Religious And Pro-choice (Page 1)
Is this possible? Is it feasible for a practicing theist (let's say a Christian, to be comfortable), who believes with all his/her heart and soul in the Holy Bible, who attends church and engages in deep prayer every day, to be pro-choice? When I say pro-choice, I mean those who support a woman's choice to abort. That person, on par with the Scriptures, would more than likely be against abortion for him/herself, although would still technically fall into the category of pro-choice because s/he supports the choice of all women to end a pregnancy, too.
I have often wondered how religious politicians marry their faith with the laws they set in a political party. In fact, I think it's impossible. Tony Blair is soon to be baptised a Catholic and has admitted he was deeply religious during his time as leader and carried the Bible around everywhere. How on Earth can he truly mean this when he voted against laws to recuce the time limit for abortion and is indirectly responsible for the deaths of thousands of people. How can he support a particular system of Government when he is supposed to be voting for God's theoretical 'Government'? It's absolutely ridiculous.
However, avoiding going off on a tangent, can one be pro-choice (and obviously that personal choice being life) for others, with this engaging with the Bible? Whereas the Bible prohibits its believers to have an abortion, does it not say anything regarding accepting other people to act out their desired beliefs? The choice to be unrighteous etc.?
Let's discuss, my chummie chums.
Kypros.
I have often wondered how religious politicians marry their faith with the laws they set in a political party. In fact, I think it's impossible. Tony Blair is soon to be baptised a Catholic and has admitted he was deeply religious during his time as leader and carried the Bible around everywhere. How on Earth can he truly mean this when he voted against laws to recuce the time limit for abortion and is indirectly responsible for the deaths of thousands of people. How can he support a particular system of Government when he is supposed to be voting for God's theoretical 'Government'? It's absolutely ridiculous.
However, avoiding going off on a tangent, can one be pro-choice (and obviously that personal choice being life) for others, with this engaging with the Bible? Whereas the Bible prohibits its believers to have an abortion, does it not say anything regarding accepting other people to act out their desired beliefs? The choice to be unrighteous etc.?
Let's discuss, my chummie chums.
Kypros.
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
|
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| Kypros wrote: |
| Is this possible? |
Absolutely. In fact, being prochoice seems to reach to religious fervor in some. I imagine that there are as many prochoicers belonging to the various religions in this country as there are prolifers.
| Kypros wrote: |
|
Whereas the Bible prohibits its believers to have an abortion, does it not say anything regarding accepting other people to act out their desired beliefs? . |
The word abortion isn't found in the Judeo-Christian scriptures, as far as I know. One must interpret such things as "Thou shalt not kill" in order to apply it to abortion.
As far as advocating for particular laws, I don't think you'll find anything for or against that in the scriptures.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
| yoadavater wrote: |
| The word abortion isn't found in the Judeo-Christian scriptures, as far as I know. One must interpret such things as "Thou shalt not kill" in order to apply it to abortion. |
Neither is the word monotheism but we know by the languages of the Bible that this is what is intended to be conveyed. It's clear that the Bible condemns abortion, we are clear on that matter. Obviously, the Scriptures do not say whether we must be against that specific law, however the Bible does say that we must obey the laws of the nation. I am wondering if there is something more particular, something along the lines of "I disagree with what you're doing but I support you're right to do it". Opinions, especially moral ones, can be shaped based on the Scriptures, so they're must be something more categorical. If people can choose to be unrighteous, we should love them nonetheless, have the right to refuse God's Word and we must respect that, surely they can be pro-choice (in the sense that they themselves would never abort (which is, of course, itself a choice), yet respect the choice of others to)? I'm not stating this as a fact, but I'm very, very confident. It seems the only justifications for being pro-life (this differs from pro-choice since the pro-lifer doesn't think that abortion should be a choice for anybody) are science and philosophy.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
| Kypros wrote: |
|
Neither is the word monotheism but we know by the languages of the Bible that this is what is intended to be conveyed. It's clear that the Bible condemns abortion, we are clear on that matter. |
Monotheism can be found in the scriptures as a definition of the word itself. The command not to have "any other gods" clearly defines that word. Abortion, on the other hand, is not so clearly defined.
