Why are Christians generally opposed to abortion?

[zephcom]

I'm not a Christian, and I'm opposed to elective abortion. It's tragic and very undesirable. But I'm more opposed to using the police power of the state to criminalize it. Terminating a healthy pregnancy is bad, but that's a worse evil.

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.

If we would provide comprehensive sex education in schools, allow better access to birth control we would reduce the pregnancy occurrences tremendously. That would greatly reduce the need to ever make such decisions in the first place.

But more importantly, society needs to change its attitude toward women who become pregnant and then CHOOSE to give birth. Instead of the stigma of being a 'fallen woman', society viewed them as valuable citizens who value life and are willing to commit to preserving it at whatever the cost to them is.

These women SHOULD be viewed as desirable for marriage by men because of their willingness preserve those lives. They should be valued by employers and given full wages instead of 'woman's salary' because of their commitment to human life.

A woman should not be faced with deciding to keep a pregnancy knowing that they face a life of scorn, poverty, and undesirability for marriage or quietly aborting to preserve their future and the future of any subsequent children through marriage.

WE created this mess by creating a myth about women and their 'purity'.

 

[rjs330]

The population of hevworld is unsustainable if we want a bio diverse planet to leave to future generations, and don't be bloody stupid, of course I'm not advocating genicide. I am advocating birth control and education, because if we don't control the population we will ruin the environment.

Abortion is not birth control. It is killing a human being so you are advocating killing people to save the planet. There is plenty of space on this planet to sustain our population and plenty of food and water to feed us. We have the technology to do so.

 

[rjs330]

On the other hand, killing people for political and economic convenience is perfectly fine.

The truth is that Christians don't value human life at all. They just jumped on this bandwagon because their leadership uses it to keep the money flowing in.

Who said that? Prove your point please.

 

[zephcom]

Who said that? Prove your point please.

My point is proven just by observing current events. For instance, America could not even field a military if the -Christians- in this country refused to serve because they 'valued all life'.

Our Congress would not be proposing to withhold medical care from people unable to pay for it if the -Christians- didn't support those efforts. JESUS never charged anyone for medical care.

We wouldn't have executions of criminals if the -Christians- opposed it.

This issue about life is precious to Christians ONLY applies to abortion. And that only is because the idea of abortion can be manipulated by the religion and the politics which pander to religion to bring out voters.

 

[rjs330]

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.

If we would provide comprehensive sex education in schools, allow better access to birth control we would reduce the pregnancy occurrences tremendously. That would greatly reduce the need to ever make such decisions in the first place.

But more importantly, society needs to change its attitude toward women who become pregnant and then CHOOSE to give birth. Instead of the stigma of being a 'fallen woman', society viewed them as valuable citizens who value life and are willing to commit to preserving it at whatever the cost to them is.

These women SHOULD be viewed as desirable for marriage by men because of their willingness preserve those lives. They should be valued by employers and given full wages instead of 'woman's salary' because of their commitment to human life.

A woman should not be faced with deciding to keep a pregnancy knowing that they face a life of scorn, poverty, and undesirability for marriage or quietly aborting to preserve their future and the future of any subsequent children through marriage.

WE created this mess by creating a myth about women and their 'purity'.

We have comprehensive sex Ed in schools now. We also have amazing access to birth control. There are free condoms and very low cost if not free birth control pills available. Condoms by themselves are really cheap.

No what causes unwanted pregnancy is primarily irresponsibility. People having sex without using birth control that is easily accessible.

I whole heartedly agree with what you said about valuing the woman who chooses to give birth and keep the baby. I admire women who do so. They need to be respected for tackling the difficult job of being a single mom.

I also do not think we hold the father's accountable for their part in the process. Fathers should be forced to pay their share for the life they helped create. It should not fall on the mothers and society to pick up that burden. Too many fathers get away with not taking care of their responsibility. That also should be taught in the sex Ed classes and reinforced by society.

 

[zephcom]

We have comprehensive sex Ed in schools now. We also have amazing access to birth control. There are free condoms and very low cost if not free birth control pills available. Condoms by themselves are really cheap.

No what causes unwanted pregnancy is primarily irresponsibility. People having sex without using birth control that is easily accessible.

