree. This is why the abortion discussion between atheists and Christians is often dead on arrival. Our foundational, core beliefs are mutually exclusive, and so finding common ground is virtually impossible. If I were an atheist, I would be a moral nihilist, and would not think that abortion was morally evil.

I'm not actually out to convince any atheist that abortion is wrong, I don't think I can do that. What I try to do is very clearly weed out the categorical mistakes, question begging, and shifting the goals posts that usually occur during this discussion so that we can at least understand very clearly why we each believe what we do.

As far as I understand it "person" is a legal label, and it is used to attach certain rights to anything that belongs to that label. The law makers have drawn a line at what point in the development of a fetus the law will kick in to protect that fetus. Having this in the late term gives pregnant mothers the opportunity (under law) to terminate their pregnancy if they wish. This allows the mother to make decisions on her desire to have a child, her ability to bring one up, her desire/ability/reluctance to bring up a child with certain deformities. The line in the sand gives her some time to think about these things, gives doctors some time to assess the health of the fetus, and gives her a deadline date by when she must make her decision... Law does not need to be based on moral beliefs or ethics.

The problem is that by creating a distinction between a human being and a human person, the law becomes the determiner of an ethical issue. The law is essentially stating that all killing of human non-persons is morally appropriate.

Christians believe that all human life is inherently morally valuable. If all human life is inherently morally valuable and if human life begins at conception - then unborn babies deserve protection.

The issue comes in that Christians need convince others that all human life is inherently morally valuable. And of course, in order to do that you need to convince someone that God exists. And that is no small task~

 

[Dave RP]

It would be a form of murder in the moral sense. All murder is morally wrong, but not all killing is morally wrong.

I completely understand this and agree. This is why the abortion discussion between atheists and Christians is often dead on arrival. Our foundational, core beliefs are mutually exclusive, and so finding common ground is virtually impossible. If I were an atheist, I would be a moral nihilist, and would not think that abortion was morally evil.

I'm not actually out to convince any atheist that abortion is wrong, I don't think I can do that. What I try to do is very clearly weed out the categorical mistakes, question begging, and shifting the goals posts that usually occur during this discussion so that we can at least understand very clearly why we each believe what we do.

The problem is that by creating a distinction between a human being and a human person, the law becomes the determiner of an ethical issue. The law is essentially stating that all killing of human non-persons is morally appropriate.

Christians believe that all human life is inherently morally valuable. If all human life is inherently morally valuable and if human life begins at conception - then unborn babies deserve protection.

The issue comes in that Christians need convince others that all human life is inherently morally valuable. And of course, in order to do that you need to convince someone that God exists. And that is no small task~

I appreciate everything you say, but surely all that leads to is that no true Christian would ever have an abortion, but it is a personal choice for anyone else?

I see some people attacking and damaging abortion clinics and some even attacking physically the people carrying out abortions, that can't be right, if god accepts the soul of the aborted fetus then no harm is done to the soul and eternal life will result, and god will punish the woman in question if he deems it correct to do so, so why are some Christians violently opposed to women having a choice?

 

[SPF]

I appreciate everything you say, but surely all that leads to is that no true Christian would ever have an abortion, but it is a personal choice for anyone else?

I would look at it a little differently. It's a personal choice for everyone. If God is actually real, and if Scripture actually is His revelation to us, then abortion is actually morally wrong. As a Christian, I do not judge the actions of those who are not Christians. No offense meant, but if we classify non-Christians as "sinners", then sinners are simply living according to their nature - they're sinning! I don't judge my alcoholic or homosexual friends who don't profess Christ, why would I?

However, if someone professes to be a Christian, then I have every right to judge their actions (not their hearts) against what is taught in Scripture. So yes, I would expect no Christian to have an abortion, and if they did (which I'm sure some do as no Christian is perfect), I would rebuke them (lovingly) and hope they recognize what they did was wrong.

But having an abortion is still morally wrong, regardless of any beliefs that a person holds.

I see some people attacking and damaging abortion clinics and some even attacking physically the people carrying out abortions, that can't be right,

No, it's absolutely wrong. The Christian response ought to be love for the people that have abortions. People who have abortions are not cold hearted murderers. They're people with feelings, struggles, and I don't believe an abortion can be an easy thing for any woman to go through, no matter their beliefs.

if god accepts the soul of the aborted fetus then no harm is done to the soul and eternal life will result,

Scripture isn't entirely clear on this. But we can at least believe that whatever the outcome, it will be just.

and god will punish the woman in question if he deems it correct to do so, so why are some Christians violently opposed to women having a choice?

You're right, all of us will face justice eventually for our sins. Christians should be opposed to abortions, but never violently opposed. That's crossing the line.

 

[stevil]

It would be a form of murder in the moral sense. All murder is morally wrong, but not all killing is morally wrong.

Individuals have their own moral beliefs. Most Christians believe abortion is murder in the moral sense, most atheists do not hold that belief. If you go into an abortion argument and tell them that abortion is murder they will assume you are misrepresenting the legal term "murder".
They will accuse you of being overly emotional.

But if you go into the argument saying that abortion is immoral, then you won't fall for the issues above. I do think some of the issues when theists and atheists debate is that we often have different definitions of the words that are used and we then end up talking past each other.
Arguing semantics rather than the actual points.

I completely understand this and agree. This is why the abortion discussion between atheists and Christians is often dead on arrival. Our foundational, core beliefs are mutually exclusive, and so finding common ground is virtually impossible. If I were an atheist, I would be a moral nihilist, and would not think that abortion was morally evil.

I am a moral nihilist. With regards to the abortion debate, it depends on what you are trying to get out of the debate. I think it makes sense to try and convince an atheist that after conception it is a living human. Some seem to be in denial about that. I think it makes sense to try and get them to tell you at what point in the pregnancy would they term the fetus a living human. I also think, in a moral sense try to get them to explain why a living human is to be protected and why a "potential human" is not to be protected.

I'm not actually out to convince any atheist that abortion is wrong, I don't think I can do that. What I try to do is very clearly weed out the categorical mistakes, question begging, and shifting the goals posts that usually occur during this discussion so that we can at least understand very clearly why we each believe what we do.

I agree, I try to do that too, with other atheists.

The problem is that by creating a distinction between a human being and a human person, the law becomes the determiner of an ethical issue. The law is essentially stating that all killing of human non-persons is morally appropriate.

Depends on what you think is the purpose of law.
I don't think law has anything to do with morals.
We don't lock up people for cheating on their married partner (wife/husband). We don't tend to lock up people for lying, unless in court or in regards to finances or legal documents. We don't tend to lock up people for many "moral" transgressions. In NZ we legalised prostitution. This isn't our government telling people that prostitution is moral. It is instead our government letting grown adults decide for themselves how to live.

Churches try to tell people what is moral or not, governments don't do this.

 

[stevil]

I think nearly everyone involved in this issue finds abortion to be tragic and very undesirable. I, too, think that criminalizing abortion is the wrong approach to dealing with the issue.

I feel confident that elective abortion could be reduced to a level that it is almost not happening without ever passing any law prohibiting it if our society were to address the social issues which lead to a woman deciding that abortion is the right path.

I don't stand in judgement of people choosing to have abortions.

But I agree with this second part of what you say.
We don't need to legislate on everything. We can promote certain behaviours, we can educate, these are less intrusive, less aggressive methods than empowering our police to use force to get people to conform.

I think abortions will still be common place but you might reduce some of it by educating people or giving them other alternatives (i.e. sex education). I am for people having choices rather than coercing them. If there is a god and if that god judges people then that is the god's business, giving free will and judging people on their choices and actions. It is not my business.

 

[rjs330]

I'm sure you know you are being ridiculous, and I'm sure you know that proper birth control does not require living people to be murdered. But thanks for the thought.

I am being ridiculous. But I point out absurdity by being absurd. Because if one truly believes that we have overpopulated the planet and are killing it then the only road that one can go down ends with stopping the destruction. If one REALLY believes then forced sterilization is the only real solution. If we are really overpopulating and destroying our home then drastic action is required. Bottom line is I don't think you really believe the rhetoric you have been fed. If you did then depopulating is the only answer and you know people will not do it voluntarily and must be forced.

 

[rjs330]

Clearly this is a subject where emotions run high, which is understandable. I would say that I acknowledge that you will find my answers unpleasant and contradictory but here we go. I absolutely do not support the death penalty and I do not consider abortion to be killing a living child. I have been involved in two abortions to my knowledge, one was many years ago when a girlfriend became pregnant and she had an abortion which I felt was the right thing to do, the second was more recently when a very close relative who decided to have an abortion as she was not in a long term stable relationship and I again believe she made the right decision. These abortions were very early and I do not consider that to be "murder"

I would disagree with you about god killing innocent people. If the bible stories of the flood and Sodom/ Gomorrah are true, the entire human population of the world killed by god in the flood must have had many women who were pregnant, and many children, these were all killed as were the same type of innocent people in the destruction of those two towns. Of course I accept you will say that if god can do anything he wants, but if these stories are true he has certainly killed unborn babies and innocent children,as well as Lots wife of course.

It's interesting that you would not support the killing of the guilty but support the killing of the innocent. Seems a little backwards to me.

 

[pat34lee]

Clearly this is a subject where emotions run high, which is understandable. I would say that I acknowledge that you will find my answers unpleasant and contradictory but here we go. I absolutely do not support the death penalty and I do not consider abortion to be killing a living child. I have been involved in two abortions to my knowledge, one was many years ago when a girlfriend became pregnant and she had an abortion which I felt was the right thing to do, the second was more recently when a very close relative who decided to have an abortion as she was not in a long term stable relationship and I again believe she made the right decision. These abortions were very early and I do not consider that to be "murder"

I would disagree with you about god killing innocent people. If the bible stories of the flood and Sodom/ Gomorrah are true, the entire human population of the world killed by god in the flood must have had many women who were pregnant, and many children, these were all killed as were the same type of innocent people in the destruction of those two towns. Of course I accept you will say that if god can do anything he wants, but if these stories are true he has certainly killed unborn babies and innocent children,as well as Lots wife of course.

So, is killing a small child a smaller crime than killing a large adult?
What does phase of life matter, when any time from conception
to death, a human is a human?

You argue innocence, but only God can judge the heart. Also, we are
only able to judge what we see. We can't judge the future, which God
already knows, or the past, which he also knows. Think of the "would
you kill Hitler as a child?" conundrum. Would it keep WW2 from happening?
Or would it make things worse, through another tyrant?

As I said, God cannot be wrong in his judgments, or make mistakes. He
doesn't kill without reason, or without thorough judgment. Noah spent
100 years working on the ark. The chances of anyone not knowing about
it, or why he built it is slim to none. Yet, not one person outside his sons
and their wives believed that they would be judged. So they perished.

 

[Dave RP]

It's interesting that you would not support the killing of the guilty but support the killing of the innocent. Seems a little backwards to me.

I support the right of a woman to choose, and it must, in my opinion be the woman's choice. As for the death penalty, I'm amazed that any Christian would support that.

 

[Dave RP]

So, is killing a small child a smaller crime than killing a large adult?
What does phase of life matter, when any time from conception
to death, a human is a human?

You argue innocence, but only God can judge the heart. Also, we are
only able to judge what we see. We can't judge the future, which God
already knows, or the past, which he also knows. Think of the "would
you kill Hitler as a child?" conundrum. Would it keep WW2 from happening?
Or would it make things worse, through another tyrant?

As I said, God cannot be wrong in his judgments, or make mistakes. He
doesn't kill without reason, or without thorough judgment. Noah spent
100 years working on the ark. The chances of anyone not knowing about
it, or why he built it is slim to none. Yet, not one person outside his sons
and their wives believed that they would be judged. So they perished.

Of course we will never agree but a 12 week fetus is not capable of independent life so it is not the same thing. As for god killing the entire world, if you believe that story as fact, then you must accept that some innocent children and unborn children must have died. I doubt that those living in Australia or South America were aware of what was coming their way.

 

[Dave RP]

I am being ridiculous. But I point out absurdity by being absurd. Because if one truly believes that we have overpopulated the planet and are killing it then the only road that one can go down ends with stopping the destruction. If one REALLY believes then forced sterilization is the only real solution. If we are really overpopulating and destroying our home then drastic action is required. Bottom line is I don't think you really believe the rhetoric you have been fed. If you did then depopulating is the only answer and you know people will not do it voluntarily and must be forced.

Actually education and both control would do it, and it shames some parts of the faith community who don't support birth control. If you search fir facts about about global deforestation and mass extinctions and tell me that human kind is not destroying the planet.

 

[Rajni]

“Protestant theology generally takes Genesis 2:7 as a statement that the soul is formed at breath, not with conception,” Dehoney said.