| Kypros wrote: |
| I am wondering if there is something more particular, something along the lines of "I disagree with what you're doing but I support you're right to do it". |
No, I think not. The vast majority of scriptural passages that i'm familiar with take the moral, not the legal view of things. As such they do not directly relate to legal rights to "do wrong".
| Kypros wrote: |
| It seems the only justifications for being pro-life (this differs from pro-choice since the pro-lifer doesn't think that abortion should be a choice for anybody) are science and philosophy. |
I think you have your labels reversed, but I think I understand what you're trying to say. I think the basic difference between the two opposite sides of this debate is purely one of values. Prolifers value the life of the innocent unborn baby, prochoicers do not (or value it so lowly as to make it worth less than the "right to kill to maintain your lifestyle").
So at it's essence, this debate is not about science or philosophy, it's about personal values. And personal values are subjective, they are simply matters of opinion.
And it is the opinion of prolifers that the unborn human ought not to be legally discriminated against, with respect to criminal laws.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| Kypros wrote: |
| Is this possible? |
Absolutely. When I had my abortion, I was a Christian and my minister knew and had no problem with it. His secretary, who was also a personal friend, drove me to and from the hospital.
| Quote: |
| Whereas the Bible prohibits its believers to have an abortion, does it not say anything regarding accepting other people to act out their desired beliefs? The choice to be unrighteous etc.?
|
There is nowhere in the bible that prohibits abortion. Au contraire, there is a part where god instructs a man who suspects his wife of cheating to take her to the priest and have the priest give her a drink of a potion that will cause her to miscarry if she is pregnant and has been with another man.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| msrosie wrote: | ||||
Absolutely. When I had my abortion, I was a Christian and my minister knew and had no problem with it. His secretary, who was also a personal friend, drove me to and from the hospital.
There is nowhere in the bible that prohibits abortion. Au contraire, there is a part where god instructs a man who suspects his wife of cheating to take her to the priest and have the priest give her a drink of a potion that will cause her to miscarry if she is pregnant and has been with another man. |
can you tell me where that is in the bible please?
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Religion is your personal belief. Some are arrogant enough to think that their own personal beliefs should be imposed on others. If your religion prohibits abortion, then you should not have one. If I do not follow your religion, then what I do should be none of your concern. Someone who is religious and intelligent would be pro-choice.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
You folks who doubt religion is pro choice should read :
A FAITHFUL PRO-LIFE WITNESS IN A"PRO-CHOICE"DENOMINATION
By Rev. Paul T. Stallsworth
While historic Christianity has always been clear about children being gifts from God and abortion being a sinful rejection of the divinely given little ones, there are certain denominations based in the United States that, in recent decades, claim to be prayerfully pro-choice. The Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presby-terian Church (USA), the United Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, and a few others make up this quite small fraternity of pro-choice denominations on the huge campus of world Christianity.
These particular denominations were once acknowledged as the culture-forming, culture-transforming, religious establishment of American society. They proudly wore the tag "mainline Protest- antism." When the leaders of the Protestant mainline spoke, America listened. Now, humbled by decades of membership decline and having fallen off the throne of the American religious establishment, mainline Protestantism has become "oldline Protestantism."
To be blunt about it, oldline Protestantism in general and the United Methodist Church of which I am a pastor in particular are, on life and abortion, solidly pro-choice. But what, exactly, does that mean? In the case of United Methodism (and probably other denominations), being denominationally pro-choice means at least three things.
First, being pro-choice means that United Methodism maintains, in its official teaching (that is, in its Book of Discipline), a pro-choice position. Paragraph 65J of the Discipline attempts the impossible: appealing to all United Methodists, 65J tries to advance both pro-life claims and pro-choice claims at the same time. Not surprisingly, the result is inconsistent, confusing church teaching that is, in reality, pro-choice.
Second, being pro-choice means that United Methodism associates with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), the Washington, D.C.-based lobby that baptizes abortion-on-demand politics with allegedly religious language and rationale. Occasionally, because of this association, official United Methodism--that is, a few of its important denominational boards and several of its most visible leaders--winds up supporting RCRC lobbying efforts, including one that helped protect partial- birth abortion from legislative restriction.
