Theologically speaking, why is abortion so "bad" in Christianity (compared to Judaism, Islam, etc)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no Biblical basis for it; it’s a totally manufactured issue.

Not true at all. The Bible states clearly that God created each of us, "knitted us together in the mother's womb."

[Anonymous]

I guess that there is a biblical basis for it in the way that there is for all moral issues. It’s a Christian issue in the same way that supporting rights for prisoners or taking care of drug-addicted teens or taking care of the homeless is a religious issue. Standing up for people who are otherwise on the fringes of society, unborn babies included, has always been a Christian issue.

But really, this is ultimately a human rights issue, and Christians generally care about the rights of the disenfranchised. Framing this as a biblical or theological issue comes from the pro-choice movement, not the Christians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess that there is a biblical basis for it in the way that there is for all moral issues. It’s a Christian issue in the same way that supporting rights for prisoners or taking care of drug-addicted teens or taking care of the homeless is a religious issue. Standing up for people who are otherwise on the fringes of society, unborn babies included, has always been a Christian issue.

But really, this is ultimately a human rights issue, and Christians generally care about the rights of the disenfranchised. Framing this as a biblical or theological issue comes from the pro-choice movement, not the Christians.

So, what do you know about the stance of the Catholic Church?

[Anonymous]

God didn’t seem to have a problem killing the first born of the Egyptians or ordering Joshua to kill the children of the Canaanites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess that there is a biblical basis for it in the way that there is for all moral issues. It’s a Christian issue in the same way that supporting rights for prisoners or taking care of drug-addicted teens or taking care of the homeless is a religious issue. Standing up for people who are otherwise on the fringes of society, unborn babies included, has always been a Christian issue.

But really, this is ultimately a human rights issue, and Christians generally care about the rights of the disenfranchised. Framing this as a biblical or theological issue comes from the pro-choice movement, not the Christians.

So, what do you know about the stance of the Catholic Church?

What does it matter? Do you really believe that all morality has to have a theological basis?
The Catholic Church is anti-fratricide. There is a definite biblical basis for it. But do you really believe that the only reason you shouldn’t kill your siblings is because the Church is against it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has always puzzled me. While there are certainly strictists in Judaism and Islam, both religions tend to take a considerably more moderate attitude towards abortion and termination of a pregnancy, compared to Christianity and especially Catholicism. I don't really understand why. Yes, I know there's an emphasis on "life" but the other Abrahamic religions are more open to termination than their middle sibling. Why? How historically and theologically did this happen?

As an example, I grew up in a practicing Muslim family and practicing community. In Islam, it's commonly believed (according to various texts) that God "breathes" a soul into a fetus 120 days after conception. Before 120 days, it does not have a soul. Protection of the mother is paramount - both before AND after those 120 days, and it is undisputed that a mother/woman takes precedence in a pregnancy. Termination for her wellbeing can be done at ANY time, with medical guidance.

As for other termination reasons, I (and I know many others) were raised that it's between a woman and God. She should terminate in those 120 days, and without question if it's from rape or incest. All other reasons were at her (and her family's discretion). Obviously there are some very strict people that don't support abortion at all, but overall there still seems to be much more wiggle room with regards to human circumstances. I believe it's similar in many veins of Judaism.

Let's avoid a roe v. wade debate, and try to understand historically/theologically what happened, why things changed in the middle of the Abrahamic timeline. Anyone?

In the 1970s, we got sonograms showing a live person in the womb. We also already had stethoscopes to hear a heart beating. So, we can see and hear a baby before it's born now. Science is what changed.

So you’re suggesting that Christian’s are more anti-abortion now because of science? Before the 70s plenty of religious people were anti-abortion.

You guys are so young. Most people were pro-life back in the day, until the Democrats realized they could pick up votes by differentiating themselves from the Pro-life Rs.

This is totally false.

[Anonymous]

Clearly OP is a witch. Burn her!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess that there is a biblical basis for it in the way that there is for all moral issues. It’s a Christian issue in the same way that supporting rights for prisoners or taking care of drug-addicted teens or taking care of the homeless is a religious issue. Standing up for people who are otherwise on the fringes of society, unborn babies included, has always been a Christian issue.

But really, this is ultimately a human rights issue, and Christians generally care about the rights of the disenfranchised. Framing this as a biblical or theological issue comes from the pro-choice movement, not the Christians.

So, what do you know about the stance of the Catholic Church?

What does it matter? Do you really believe that all morality has to have a theological basis?
The Catholic Church is anti-fratricide. There is a definite biblical basis for it. But do you really believe that the only reason you shouldn’t kill your siblings is because the Church is against it?

The post I responded to said that the “issue comes from the pro-choice movement, not the Christians”. That’s flat out wrong. The issue comes from a combination of long-standing Catholic theology and and was politicized within some evangelical Protestant groups in the 1970s.
No, I don’t believe that morality has to have a theological basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has always puzzled me. While there are certainly strictists in Judaism and Islam, both religions tend to take a considerably more moderate attitude towards abortion and termination of a pregnancy, compared to Christianity and especially Catholicism. I don't really understand why. Yes, I know there's an emphasis on "life" but the other Abrahamic religions are more open to termination than their middle sibling. Why? How historically and theologically did this happen?

As an example, I grew up in a practicing Muslim family and practicing community. In Islam, it's commonly believed (according to various texts) that God "breathes" a soul into a fetus 120 days after conception. Before 120 days, it does not have a soul. Protection of the mother is paramount - both before AND after those 120 days, and it is undisputed that a mother/woman takes precedence in a pregnancy. Termination for her wellbeing can be done at ANY time, with medical guidance.

As for other termination reasons, I (and I know many others) were raised that it's between a woman and God. She should terminate in those 120 days, and without question if it's from rape or incest. All other reasons were at her (and her family's discretion). Obviously there are some very strict people that don't support abortion at all, but overall there still seems to be much more wiggle room with regards to human circumstances. I believe it's similar in many veins of Judaism.

Let's avoid a roe v. wade debate, and try to understand historically/theologically what happened, why things changed in the middle of the Abrahamic timeline. Anyone?

In the 1970s, we got sonograms showing a live person in the womb. We also already had stethoscopes to hear a heart beating. So, we can see and hear a baby before it's born now. Science is what changed.

So you’re suggesting that Christian’s are more anti-abortion now because of science? Before the 70s plenty of religious people were anti-abortion.

You guys are so young. Most people were pro-life back in the day, until the Democrats realized they could pick up votes by differentiating themselves from the Pro-life Rs.

This is totally false.

Your assertion would be much more convincing if you actually supported it with something. Using the word “totally” isn’t as enlightening as actual information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no Biblical basis for it; it’s a totally manufactured issue.

Not true at all. The Bible states clearly that God created each of us, "knitted us together in the mother's womb."

Abortifacients existed in biblical times and yet fetal death is distinct from murder on the face of the text and abortion is not addressed by it. This makes abortion a “matter of conscience” and not forbidden by the Bible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has always puzzled me. While there are certainly strictists in Judaism and Islam, both religions tend to take a considerably more moderate attitude towards abortion and termination of a pregnancy, compared to Christianity and especially Catholicism. I don't really understand why. Yes, I know there's an emphasis on "life" but the other Abrahamic religions are more open to termination than their middle sibling. Why? How historically and theologically did this happen?

As an example, I grew up in a practicing Muslim family and practicing community. In Islam, it's commonly believed (according to various texts) that God "breathes" a soul into a fetus 120 days after conception. Before 120 days, it does not have a soul. Protection of the mother is paramount - both before AND after those 120 days, and it is undisputed that a mother/woman takes precedence in a pregnancy. Termination for her wellbeing can be done at ANY time, with medical guidance.

As for other termination reasons, I (and I know many others) were raised that it's between a woman and God. She should terminate in those 120 days, and without question if it's from rape or incest. All other reasons were at her (and her family's discretion). Obviously there are some very strict people that don't support abortion at all, but overall there still seems to be much more wiggle room with regards to human circumstances. I believe it's similar in many veins of Judaism.

Let's avoid a roe v. wade debate, and try to understand historically/theologically what happened, why things changed in the middle of the Abrahamic timeline. Anyone?

In the 1970s, we got sonograms showing a live person in the womb. We also already had stethoscopes to hear a heart beating. So, we can see and hear a baby before it's born now. Science is what changed.

So you’re suggesting that Christian’s are more anti-abortion now because of science? Before the 70s plenty of religious people were anti-abortion.

You guys are so young. Most people were pro-life back in the day, until the Democrats realized they could pick up votes by differentiating themselves from the Pro-life Rs.

This is totally false.

