Pro-choice "Christians" ?

[earl40]

I have a serious question for all. I doubt one can be a Christian and be pro-choice. The main reason is in my mind one must be spiritually blind, and ignore The Holy Spirit when He screams abortion is wrong. Can you convince me otherwise how a "Christian" can be pro-choice?

 

[Jeri Tanner]

It seems so to me too, Earl. Of course the Lord alone knows the heart. Can one can be born of the Spirit and so terribly misinformed? but surely only temporarily...

 

[Justaguy]

Abortion and chattel slavery seem to have much of the same root of sin: denying persons the image of God. Both sins are gruesome and barbaric.

There were great theologians who owned slaves, it would be hard for me to deny them being Christians.

I don’t know how a Christian could affirm the murder of the unborn, but I also don’t know how a Christian could enslave another person.

 

[RobertPGH1981]

I suppose a Christian can logically come to the conclusion that abortion is okay under certain conditions (perhaps Rape, Incest). For example, What would you tell the parents of a rapped 12-year-old girl that was pregnant by her 1st cousin? Most of this discussion boils down to two categories in my view.

1st defining when life begins (ie. when somebody receives a soul).
2nd understanding of the sovereignty of God.

When life Begins: To me, the scriptures teach that life and soul begin within the womb. For some, the exact timing is debated. When does somebody physically receive a soul? Is the soul something inherited at conception, or is it something inherited when you gain consciousness? Some point to passages in Genesis speaking of the breath of life (Gen 2). In their view life begins at first physical breath. It ignored passages in Psalms when God formed us in the womb. This is probably the most crucial to the discussion.

Not to far behind is the 2nd item... The Soveignty of God...

Sovereignty of God: If you believe God is sovereign then all things then he can work out horrible things for good. The perspective on this varies since all things to some wouldn't mean sinful things. Rape/Incest, for example, is horrible and it would be difficult for somebody to come to grips with why he would allow that or even turn that into good. This is lost on the unbeliever and also lost on those who limit the Sovereignty of God.

 

[C4MERON]

And also, how would you respond to a brother or sister who held to a viewpoint that would allow for abortion under circumstances such as if it meant the high likelihood of the death of the mother?
I have heard, but still disagree with, the rhetoric that says we ought to consider that the taking of a life is not, under all circumstances wrong (ie to save another life). I would argue that to hold such a viewpoint in this example is to severely limit, if not outright deny, the sovereignty of God in all things. Is the arm of the Lord shortened to save a mother even under seemingly medical certainty? by no means!

 

[Eyedoc84]

And also, how would you respond to a brother or sister who held to a viewpoint that would allow for abortion under circumstances such as if it meant the high likelihood of the death of the mother?
I have heard, but still disagree with, the rhetoric that says we ought to consider that the taking of a life is not, under all circumstances wrong (ie to save another life). I would argue that to hold such a viewpoint in this example is to severely limit, if not outright deny, the sovereignty of God in all things. Is the arm of the Lord shortened to save a mother even under seemingly medical certainty? by no means!

Ectopic pregnancies?

 

[Rome2Geneva]

Ectopic pregnancies?

As a Roman Catholic I would appeal to the concept of double effect for cases such as ectopic pregnancies. I'm not sure how this overtly Thomistic concept is received in Reformed circles but I would love to hear some thoughts on the matter.

 

[Taylor]

I also don’t know how a Christian could enslave another person.

Murder is always wrong. Not slavery. God commanded slavery as a just form of punishment for certain criminals.

 

[RobertPGH1981]

Ectopic pregnancies?

An ectopic pregnancy does not lead to an abortion. In this case, both the mother and child would die if the mother tried to bring the baby to term. The baby wouldn't receive proper nourishment either, so to preserve life the mother would be saved.

If for some reason the choice was between mother and child, I think the view would always to choose the mother. Since taking her away could harm the other children, or future children.

 

[Before]

suppose a Christian can logically come to the conclusion that abortion is okay under certain conditions (perhaps Rape, Incest). For example, What would you tell the parents of a rapped 12-year-old girl that was pregnant by her 1st cousin? Most of this discussion boils down to two categories in my view.

Wouldn't adoption be a better option than abortion in these instances?

 

[Eyedoc84]

An ectopic pregnancy does not lead to an abortion. In this case, both the mother and child would die if the mother tried to bring the baby to term.

I’m confused. Your second sentence contradicts the first.

 

[RamistThomist]

I’m confused. Your second sentence contradicts the first.

I think he means that "abortion" isn't being used in the typical Planned Parenthood sense. This would be analogous to removing a miscarriage.

