Skip to comments.Abortion isn't a religious issue (And it should not be a political issue says the author)
Posted on 11/04/2007 4:58:54 AM PST by shrinkermd
Evangelicals are adamant, but religion really has nothing to say about the issue
What makes opposition to abortion the issue it is for each of the GOP presidential candidates is the fact that it is the ultimate "wedge issue" -- it is nonnegotiable. The right-to-life people hold that it is as strong a point of religion as any can be. It is religious because the Sixth Commandment (or the Fifth by Catholic count) says, "Thou shalt not kill." For evangelical Christians, in general, abortion is murder. That is why what others think, what polls say, what looks practical does not matter for them. One must oppose murder, however much rancor or controversy may ensue.
But is abortion murder? Most people think not. Evangelicals may argue that most people in Germany thought it was all right to kill Jews. But the parallel is not valid. Killing Jews was killing persons. It is not demonstrable that killing fetuses is killing persons. Not even evangelicals act as if it were. If so, a woman seeking an abortion would be the most culpable person. She is killing her own child. But the evangelical community does not call for her execution.
About 10% of evangelicals, according to polls, allow for abortion in the case of rape or incest. But the circumstances of conception should not change the nature of the thing conceived. If it is a human person, killing it is punishing it for something it had nothing to do with. We do not kill people because they had a criminal parent.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I only posted the first three paragraphs. In the artilce there is a section on the Pope allegedly acting only on "natural law" rather than Biblical precedent.
Finally, the article does not mention the ancients, long before Christ, condemned abortion. See the Hippocratic Oath (500 b.c.) prohibition to abortions. Physicians took this oath for thousands of years.
Yes it is.
Go to 1000 couples that are about to have a baby. Ask them if killing their fetus is the same as killing their baby. 100% will say yes.
The definition of murder should not be left to the perpetrator.
Thou shall not kill seems rather straight forward to me.
About 10% of evangelicals, according to polls, allow for abortion in the case of rape or incest. But the circumstances of conception should not change the nature of the thing conceived.
whatcha talkin about willis? 10% is only 10%.
I'm not interested in "understanding" how pro infanticide liberals "think."
Leftists are such idiots that they don't even understand the crux of the arguments they are making. The fact is that black slavery and the holocaust were both justified on the same principal that this writer is making, that the victims are NOT FULLY HUMAN. What an idiot.
Then we (the survivors) could return to being normal people in a normal world with normal rules.
Obviously we are not going to do that. The fact that we do not threaten to do so merely emboldens them, and that's where you get articles like this piece in the LA Times.
What grade is this author in?
Bingo. For abortophiles the fetus is a "person" if the mother wants it, and not a "person" if she doesn't want it. The personhood of the fetus is wholly dependent on the whims of the mother.
A person who has no morals should not be trusted at anything.
I'm disappointed in Wills. This is shooting fish in a barrel.
OK, so I redefine the legal term "person" to exclude Jews. Now I can kill all the Jews I want without killing a person.
Women kill their babies just so they can fornicate without the 18-yr-long consequences.
But is abortion murder? Most people think not. Evangelicals may argue that most people in Germany thought it was all right to kill Jews. But the parallel is not valid. Killing Jews was killing persons. It is not demonstrable that killing fetuses is killing persons.
The writer makes statements like these without any supporting evidence whatsoever. He doesn't even point out the fact that a pregnant woman will decide her child is a human by giving it a name, decide which schools the baby can go to, the room the baby will have up until the point she decides to have an abortion...then all bets are off and the baby is no longer human according to the psychology of the woman...even though the biology of the baby hasn't chnged. Liberal bull!!!
Of course we don't call for her execution, we would rather see her restored and whole. We preach forgiveness from sin, not vengeance.
This is Rudy Giuliani propaganda.
The 1 or 2% of the queers legislate as if there is a vast majority ... the 1 or less % of Islamists take over whole towns and are well on their way to controlling the gum'mint skools ...
Actually, it isn't. "Person" in this sense is a legal term, not a medical or scientific one.
It thus has no inherent meaning at all, but only what is assigned it by the legal system, which in this case means a single swing voter on the Supreme Court.
What the pro-choice people never seem to realize is that women, Jews, blacks, homosexuals, old people, crippled people and any other of their favorite groups could equally well be classified as non-persons using exactly the same procedure.
His ancestors probably used the same humanist defense when enslaving Africans, who were looked upon as less-than-human: "It is not demonstrable that chaining Negroes is chaining persons."