Your assertion would be much more convincing if you actually supported it with something. Using the word “totally” isn’t as enlightening as actual information.

Someone else did upthread. Support for Roe was about the same when it passed as what it is now. And when it passed the group that most supported it was Republicans. “Pro-life” wasn’t a thing until the late 70s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:God didn’t seem to have a problem killing the first born of the Egyptians or ordering Joshua to kill the children of the Canaanites.

Good point. He stopped Abraham from sacrificing his son, but other leaders are praised for wiping out entire towns, including the children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has always puzzled me. While there are certainly strictists in Judaism and Islam, both religions tend to take a considerably more moderate attitude towards abortion and termination of a pregnancy, compared to Christianity and especially Catholicism. I don't really understand why. Yes, I know there's an emphasis on "life" but the other Abrahamic religions are more open to termination than their middle sibling. Why? How historically and theologically did this happen?

As an example, I grew up in a practicing Muslim family and practicing community. In Islam, it's commonly believed (according to various texts) that God "breathes" a soul into a fetus 120 days after conception. Before 120 days, it does not have a soul. Protection of the mother is paramount - both before AND after those 120 days, and it is undisputed that a mother/woman takes precedence in a pregnancy. Termination for her wellbeing can be done at ANY time, with medical guidance.

As for other termination reasons, I (and I know many others) were raised that it's between a woman and God. She should terminate in those 120 days, and without question if it's from rape or incest. All other reasons were at her (and her family's discretion). Obviously there are some very strict people that don't support abortion at all, but overall there still seems to be much more wiggle room with regards to human circumstances. I believe it's similar in many veins of Judaism.

Let's avoid a roe v. wade debate, and try to understand historically/theologically what happened, why things changed in the middle of the Abrahamic timeline. Anyone?

In the 1970s, we got sonograms showing a live person in the womb. We also already had stethoscopes to hear a heart beating. So, we can see and hear a baby before it's born now. Science is what changed.

So you’re suggesting that Christian’s are more anti-abortion now because of science? Before the 70s plenty of religious people were anti-abortion.

You guys are so young. Most people were pro-life back in the day, until the Democrats realized they could pick up votes by differentiating themselves from the Pro-life Rs.

This is totally false.

Your assertion would be much more convincing if you actually supported it with something. Using the word “totally” isn’t as enlightening as actual information.

Someone else did upthread. Support for Roe was about the same when it passed as what it is now. And when it passed the group that most supported it was Republicans. “Pro-life” wasn’t a thing until the late 70s.

Thanks! I appreciate your response. And I scrolled back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The focus on Catholicism in this discussion frustrates me. Although Catholics make up half of the world's Christians, they are a minority of Christians in the U.S. Most U.S. Christians are Protestants, and beliefs vary widely. There are lots of liberal Christian denominations that do not want to ban abortion.

Also, in the early years of this country - the period SCOTUS is apparently nostalgic for - Americans were not only staunchly anti-Catholic, they were really into non-Christian deism. Some of the most famous Founders, like Jefferson and Adams, we're not Christians: they denied that Jesus was divine. So the idea that Christian or Catholic views are relevant to our political rights is really ahistoric and recent.

Because the Catholic Church (Bishops) have more money, influence, and effects on our rights.

Catholics also do not believe women are equal.

I certainly will never vote again for a traditional Catholic. The US Council of Bishops is one of the most morally corrupt institutions in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The focus on Catholicism in this discussion frustrates me. Although Catholics make up half of the world's Christians, they are a minority of Christians in the U.S. Most U.S. Christians are Protestants, and beliefs vary widely. There are lots of liberal Christian denominations that do not want to ban abortion.

Also, in the early years of this country - the period SCOTUS is apparently nostalgic for - Americans were not only staunchly anti-Catholic, they were really into non-Christian deism. Some of the most famous Founders, like Jefferson and Adams, we're not Christians: they denied that Jesus was divine. So the idea that Christian or Catholic views are relevant to our political rights is really ahistoric and recent.

Because the Catholic Church (Bishops) have more money, influence, and effects on our rights.

Catholics also do not believe women are equal.

I certainly will never vote again for a traditional Catholic. The US Council of Bishops is one of the most morally corrupt institutions in the US.

Don’t forget to condemn the Pope, the Bishop of Rome!!! He just reiterated his support for the Church’s doctrine prohibiting all abortion without exception.