And third, being pro-choice means that United Methodism and its elite leaders have made their peace with abortion on demand in American society. Apparently, they have agreed among themselves not to bring up abortion in their preaching and in their social action. They have agreed that choice is okay--perhaps tragic, but still okay--and that anyone who speaks in defense of the unborn child and mother is downright impolite and intolerant. In this way, the pro-choice sect encourages silence on abortion.
SOURCE
A FAITHFUL PRO-LIFE WITNESS IN A"PRO-CHOICE"DENOMINATION
By Rev. Paul T. Stallsworth
While historic Christianity has always been clear about children being gifts from God and abortion being a sinful rejection of the divinely given little ones, there are certain denominations based in the United States that, in recent decades, claim to be prayerfully pro-choice. The Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presby-terian Church (USA), the United Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, and a few others make up this quite small fraternity of pro-choice denominations on the huge campus of world Christianity.
These particular denominations were once acknowledged as the culture-forming, culture-transforming, religious establishment of American society. They proudly wore the tag "mainline Protest- antism." When the leaders of the Protestant mainline spoke, America listened. Now, humbled by decades of membership decline and having fallen off the throne of the American religious establishment, mainline Protestantism has become "oldline Protestantism."
To be blunt about it, oldline Protestantism in general and the United Methodist Church of which I am a pastor in particular are, on life and abortion, solidly pro-choice. But what, exactly, does that mean? In the case of United Methodism (and probably other denominations), being denominationally pro-choice means at least three things.
First, being pro-choice means that United Methodism maintains, in its official teaching (that is, in its Book of Discipline), a pro-choice position. Paragraph 65J of the Discipline attempts the impossible: appealing to all United Methodists, 65J tries to advance both pro-life claims and pro-choice claims at the same time. Not surprisingly, the result is inconsistent, confusing church teaching that is, in reality, pro-choice.
Second, being pro-choice means that United Methodism associates with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), the Washington, D.C.-based lobby that baptizes abortion-on-demand politics with allegedly religious language and rationale. Occasionally, because of this association, official United Methodism--that is, a few of its important denominational boards and several of its most visible leaders--winds up supporting RCRC lobbying efforts, including one that helped protect partial- birth abortion from legislative restriction.
And third, being pro-choice means that United Methodism and its elite leaders have made their peace with abortion on demand in American society. Apparently, they have agreed among themselves not to bring up abortion in their preaching and in their social action. They have agreed that choice is okay--perhaps tragic, but still okay--and that anyone who speaks in defense of the unborn child and mother is downright impolite and intolerant. In this way, the pro-choice sect encourages silence on abortion.
SOURCE
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Some gods/goddesses actually respect women. You might want to consider that when you're brooding over the nature of prochoice spirituality. Not all deities or beliefs base women's value on reproduction.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| msrosie wrote: |
|
Absolutely. When I had my abortion, I was a Christian and my minister knew and had no problem with it. His secretary, who was also a personal friend, drove me to and from the hospital. |
This is where we can tell that protestant denominations don't hold the whole Thruth like the holy catholic church does.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
*Annoyed* What is this "my version of worship is better then yours" come in? There isn't One True Way. It doesn't exist. If there ever is it will be because all of humanity have become borg..
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
| poopoopoo wrote: |
| Religion is your personal belief. Some are arrogant enough to think that their own personal beliefs should be imposed on others. |
True. Like the personal belief that one should not kill their neighbor in cold blood for selfish reasons. People decided a long time ago to "impose" that belief on all of society. And they didn't stop there, they went after robbery, kidnapping, assault and battery, etc., all kinds of stuff.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| meblonde01 wrote: |
|
can you tell me where that is in the bible please? |
Numbers 5.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| nightangel73 wrote: |
|
This is where we can tell that protestant denominations don't hold the whole Thruth like the holy catholic church does. |
I wouldn't be so smug, if I were you. Your misogynist catholic denomination is just as much a crock as any other denomination or religion.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| msrosie wrote: | ||||
Absolutely. When I had my abortion, I was a Christian and my minister knew and had no problem with it. His secretary, who was also a personal friend, drove me to and from the hospital.
There is nowhere in the bible that prohibits abortion. Au contraire, there is a part where god instructs a man who suspects his wife of cheating to take her to the priest and have the priest give her a drink of a potion that will cause her to miscarry if she is pregnant and has been with another man. |
I was just about to post something similar... give me a minute to find my Bible.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
This is one of the reasons why I believe that abortion is not considered murder in the eyes of God (just one, not all but it seemed rather eye opening to me at the time).
