Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
betsy

Abortion on Christian Grounds

Recommended Posts

I've given my strong views on abortion, had argued passionately against it based on human rights. Although I've stated that my anti-abortion stance is primarily fueled by my religious belief, nevertheless I tackled the issue on this board not with faith-based arguments/reasons but by insisting it is a gross violations of human right.

This topic was inspired by an encounter with a church elder from the same denomination I now belong (Baptist). Yes, I've just been recently baptized (again) - this time voluntarily, symbolic and much more meaningful since it states my sincere desire to belong to Christ.

My discussion with the elderly led tothe issues of abortion and gay marriage. To my surprise, he stated that, "the pages are blank" on those issues - meaning they're not in the Bible. It is true. Nowhere in the Bible does it explicitly state, "Thou shalt not abort"....but I don't think the pages are blank. So I did my own research. THE PAGES ARE INDEED NOT BLANK!

Here are the results.

Please don't get me wrong. This elderly is a good man with good intentions, doing his own ministry of visiting state penitentiaries, actively doing his part in spreading not only the gospel, but compassion and kindness. I pray to be blessed with the same dedication and perseverance.

His view about abortion is however not unique. There are Christians who share the same view.

This thread is for them. For my brothers and sisters in Christ....not to condemn them, but to share with them the glasses that helped me see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have several points to give in support of my position regarding the Biblical view on abortion - or the killing of the "fruit of the womb." I will start first by giving the various references that points to the fact that the fetus is human.

The pages are not blank when it comes to the fetus being human. Several passages from the Bible depict that.

Here is one reference from Genesis 25, talking about the families of Ishmael and Isaac.

19 This is the genealogy of Isaac, Abraham’s son. Abraham begot Isaac. 20 Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah as wife, the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of Padan Aram, the sister of Laban the Syrian. 21 Now Isaac pleaded with the LORD for his wife, because she was barren; and the LORD granted his plea, and Rebekah his wife conceived. 22 But the children struggled together within her; and she said, “If all is well, why am I like this?” So she went to inquire of the LORD.

23 And the LORD said to her:

“Two nations are in your womb,

Two peoples shall be separated from your body;

One people shall be stronger than the other,

And the older shall serve the younger.”

24 So when her days were fulfilled for her to give birth, indeed there were twins in her womb. 25 And the first came out red. He was like a hairy garment all over; so they called his name Esau. 26 Afterward his brother came out, and his hand took hold of Esau’s heel; so his name was called Jacob.[c] Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them.

The fetuses were referred to as "children."

Two nations are in your womb. Nations are people.

The following verses from Job supports my position that the fetus is human.

Job 3

After this opened Job his mouth, and cursed his day.

2 And Job spake, and said,

3 Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night in which it was said, There is a man child conceived.

JOB 10

8 Thine hands have made me and fashioned me together round about; yet thou dost destroy me.

9 Remember, I beseech thee, that thou hast made me as the clay; and wilt thou bring me into dust again?

10 Hast thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese?

11 Thou hast clothed me with skin and flesh, and hast fenced me with bones and sinews.

12 Thou hast granted me life and favour, and thy visitation hath preserved my spirit.

JOB 31

14 What then shall I do when God riseth up? and when he visiteth, what shall I answer him?

15 Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb?

16 If I have withheld the poor from their desire, or have caused the eyes of the widow to fail;

17 Or have eaten my morsel myself alone, and the fatherless hath not eaten thereof;

18 (For from my youth he was brought up with me, as with a father, and I have guided her from my mother's womb;)

The following verses from Isaiah show the significance of the fetus in the eyes of God.

Isaiah 44: 2

44 Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen:

2 Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen.

Isaiah 44

24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Isaiah 13:18

18 Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.

NOTE: If the “fruit of the womb” is nothing but a blob, why would it require any pity at all?

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've given my strong views on abortion, had argued passionately against it based on human rights. Although I've stated that my anti-abortion stance is primarily fueled by my religious belief, nevertheless I tackled the issue on this board not with faith-based arguments/reasons but by insisting it is a gross violations of human right.

I would stop there.

While you have tried to base your debate on human rights, where the problem occurs is you favour giving rights to something that has none, all the while denying the one who has the right enshrined.

Best rethink this angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, betsy, but what do...

The Jewish Torah

The Muslim Qu'ran

The Book of Mormon

The Kitab-i-Aqdas of Bahá’u’lláh

The Hindu Vedas

The Avestas of Zarathustra

The Adi-Granth of the Sikhs

The Mahabarata’s Bhagavad-Gita

The Urantia book

The Buddhist Tao Te Ching

The Neo-Pagan Book of Shadows

The Cannon of Confucius

...say about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty sparse. Maybe fruit of the womb can also mean young children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm mostly pro-life. But my views are based on science. Religion really has nothing to do with it for me. It's pretty irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would stop there.

While you have tried to base your debate on human rights, where the problem occurs is you favour giving rights to something that has none, all the while denying the one who has the right enshrined.

Best rethink this angle.

Why would a fetus/embyro automatically have no rights? When does a fetus begin to have rights? 3rd trimester? Only at birth? If so, why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biblical argument breaks down when one realizes that the Bible isn't the word of God, but the word of man, written & edited & rewritten & re-edited & translated by humans. In the case of the New Testament, largely written by people who never even met Jesus or lived during his time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would a fetus/embyro automatically have no rights? When does a fetus begin to have rights? 3rd trimester? Only at birth? If so, why?

You can debate about when a fetus begins to have rights. But if you're arguing simply about the timing, then you concede that a woman has a right to decide whether or not she gets or stays pregnant, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people want to talk about rights, then there's an important question that they need to ask.

Should a human being, who would otherwise die, be able to demand the use of another person's body for 9 months to stay alive even if it's against that person's will?

Edited by cybercoma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people want to talk about rights, then there's an important question that they need to ask.

Should a human being, who would otherwise die, be able to demand the use of another person's body for 9 months to stay alive even if it's against that person's will?

Does it matter in anyway if the person, the "host" was responsible for creating the circumstances that made the other human being dependent on them to live?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it matter in anyway if the person, the "host" was responsible for creating the circumstances that made the other human being dependent on them to live?

You tell me. Does it matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You tell me. Does it matter?

I think it does.

I believe in pro-choice. If you choose to let a penis into your vagaina, that's your choice.

Use the pill with male and female condoms covered in spermicide while using the pull-out method and you'll be good to go LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it does.

I believe in pro-choice. If you choose to let a penis into your vagaina, that's your choice.

Use the pill with male and female condoms covered in spermicide while using the pull-out method and you'll be good to go LOL.

And if you're not, isn't it still your choice whether or not you want to be pregnant?

If it's your fault for causing a car accident and the other person needs you to provide a kidney for them to survive (time is of the essence), should doctors be allowed to take it from you without your consent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if you're not, isn't it still your choice whether or not you want to be pregnant?

Maybe, I really don't know. It's a controversial issue for a reason. I flip back and worth on it. But I don't think the argument that the baby is hijacking the mother's body or whatnot is a convincing argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, I really don't know. It's a controversial issue for a reason. I flip back and worth on it. But I don't think the argument that the baby is hijacking the mother's body or whatnot is a convincing argument.

Ditto all this. It's a difficult issue because among other things it is a question of degrees, not black/white.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, I really don't know. It's a controversial issue for a reason. I flip back and worth on it. But I don't think the argument that the baby is hijacking the mother's body or whatnot is a convincing argument.

I think it's actually the main argument. Can the freedom of one person be forced by the state to be subsumed to the needs of another? That is the inherent ethical question that must be answered in the "yes" if one wants to ban abortion. I must say though I am surprised to see the Objectivist argument from cybercoma.

Personally I would say that I think the state has no business making this choice on people's behalf. Every woman/family should be able to make this choice themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would say that I think the state has no business making this choice on people's behalf. Every woman/family should be able to make this choice themselves.

But this also leads to its own set of social problems in so many ways, doesn't it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it does.

I believe in pro-choice. If you choose to let a penis into your vagaina, that's your choice.

Use the pill with male and female condoms covered in spermicide while using the pull-out method and you'll be good to go LOL.

So in cases where contraception fails, or rape, you're in favor of abortion?

We should be setting limits abortion - ie on demand earlier in the pregnancy, only for medical emergencies later. While this pleases neither of the extremist sides, I think it's the best answer to this knotty question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bunch of dudes debating about what women should be doing with their own bodies.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, I really don't know. It's a controversial issue for a reason. I flip back and worth on it. But I don't think the argument that the baby is hijacking the mother's body or whatnot is a convincing argument.

It's not an argument about the baby hijacking the mother's baby. What is being forwarded is a conflict of rights between the baby and the mother's sovereignty over her own body. That's what the thought experiment explores, I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the freedom of one person be forced by the state to be subsumed to the needs of another?

This is precisely the moral issue, which is why I have said before that it doesn't matter whether or not you consider a fetus a legal person. Edited by cybercoma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But this also leads to its own set of social problems in so many ways, doesn't it.

Not allowing abortions also leads to social problems. We could argue about which ones are worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I welcome the non-believers input, however please keep in mind that this topic is reaching out to fellow-Christians (who think or are led to think that the Bible is silent on this issue), so naturally itll be like sitting before the pulpit, guys. Yep. Like a sermon. :)

Back to what I was saying....

The Old Testament provides most of the information regarding God's view of life before birth, since the OT gives us the law. The law that specifically points to the issue of taking the fetus' life is in the Book of Exodus:

"Exodus 21 The Law Concerning Violence

22 If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the womans husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

This is quite clear. A man who induces abortion or miscarriage (premature birth) is to be punished, which is a clear indication that God values life before birth.

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...