 

[ryanpresnell]

Murder is always wrong. Not slavery. God commanded slavery as a just form of punishment for certain criminals.

This is certainly true, brother. I think a more charitable interpretation would view "enslave[ment]" as more of an unlawful kidnapping (Exodus 21:16) type of slavery, which is also always wrong, rather than something more akin to hard labor in prisons, especially since the term "chattel slavery" was used almost immediately prior.

Earl,
I am acquainted with a few "pro-choice" individuals who profess Christ at my university. It pains me to think that one for whom Christ died would advocate for the death of unborn children. I pray that God will grant them repentance.

 

[Joshua]

Abortion & Slavery -as an institution- are not even close to the same thing. I realize that is a very controversial take in this era -and I don't mean to be provocative- but the ignorance of the subject, as well as the assertions made to godly men who eloquently express the Scripture doctrine thereof- are quite grievous. Everything must be defined, including chattel. Before doing so, implying that what is meant by chattel slavery is equivalent to "great theologians who owned slaves" is cloudy, and ought to be cleared up. Anyway, that's not the point of this thread, so I apologize for diverting

 

[Taylor]

This is certainly true, brother. I think a more charitable interpretation would view "enslave[ment]" as more of an unlawful kidnapping (Exodus 21:16) type of slavery, which is also always wrong, rather than something more akin to hard labor in prisons, especially since the term "chattel slavery" was used almost immediately prior.

I understand, brother. I just wanted to be clear, I suppose. Of course, I object to prisons, as well. I believe they are actually worse than some of the worst expressions of antebellum chattel slavery. They are worse for the prisoners and worse for society.

 

[ryanpresnell]

I understand, brother. I just wanted to be clear, I suppose. Of course, I object to prisons, as well. I believe they are actually worse than some of the worst expressions antebellum chattel slavery. They are worse for the prisoners and worse for society.

Good point- maybe I assumed too much! I know very little about the prison system. That was just the first hypothetical example that came to mind. Thanks for letting me know I'll have to look into that some more.

 

[En Kristo]

Salvation is an act of God. Nobody is required to pass a theological exam to enter into God’s eternal rest. I suspect the thief on the cross wouldn’t have fared well on a test on the Westminster Shorter Catechism. In that sense, their will be saints in heaven who hold all manner of errors. That said, the Biblical position is that abortion is a grievous sin. The exception to save the life of the mother is grounded in the right of self defense. I have read some rabbinical commentary that forbids abortion even in the case of saving the mother’s life: “Who is to say which life is more important?” That’s an interesting take, but I don’t find it persuasive.

 

[aaronsk]

Salvation is an act of God. Nobody is required to pass a theological exam to enter into God’s eternal rest. I suspect the thief on the cross wouldn’t have fared well on a test on the Westminster Shorter Catechism. In that sense, their will be saints in heaven who hold all manner of errors. That said, the Biblical position is that abortion is a grievous sin. The exception to save the life of the mother is grounded in the right of self defense. I have read some rabbinical commentary that forbids abortion even in the case of saving the mother’s life: “Who is to say which life is more important?” That’s an interesting take, but I don’t find it persuasive.

The exception to save the life of the mother doesn’t make sense. Abortion as spoken of in this context means to not just terminate the pregnancy but the life of the child. In the exceedingly rare case where the baby is yet alive in the womb and the pregnancy is deemed a danger to the mother the pregnancy may be terminated but with the intent of keeping the baby alive.

Now it may happen the baby does not live but this is in spite of every reasonable effort being made for the sake of both patients. Its quite different from just killing the child.

There are more commonly (as I understand), instances where the baby has passed while yet in the womb and this poses a risk to the mother. To abort the pregnancy in this case is not to kill the child.

 

[En Kristo]

I could not agree more. The goal is to save the life of both the mother and child. That said, it is extremely rare these days that this situation arises. Most often, this situation is used as a red herring to deflect the debate away from the essential point that an unborn baby is a person.

 

[py3ak]

I have a serious question for all. I doubt one can be a Christian and be pro-choice. The main reason is in my mind one must be spiritually blind, and ignore The Holy Spirit when He screams abortion is wrong. Can you convince me otherwise how a "Christian" can be pro-choice?

You could read Paul Woolley's minority report on the matter for the OPC.

Report of the Committee to Study the Matter of Abortion: The Orthodox Presbyterian Church

We're the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Our purpose is simple: to bring glory to God through our churches and individual lives to make known to the world the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ

www.opc.org

It is found very near the end of the whole document. I dissent wholeheartedly from Woolley's position, but it is one way that your question has been answered.