"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."
Exodus 21:22-25
Notice that if the fetus is killed, the punishment is a fine. But if anything further happens, like the woman is seriously injured or killed there is a more serious punishment involved. Also check out Leviticus chapter 27. Do you see the value system placed on children? do you also see that children younger than 1 month old have no value assigned to them? This is the value system that the Bible says that God himself set. Or what about the book of Genesis? I distinctly remember a pregnant woman being condemned to burn somewhere in there. If the fetus was a "real, live human being" why wouldn't they wait until it was born to turn her crispy? Someone find that passage for me? I can't find it for the life of me right now... Ah, here we go. It was Judah and Tamar. She didn't end up being burnt but the point is that she was condemned to burn fetus and all and no one had a problem with the idea.
"And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."
Exodus 21:22-25
Notice that if the fetus is killed, the punishment is a fine. But if anything further happens, like the woman is seriously injured or killed there is a more serious punishment involved. Also check out Leviticus chapter 27. Do you see the value system placed on children? do you also see that children younger than 1 month old have no value assigned to them? This is the value system that the Bible says that God himself set. Or what about the book of Genesis? I distinctly remember a pregnant woman being condemned to burn somewhere in there. If the fetus was a "real, live human being" why wouldn't they wait until it was born to turn her crispy? Someone find that passage for me? I can't find it for the life of me right now... Ah, here we go. It was Judah and Tamar. She didn't end up being burnt but the point is that she was condemned to burn fetus and all and no one had a problem with the idea.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Re: Religious And Pro-choice
| nightangel73 wrote: | ||
This is where we can tell that protestant denominations don't hold the whole Thruth like the holy catholic church does. |
Sorry, but I feel compelled to reply. Catholicism preaches erroneously that the Madonna was a perpetual virgin, when in fact she went on to have more children with her husband, Joseph. Mainstream Christians celebrate Christmas and birthdays, yet these are not found in the Bible and originate in Paganism (there are, actually, two birthdays celebrated in the Bible but they are not viewed positively, if you read the Holy Book). Unfortunately, nobody has been able to compile a full binding of the Scriptures, which have been found at various times over the years and translations are scrambled together. Nobody knows the truth, especially not the paedophile-phile Nazi Pope.
Anyway, back on topic, the Bible expresses profusely that life is a wonderful, ineffably divine gift that must not be taken. I cannot see how abortion would be permitted but not euthanasia, for example. Just like the word monotheism, abortion does not actually appear in the Scriptures although its definition is described and as sinful and that. I find it highly hypocritical for a Christian to have an abortion, although s/he could be pro-choice in the sense that s/he feels it should be legal for other women (secular, most likely) to have one, just as they have the right not to be under theocratic control and forced into believing in God. I'm pretty sure that this stance can be engaged by Christians. As I understand, Christians must "respect the laws of the nation as long as they don't interfere with God's laws". But for Chistians themselves to actually have a termination? I'd like to see the biblical evidence for this.
Kypros.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
So you don't think the passages that I posted show the groundwork for not viewing an abortion as murder?
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
*bumped because I'm truly curious*
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
No, sorry, I don't, purely because there are much more conflicting and definitive verses that condemn such an act. Your verses also show that it is not favourably looked upon.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
You marked this post as helpful! I changed my mind
Sign up for FREE weekly health tips!
Saving
The site is not a replacement for professional medical opinion, examination, diagnosis or treatment.
Always seek the advice of your medical doctor or other qualified health professional before starting any new treatment
or making any changes to existing treatment. Do not delay seeking or disregard medical advice based on information
written by any author on this site. No health questions and information on eHealth Forum is regulated or
evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and therefore the information should not be used to diagnose, treat, cure or
prevent any disease without the supervision of a medical doctor. Posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author,
and not the administrators, moderators, or editorial staff and hence eHealth Forum and its principals will accept no
liabilities or responsibilities for the statements made. Health Disclaimer
This page was last updated on Dec 10, 2019.
© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands
This page was last updated on Dec 10, 2019.
© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands
