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."
Preaching mostly to the choir I assume, but here is my 2 cents anyway......
Anybody that votes or suggest they will vote for Rudy G, is simply not pro life!!! Case closed the fat lady has sung
“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.”
How true this is, the position that ‘in case of rape or incest’ ignores the humanity of the unborn..
Gary Wills bent so far backwards in his “reasoning”, he stuck his head up his butt. This is beyond twisted logic. It’s deliberate self-delusion.
The author is correct that this is an inconsistency in pro-lifers.
Are you equally anxious to see Jeffrey Daumer made “restored and whole?” Or do you preach vengeance for him, but not for her? If so, on what logical basis?
Willful suspension of disbelief anyone? Talk about having no faith in modern science.
Without the right to life, there are no other rights.
Actually, personhood is an absolute and totally independent from what a law defines it as. But your over all point is well made, that laws are crafted to discriminate against personhood, be it non-person slaves, illegal and non-person Jews, or non-person unborn children.
esp considering that the word ‘fetuses’ means nothing more than *unborn child*
Try putting an “Abort Hillary” bumper sticker on your car and see the reaction you get from the pro-choice types.
I heard someone suggest that Rudy was a good argument for abortion....I guess Hillary also.
Dahmer knew what he was doing. In many cases women who get abortions are not fully aware of the magnitude of their decision and are usually counselled (preyed upon) to do so by those on the left with an agenda. They are talked into it. Then regret it the rest of their lives.
“Without the right to life, there are no other rights.”
That is such a profound statement that only liberals would not know what it means.
Then why do abortion supporters call themselves "pro-choice" and not pro-abortion?
Better yet, why do abortion supporters recoil with horror and outrage when photos or videos of abortions are shown? Why do they protest when laws are initiated requiring abortionists to show women considering abortion an ultrasound?
If Wills were correct, it would be the pro-abortion side that would be wanting to display clear photographic and medical imagery of what they are doing.
I practiced medicine for 13 years prior to Roe vs. Wade and women were never prosecuted in Minnesota. It was this kind of tautology that made harsh abortion penalties almost impossible to enforce.
Sure, but many women also know exactly what they are doing and just don’t care. Your automatic exclusion from responsibility for all women is not logical, and is frankly more than a little patronizing.
So if it isn’t a human child, what is it?
Abortion is a losing issue for the Dem’s and is one of the few “emotional” issues that rally’s Republicans. Dem’s usually vote because “the sky is falling” and so on this issue, along with Homosexuality and socialism, Republican’s hold their lines. Of course the Dem’s want to see this issue go away, because the Republicans wouldn’t have a rallying issue to get the voters to the polls.
My cup if half full and I’m grateful, yet my Democratic voting friends always see their glass half empty.
Interesting...never thought of it that way.
Are you suggesting that government's failure to prosecute is the evidence necessary to establish that abortion is not killing?
What government does or does not do establishes nothing.
The question, if there is one, is at what point does life begin. I think the answer is clear that life begins at conception. The organism is forming and growing from that point on.
Any other conclusion, I believe, is agenda driven. It is beyond me how "science" can throw up its hands in defeat and not admit that life begins when the organism begins to form and grow.
To suggest that life begins when a fetus is viable is simply absurd - that fetus began long before it became viable.
If we are unwilling to concede that a growing fetus hours or days or weeks old is a living organism, how can we possibly conclude that an amoeba is alive?
It may be a legal question whether or not this is killing we allow in our culture - such as hunting or stepping on ants ... but to suggest that it is not killing is intellectually dishonest and morally bankrupt.
What part of "Thou Shalt Not Kill" are you unable to understand?"
Well, tell me why women obtaining an abortion are not prosecuted. There must be a reason.
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.<<
Unfortunately, you’ve got that right. But it isn’t just women who believe an unplanned pregnancy baby isn’t a person deserving of the right to life, men can feel the same way. I had a sociology course not too long ago where men and women were asked to name their “happiest” day and their “worst” day. One of the male respondents said his happiest day was when he and his wife found out they were having a baby. His worst day was when a previous girlfriend told him she was pregnant...and that’s how he worded it also. When he wanted the baby it was happy and it was “their” baby. When he and a previous girlfriend conceived a child suddenly “she” was pregnant and it was his worst day.
It was quite telling, and quite sad.
Personhood is a pure social construct. Slaves weren't persons. In some societies Jews aren't persons. The march of progress in this country for 200 years has been to grant more and more human beings person hood. Except this particular class of human beings.
It is not demonstrable that fetuses is persons
Gary Wills - yet another Vatican II Catholic who has made a killing from doing his best to kill the Catholic faith. Can you believe this abortion devotee wrote a book praising the rosary???
Is this a joke? Are you justifying abortion because women aren't prosecuted for getting one?
I don't know the laws prior to Roe v Wade, whether a woman was legally culpable or not, but if a woman wasn't prosecuted for having an abortion and legally should have been, then the obvious answer is because police and prosecutors failed to do their job.
But a failure to prosecute, as I clearly stated, is no answer as to whether or not abortion is killing. A failure to prosecute, as could easily be inferred from my previous post, is simply a cultural decision that it is killing that we allow.
It is no joke, and I am not justifying abortion. But the question remains, “Why were women seldom to never prosecuted for obtaining an abortion?” Not having an answer tells me you have not really examined your own thinking.
The Islamists must love the West killing itself off. What need is there for having a WMD when the West already uses a more killing one.
Foetus is latin. Wonder if the goober has ever checked what it means.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.