^This.

 

[rjs330]

I support the right of a woman to choose, and it must, in my opinion be the woman's choice. As for the death penalty, I'm amazed that any Christian would support that.

You may justify your thoughts of killing the innocent with all the verbal gymnastics you want but it doesn't change the fact it is killing the innocent. And I never said I support the death penalty. I just pointed out that you support killing innocent people while decrying the killing of the guilty.

 

[rjs330]

Actually education and both control would do it, and it shames some parts of the faith community who don't support birth control. If you search fir facts about about global deforestation and mass extinctions and tell me that human kind is not destroying the planet.

Humans have polluted places on this planet. There is no doubt. We have also caused or came close to causing extinctions. But we are not destroying the planet. Life goes on. The planet continues. Everything is not a catastrophe. We are not overpopulating the planet. Doom and gloom is not on the horizon. If it really was you would support killing as many humans as necessary to save the planet. It just goes to show you don't really believe it either. The fact that you also do not support forced sterilization also shows you don't believe it. Not really.

 

[rjs330]

I support the right of a woman to choose, and it must, in my opinion be the woman's choice. As for the death penalty, I'm amazed that any Christian would support that.

On the topic of capitol punishment I don't know why you would be shocked to think a Christian would not have a problem with it. God clearly does not. The OT law given by God gave plenty of circumstances where a guilty person would be condemned to death. So obviously God took no issue with it, in fact commanded it. Now we do not follow the Old Covenant as believers. But neither Jesus nor the apostles prohibited it. They did say it is not the believers obligation to carry out the death penalty. In fact we are to let the government deal with that. So if a state says capitol punishment is okay then that is fine in the eyes of God. It breaks no commandment in scripture to do so. It is not murder. Whereas the taking of an innocent life is. One is justice meeted out by the state of a guilty person. The other has nothing to do with justice but is the deliberate act of killing someone who has not done anything to deserve being killed by another human being.

 

[Dave RP]

Humans have polluted places on this planet. There is no doubt. We have also caused or came close to causing extinctions. But we are not destroying the planet. Life goes on. The planet continues. Everything is not a catastrophe. We are not overpopulating the planet. Doom and gloom is not on the horizon. If it really was you would support killing as many humans as necessary to save the planet. It just goes to show you don't really believe it either. The fact that you also do not support forced sterilization also shows you don't believe it. Not really.

Not true, I've travelled to Africa and to the middle east and I've seen the pressure put in the environment by human population growth, it's a fact.

Now as a liberal I wold not ever suggest mass murder or forced anything and your leap of logic if frankly preposterous. Personal choice and responsibility backed up by education and targeted aid, that's my suggestion.

Mind you Mr. Trump seems to be aiming for a bit of population thinning in korea and surrounding areas.

 

[Dave RP]

On the topic of capitol punishment I don't know why you would be shocked to think a Christian would not have a problem with it. God clearly does not. The OT law given by God gave plenty of circumstances where a guilty person would be condemned to death. So obviously God took no issue with it, in fact commanded it. Now we do not follow the Old Covenant as believers. But neither Jesus nor the apostles prohibited it. They did say it is not the believers obligation to carry out the death penalty. In fact we are to let the government deal with that. So if a state says capitol punishment is okay then that is fine in the eyes of God. It breaks no commandment in scripture to do so. It is not murder. Whereas the taking of an innocent life is. One is justice meeted out by the state of a guilty person. The other has nothing to do with justice but is the deliberate act of killing someone who has not done anything to deserve being killed by another human being.

Capital punishment is murder, the deliberate taking of a human life. Not like abortion where there is no walking talking seeing breathing life.

The god of the OT enjoyed a bit of mass killing and murder, bit i thought Jesus put that all behind him? Thankfully god now does not intervene in the world to kill the unbelievers, mind you I wish he would intervene in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and other places of conflict but he's given up direct intervention.

 

[rjs330]

Not true, I've travelled to Africa and to the middle east and I've seen the pressure put in the environment by human population growth, it's a fact.

Now as a liberal I wold not ever suggest mass murder or forced anything and your leap of logic if frankly preposterous. Personal choice and responsibility backed up by education and targeted aid, that's my suggestion.

Mind you Mr. Trump seems to be aiming for a bit of population thinning in korea and surrounding areas.

Just how long do we have left before we destroy the planet?