 

[RobertPGH1981]

Wouldn't adoption be a better option than abortion in these instances?

I am responding to topics that people would shy away from. Its easy to say its wrong until you're standing in front of rape victims. They may argue that the aborted child would go to heaven. How would you then respond?

 

[earl40]

You could read Paul Woolley's minority report on the matter for the OPC.

Report of the Committee to Study the Matter of Abortion: The Orthodox Presbyterian Church

We're the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Our purpose is simple: to bring glory to God through our churches and individual lives to make known to the world the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ

www.opc.org

It is found very near the end of the whole document. I dissent wholeheartedly from Woolley's position, but it is one way that your question has been answered.

"Charity is still a Christian virtue in spite of the low place that it holds in the minds of many Christians. To safeguard the rights of a fertilized egg at the expense of the welfare of adult men and women seems to the undersigned to betray a lack of Christian understanding of the moral law."

He does seem to say one can be a Christian, and be very ignorant on the issue of abortion. I can maybe agree with such. What is interesting is that when I press a pro-choice "christian" to what they believe about what the bible says about abortion, and what they believe who Jesus is, they conversation stops with offence taken. In that I dare question personal beliefs about their faith. Now talk about a sacred cow that may be talked about, which SHALL NOT BE CROSSED in the USA.

 

[earl40]

I am responding to topics that people would shy away from. Its easy to say its wrong until you're standing in front of rape victims. They may argue that the aborted child would go to heaven. How would you then respond?

One could say that "you may never see that baby in heaven".

 

[RobertPGH1981]

One could say that "you may never see that baby in heaven".

The child is a child of believing parents. 1 Cor 7:14; 2 Sam 12:23

 

[RobertPGH1981]

I’m confused. Your second sentence contradicts the first.

One poster mentioned this but to clear things up, when people say Abortion we think of it in the planned parenthood sense (ripping the baby to pieces). Killing with chemical burns.

In the case of ectopic pregnancy, the procedure is different. They give medication to prevent growth and then remove the fallopian tube. The baby wouldn't survive and neither would the mother.

 

[retroGRAD3]

The child is a child of believing parents. 1 Cor 7:14; 2 Sam 12:23

I don't think these are airtight proof texts for proving all babies go to heaven (they could be), but all people are born in sin. Also, the verses assume the parents are true believers, which if they are willing to murder their children, would be in question.

 

[RobertPGH1981]

I don't think these are airtight proof texts for proving all babies go to heaven (they could be), but all people are born in sin. Also, the verses assume the parents are true believers, which if they are willing to murder their children, would be in question

I agree to your assessment. But just to push a little bit further.... When does a human receive their soul? Is it at the moment of conception?

 

[retroGRAD3]

I agree to your assessment. But just to push a little bit further.... When does a human receive their soul? Is it at the moment of conception?

The Bible does not speak on this so I really don't have an answer. Perhaps some of the philosophy people do.

If you want my opinion, I would say yes, at the moment of conception.

 

[AT]

Someone mentioned the principle of double effect. Here is Justice Gorsuch applying it to assisted suicide and Euthanasia:

"To ascertain whether a meaningful moral line can be drawn between assisted suicide and the right to refuse on the basis of intent, we must first, of course, consider whether a meaningful moral line can ever be drawn between intended and unintended consequences. The notion that intended consequences possess some special moral character, tacitly endorsed by the Supreme Court in Quill, is often called the principle of “double effect” and is sometimes associated with Thomistic moral philosophy. The principle is commonly interpreted as setting forth certain conditions for assessing whether a person may morally perform an action from which two effects will follow, one bad, and the other good: The agent may not positively will the bad effect but may merely permit it; if the agent can attain the good effect without the bad effect, he or she should do so; and the good effect flowing from the action must be at least as immediate as the bad effect. In other words, the good effect must be produced directly by the action, not by the bad effect. Otherwise, the agent would be intending a bad means to a good end. Finally, the good effect must be at least as important as the bad ef- fect to compensate for allowing the bad effect to occur." - Gorsuch, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia (Pg 54).

For Aquinas himself, refer:

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.II-II.Q64.A7

 

[RobertPGH1981]

The Bible does not speak on this so I really don't have an answer

The moment of conception up until the heartbeat is when the arguments start to break down. It's tough to provide scriptural support in this area, so in theory, one could argue abortion for rape would be acceptable up until heartbeat (6 weeks). Nothing firm in the scripture would prevent this line of thinking especially since the reception of the soul cannot be clearly defined.