Anonymous wrote:All 3 faiths, Judaism, Islam and Christianity and about subjugating women. They all preach against premarital sex

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The early Catholic church did allow abortion. In 1869, Pope Pius IX declared all abortion murder.

This entirely misstates the case. Since at least the first century, the Church has unwaveringly held procured abortion to be a grave sin. Indeed, one of the earliest distinctions between Christians and non believers was the former’s opposition to the abortion and infanticide practiced by the latter. Theologians may have debated the matter and Popes may have vacillated on the appropriate canonical penalties, but the Church has never, ever permitted abortion.

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.

That has nothing to do with anything. And there's no "person" in any womb, scientifically speaking (though I suspect you do not understand 'science' much at all).

I think the PP has a point in that the visual of the foetus in the womb did set off the changes that allowed the religious right to make abortion the political issue it is. The ability to distribute photos of faces in the womb, connecting them with life healthy babies really strikes an emotional chord with otherwise lazy women voters. And it's easier to paint pro-choicers as cold, uncaring and unfeminine.

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.

That has nothing to do with anything. And there's no "person" in any womb, scientifically speaking (though I suspect you do not understand 'science' much at all).

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.

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?

Anonymous wrote:All 3 faiths, Judaism, Islam and Christianity and about subjugating women. They all preach against premarital sex

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the 1970s, a political mastermind had the idea to get women and religious conservatives into voting Republican over "killing babies". Before this point, there had of course been stigma for years over unmarried sex and pregnancies, and desperate women made desperate choices. No one had the opinion that abortion was wrong until it was made political.

Look I’m very pro choice but this is… not true. Wisconsin’s abortion ban is from the mid 19th century.

Was it a six-week. An in the mid 19th century? No it was not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The early Catholic church did allow abortion. In 1869, Pope Pius IX declared all abortion murder.

This entirely misstates the case. Since at least the first century, the Church has unwaveringly held procured abortion to be a grave sin. Indeed, one of the earliest distinctions between Christians and non believers was the former’s opposition to the abortion and infanticide practiced by the latter. Theologians may have debated the matter and Popes may have vacillated on the appropriate canonical penalties, but the Church has never, ever permitted abortion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The early Catholic church did allow abortion. In 1869, Pope Pius IX declared all abortion murder.

This entirely misstates the case. Since at least the first century, the Church has unwaveringly held procured abortion to be a grave sin. Indeed, one of the earliest distinctions between Christians and non believers was the former’s opposition to the abortion and infanticide practiced by the latter. Theologians may have debated the matter and Popes may have vacillated on the appropriate canonical penalties, but the Church has never, ever permitted abortion.

But, why? The question the OP asked is why? It’s not rooted in scripture.

The catholic church refers to the ""quickening" similar to the Muslim OP who talks about 120 days.

That’s way later than the fetal personhood stuff that’s bandied about now by the extreme religious right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The early Catholic church did allow abortion. In 1869, Pope Pius IX declared all abortion murder.

This entirely misstates the case. Since at least the first century, the Church has unwaveringly held procured abortion to be a grave sin. Indeed, one of the earliest distinctions between Christians and non believers was the former’s opposition to the abortion and infanticide practiced by the latter. Theologians may have debated the matter and Popes may have vacillated on the appropriate canonical penalties, but the Church has never, ever permitted abortion.

But, why? The question the OP asked is why? It’s not rooted in scripture.

The catholic church refers to the ""quickening" similar to the Muslim OP who talks about 120 days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The early Catholic church did allow abortion. In 1869, Pope Pius IX declared all abortion murder.

This entirely misstates the case. Since at least the first century, the Church has unwaveringly held procured abortion to be a grave sin. Indeed, one of the earliest distinctions between Christians and non believers was the former’s opposition to the abortion and infanticide practiced by the latter. Theologians may have debated the matter and Popes may have vacillated on the appropriate canonical penalties, but the Church has never, ever permitted abortion.

But, why? The question the OP asked is why? It’s not rooted in scripture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the 1970s, a political mastermind had the idea to get women and religious conservatives into voting Republican over "killing babies". Before this point, there had of course been stigma for years over unmarried sex and pregnancies, and desperate women made desperate choices. No one had the opinion that abortion was wrong until it was made political.

Look I’m very pro choice but this is… not true. Wisconsin’s abortion ban is from the mid 19th century.