I whole heartedly agree with what you said about valuing the woman who chooses to give birth and keep the baby. I admire women who do so. They need to be respected for tackling the difficult job of being a single mom.

I also do not think we hold the father's accountable for their part in the process. Fathers should be forced to pay their share for the life they helped create. It should not fall on the mothers and society to pick up that burden. Too many fathers get away with not taking care of their responsibility. That also should be taught in the sex Ed classes and reinforced by society.

We have comprehensive sex ed in -some- schools. Throughout the Bible Belt, schools lack both sex ed and easy access to birth control. And their pregnancy rates reflect that lack.

What causes unwanted pregnancies is a society which defies nature's own rhythms. Nature has women becoming viable at about fifteen with all the hormonal drive to procreate while our society demands they not procreate until they are at LEAST eighteen. And longer than that if they don't marry at eighteen.

That hormonal urge to procreate is extremely strong and just a sense of 'responsibility' is not enough to overcome it in all cases. Hence the need for birth control.

As to you idea that fathers should help support the babies they create is, quite frankly, Utopian. If society is going to be the cause of requiring these women to give birth because they don't have access to abortion, then the support of the babies society forced into life become the responsibility of society.

And the idea that a woman should receive full pay equal to a man doing the same job is the right thing to do regardless of whether she is a mother or not.

 

[rjs330]

My point is proven just by observing current events. For instance, America could not even field a military if the -Christians- in this country refused to serve because they 'valued all life'.

Our Congress would not be proposing to withhold medical care from people unable to pay for it if the -Christians- didn't support those efforts. JESUS never charged anyone for medical care.

We wouldn't have executions of criminals if the -Christians- opposed it.

This issue about life is precious to Christians ONLY applies to abortion. And that only is because the idea of abortion can be manipulated by the religion and the politics which pander to religion to bring out voters.

Oh I follow you now. You do realize that government is ordained by God to protect their people from evil right? How are they supposed to do that without a military? If it wasn't for the military you might just be living under Nazi rule right now and there would be no Jews left in the world.

There is a HUGE difference between being the aggressor and going to war to take over other peaceful people so you can rule them and going to war to defend your people from the evil ones or defend others from the evil ones. When a evil person enters your home or the home of your neighbor to rape and murder your family or your neighbors are you telling me you have no right to defend your family or your neighbors with deadly force if need be?

I want you to hear me clearly. There are wars that should not be fought. But not all war is wrong.

No Christian is proposing to withhold care from those who need it. Those of us who oppose Obamacare do so with good reason. We also support finding a better way of doing things. Tell me how is raising the rates of insurance and raising the deductibles so high that people won't go to the doctor cause they can't afford it helping anyone? How is skyrocketing insurance costs helping anyone? No Christian is opposed to people getting healthcare. What we are opposed to is the way it is happening.

And you are probably not aware that God supports and commanded Capitol punishment. The taking of innocent life is serious business to God. So serious that he commanded that people who do that be put to death. Why? Because there is a difference between innocent life and evil life.

 

[zephcom]

Oh I follow you now. You do realize that government is ordained by God to protect their people from evil right? How are they supposed to do that without a military? If it wasn't for the military you might just be living under Nazi rule right now and there would be no Jews left in the world.

There is a HUGE difference between being the aggressor and going to war to take over other peaceful people so you can rule them and going to war to defend your people from the evil ones or defend others from the evil ones. When a evil person enters your home or the home of your neighbor to rape and murder your family or your neighbors are you telling me you have no right to defend your family or your neighbors with deadly force if need be?

I want you to hear me clearly. There are wars that should not be fought. But not all war is wrong.

No Christian is proposing to withhold care from those who need it. Those of us who oppose Obamacare do so with good reason. We also support finding a better way of doing things. Tell me how is raising the rates of insurance and raising the deductibles so high that people won't go to the doctor cause they can't afford it helping anyone? How is skyrocketing insurance costs helping anyone? No Christian is opposed to people getting healthcare. What we are opposed to is the way it is happening.

And you are probably not aware that God supports and commanded Capitol punishment. The taking of innocent life is serious business to God. So serious that he commanded that people who do that be put to death. Why? Because there is a difference between innocent life and evil life.

Allow me to refer you to the teachings of Jesus as found in the New Testament. Those teachings eliminated the entire Old Testament Law and teachings of the Prophets. Those teachings established NEW commandments which Jesus said fully encompass ALL of the Old Testament Law and teachings from the Prophets.

Those teachings eliminated all the things you talk about and replaced them with loving behavior. You talk about us being under the control of the Nazis right now if it had not been for the 'Christians'. But one has to remember that JESUS lived under the Roman Empire which was a nasty an empire as any yet HE never advocated going to war against them. In fact, His resistance to leading an army against the Romans is why the JEWS don't acknowledge is Messiah status.

Jesus gave explicit instructions about how HIS people will behave. And those instructions do not make room for all your exceptions to His teachings.

 

[jayem]

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.

If we would provide comprehensive sex education in schools, allow better access to birth control we would reduce the pregnancy occurrences tremendously. That would greatly reduce the need to ever make such decisions in the first place.

But more importantly, society needs to change its attitude toward women who become pregnant and then CHOOSE to give birth. Instead of the stigma of being a 'fallen woman', society viewed them as valuable citizens who value life and are willing to commit to preserving it at whatever the cost to them is.

These women SHOULD be viewed as desirable for marriage by men because of their willingness preserve those lives. They should be valued by employers and given full wages instead of 'woman's salary' because of their commitment to human life.

A woman should not be faced with deciding to keep a pregnancy knowing that they face a life of scorn, poverty, and undesirability for marriage or quietly aborting to preserve their future and the future of any subsequent children through marriage.

WE created this mess by creating a myth about women and their 'purity'.

This is pasted from an earlier post. I think incentivizing adoption could be one tool to reduce abortions. And what's a better incentive than cash? Here's a possible scenario that's fully non-governmental and completely voluntary:

Aren't there at least 30,000,000 committed pro-life citizens in the US? Suppose each one made a yearly $100 (only $8.33 a month) tax-deductible donation to a charitable fund. That would raise $3 billion. Ramp it up over 5 years, and we have $15 billion. (There may well be more, counting corporate donations.) Invested conservatively at a 3% yield, this would generate $450 million in annual income. Take off 10% for expenses and admin, and that leaves $405 million. That could pay $4500 to each of 90,000 women who didn't terminate and placed their babies for adoption. That's about a 10% reduction in total abortions. As the years go by, and hopefully the fund grows, more women can be served, and more abortions averted. It could be a win-win all around. Babies become available for people who really want children, and birth moms get a cash nest egg they can use as they need (ideally to better their lives.)

To emphasize: This is NOT BABY SELLING. No buyer is paying for a child. This is an independent charitable fund providing a cash reward in recognition of a good deed. It's like when the Pulitzer Prize is awarded to the author of a novel. The Pulitzer Foundation isn't buying anything or acquiring any rights to the novel. It just pays a cash prize in recognition of the author's work. It's purpose is to incentivize literary achievement. My proposal is the same thing. It's goal is to incentivize forgoing abortion and providing babies for adoption.

 

[zephcom]

This is pasted from an earlier post. I think incentivizing adoption could be one tool to reduce abortions. And what's a better incentive than cash? Here's a possible scenario that's fully non-governmental and completely voluntary:

Aren't there at least 30,000,000 committed pro-life citizens in the US? Suppose each one made a yearly $100 (only $8.33 a month) tax-deductible donation to a charitable fund. That would raise $3 billion. Ramp it up over 5 years, and we have $15 billion. (There may well be more, counting corporate donations.) Invested conservatively at a 3% yield, this would generate $450 million in annual income. Take off 10% for expenses and admin, and that leaves $405 million. That could pay $4500 to each of 90,000 women who didn't terminate and placed their babies for adoption. That's about a 10% reduction in total abortions. As the years go by, and hopefully the fund grows, more women can be served, and more abortions averted. It could be a win-win all around. Babies become available for people who really want children, and birth moms get a cash nest egg they can use as they need (ideally to better their lives.)

To emphasize: This is NOT BABY SELLING. No buyer is paying for a child. This is an independent charitable fund providing a cash reward in recognition of a good deed. It's like when the Pulitzer Prize is awarded to the author of a novel. The Pulitzer Foundation isn't buying anything or acquiring any rights to the novel. It just pays a cash prize in recognition of the author's work. It's purpose is to incentivize literary achievement. My proposal is the same thing. It's goal is to incentivize forgoing abortion and providing babies for adoption.

Anything but making criminals out of people that improves the situation I'm for.

Are there enough people willing to adopt these babies or are we just creating a need for institutional parenting?

 

[seeking.IAM]

I only speak for one Christian. I believe abortion destroys a beloved creation of God. I think it is sinful to destroy that which God has created.

Is that a sin specifically applied to abortion or a more universal sin that applies destroying people in war, destroying the planet with over-population, destroying wellness by withholding health care, etc.

There is a LOT of things being destroyed on this planet that God created without a word being spoken.

For me, it is a more universal sin than abortion-specific. I think destroying that which God created is always a sin.

 

[seeking.IAM]

...

The truth is that Christians don't value human life at all. They just jumped on this bandwagon because their leadership uses it to keep the money flowing in.

Such broad generalizations are never accurate or fair. Some, yes...others, no.

 

[keith99]

What do Christians have to say about Exodus 21:22?

It seems the idea that life begins birth runs directly contrary to scripture.

 

[zephcom]

For me, it is a more universal sin than abortion-specific. I think destroying that which God created is always a sin.

So you wouldn't support joining the military, executing criminals, withholding medical care, or allowing runaway Global Warming??

This is good. I wish there were more like you in this country.

 

[zephcom]

Such broad generalizations are never accurate or fair. Some, yes...others, no.

Forums are rarely the place for long dissertations which analyze every single person.

I made my observation based on the public acceptance of a number of things which Christianity as a whole seems unconcerned about. Those things include participation in military service, support for government officials who advocate harming humans, and support for things like widespread gun ownership and execution of criminals.

Where the religion is silent, I feel it is because the religion approves.

However, I fully recognize that on the individual level, there is wide spread differences in what is accepted and what isn't. But, as I said, the forum format is not the place to list 30,000 sects and their particular position on these issues.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I think there is "no Christianity as a whole." There is much diversity among Christians.

 

[zephcom]

I think there is "no Christianity as a whole." There is much diversity among Christians.

I feel the need to disagree here. While there is much diversity among Christians, there is also much willingness to allow certain aspects of the religion to speak for all.

There are certain portions of this diversity which have allowed themselves to become politically active despite the teaching from Jesus not to be. They have, by default, became the spokespeople for the entire religion.

They elect people who will cater to their whims. The unfortunate thing is that their whims are often harmful to others and nowhere near Christlike.

I am aware of at least one group, The Sojourners, who are active in politics and seem to understand the teachings of Jesus. But they are unable to deliver the same level of votes to counter the other factions.

That leads me understand that, at least in this country, their is one group which not only can provide the voters to allow government to harm people but the remainder don't mind enough to do anything about it.

I'm not the one who lumped 30,000 sects all together under one umbrella. It is the Christians who did that. They need to understand they are tainted by how that umbrella is viewed in public.

There is a reason why my profile lists me as a Deist and not a Christian. I think the teachings of Jesus are probably the most profound teachings ever experienced on this earth. But I will not allow myself to be tainted by the awful thing Christianity has become.

Others don't seem to mind having that taint hanging over them.

 

[seeking.IAM]

The political agenda of the Christian right does not represent the belief of all Christians, certainly it does not represent my belief. But, I should stop now lest we take this into thread drift from the original topic of abortion. Peace to you.

 

[zephcom]

The political agenda of the Christian right does not represent the belief of all Christians, certainly it does not represent my belief. But, I should stop now lest we take this into thread drift from the original topic of abortion. Peace to you.

Peace to you also. Rest assured that I recognize and truly admire those few who know the Jesus as He is portrayed in the Bible and are willing to accept the struggle of traveling the path He called people to travel.

My issue is with the religion which is wandering lost in the wilderness because it has forsaken His teachings. It is creating a LOT of people wandering along with it who truly would like to know the Jesus of the Bible.

 

[Strathos]

So you wouldn't support joining the military, executing criminals, withholding medical care, or allowing runaway Global Warming??

This is good. I wish there were more like you in this country.

The military is necessary, but could certainly do fine with much less funding than it currently gets.