The bible and abortion

Many anti-abortionists base their stance on their opinion that God is anti-abortion. However, while I can't find anything in the Bible that would give them that opinion, I can point to this:Exodus 21:12: "Anyone who hits a person hard enough to cause death must be put to death."and...Numbers 35:21: "Or if someone angrily hits another person with a fist and the person dies, it is murder. In such cases, the victim's nearest relative must execute the murderer when they meet."but...Exodus 21:22: "Now suppose two people are fighting, and in the process, they hurt a pregnant woman so her child is born prematurely. If no further harm results, then the person responsible must pay damages in the amount the woman's husband demands and the judges approve."In short, the penalty for murder is death, but the penalty for *involuntary abortion* is only a fine. There's absolutely nothing stated about deliberately "casting out a child", as the practice of abortion was known at the time.Any Christian perspective on this?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Messenjah: Will you not respond to why God considers killing a person to be worthy of death, but causing a [i]forced abortion[i] to be merely a fineable offense? I would appreciate a response.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Yaro:One way to look at things. If you took a clump of human cells and destroyed them - just any old clump of cells - would that be a tragedy? Your answer is undoubtedly "no". Destroying a unique organism, a unique combination of DNA (such as a dandelion, or a paramecium) - is that a tragedy? Again, the answer is undoubtedly "no". And yet, early term abortion is merely the combination of these two.When moral issues come in is a) the psychological effect on the woman, and b) when the child reaches a level of conscious thought. The heart begins beating at, what, 6 weeks? And yet, even mites have a beating heart. The simplest stimulus-response mechanisms aren't until the second trimester, and most of them in the third.In short, I fail to see the moral issue - if there is no psychological risk to the woman getting the abortion - for an early term abortion.On the other hand, this "controversy" has led to some horrible consequences. I know someone who, at age 14, slowly starved herself until she miscarried so that her parents wouldn't have to find out, because she would have needed their permission to get an abortion. It took three months. She ended up having to have a friend drive her to Vancouver to get her cleaned out (that didn't take parental permission... ).I've heard worse. Such as suicides. I'm so thankful that she didn't take that route...It is because of this that I have proportionally little tolerance to the religious right on this issue. I hope you can understand.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

I'm going to start with a sentence that may be a little contraversial. Abortion has exactly zero to do with women's rights.

---

So, is it a woman's right to get raped and end up pregnant?If a woman cannot bear the thought of having a child, is it her right to have to starve herself to miscarry instead of getting appropriate, readily available medical treatment - having the embryo develop far further than it normally would, making the woman suffer, and create serious health risks?

quote:

---

By twelve weeks a fetus is recognizably human

---

First off, you're talking about the second trimester, which is actually somewhat controversial.Secondly, I have to disagree.http://216.158.44.119/brochures/art/10-12wks.jpgI'd say it looks more like a cross between an alien and a tyrannosaur.All kidding aside, even at twelve weeks, there is no thought. And the "potential" for thought is no more the same thing as thought than the potential for part of New York City to end up underwater from global warming is the same as part of New York City ending up underwater from global warming.

quote:

---

You can see the feet, and hands, and even make out the beginnings of a face

---

I can do that, and more, with a mouse. And depending on how you define hands, I can do that with a water flea. The brain is what's relevant.

quote:

---

While still in the womb babies are known to respond to different sounds in the environment, and even what the mother is eating, or drinking.

---

Yes. Late in the 3rd trimester. Do you see us arguing for that?

quote:

---

I believe we should extend the time window for abortion for rape, and incest victims and in cases where the child is found to be disabled or malformed

---

Good for you Now if you could just get the religious right to follow...Seriously, though, do you think that any significant number of people are arguing for the right to have 3rd-trimester abortions, in all except life-threatening situations?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

its on its way to become just like you and me

---

And so would be any combination of sperm and eggs. Is it a tragedy that they did not occur?Would you make this argument to someone who wanted to be a monk or nun - that they're effectively destroying what would be people in the world by deliberately avoiding marriage?By the way, just some food for thought: The majority of embryos abort before the woman even knows she's pregnant. If that clues you in to how much value a God must place on the survival of an embryo...------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

1. No woman who is raped should ever fail to take a morning after pill.

---

And that is *how* easy for a 14 old to come across (even if she knew how to deal with the situation)? There's the issue of parental consent requirements here.

quote:

---

2. No woman who is raped should ever involuntarily carry a child beyond the first time she misses a period.

---

Those trying to ban abortion disagree with you.

quote:

---

3. The VAST majority of abortions have exactly nothing to do with rape.

---

Even though you haven't, the religious right has been pushing to prevent these cases as well.

quote:

---

4. I specifically endorsed special abortion provisions for raped women later in my post.

---

And I commended you for it.

quote:

---

Well since you're example earlier happened despite abortion being available, do you have a point?

---

That's the thing: Due to restrictions emposed by the religious right, abortion *isn't* so available in many cases.

quote:

---

Suppose our hypothetical mother has the child ... how is this different to your above example?

---

Have you missed out on virtually all of this thread? Read: Brain activity.

quote:

---

Do you think it qualifies as a 'blob of cells'?

---

It's certainly a lot closer to a 'blob of cells' than it is to the standard acceptance of what is human (or even a mouse). I haven't seen anyone walking down the street that looks like a cross between an alien and a tyrannosaur lately...

quote:

---

You're not. I have seen people argue for abortion up until birth, yes

---

And I have seen people argue for rescinding womens' right to vote, and have seen people argue for restarting slavery. So? You need to look at what the average supporter of abortion is asking for: Complete freedom in the first trimester, restricted but still present rights in the second, and only in the case of a threat to the mother's life in the third.

quote:

---

Why is it that you don't support 3rd trimester abortion?

---

Excepting in the case of a threat to the mother's life. There is no miraculous "cutoff point" where the fetus becomes human. However, in the third trimester, cerebral brain activity becomes more than just sporadic; human thought has started to occur. It is still just the basis, but it adds a stronger moral issue. Meanwhile, the "right to choose" issue has significantly waned, since there has been ample time to choose (assuming that there aren't piles of restrictions in place by the anti-abortion crowd as a stall tactic).------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

I haven't tried to nail down the exact point at which it becomes human

---

Foam board and push pins work fairly well.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

It is. Although the case I was referring to was Canada. I wish Brits would come to realize that their country, as well as most of Europe, is much more liberal than America (and, depending on the issue, sometimes Canada, sometimes not). An American liberal typically matches up with a European moderate. A British conservative would be a moderate in America. Over here, our current government has been cutting all aid to international programs just because they provide abortions as one of their services. They've even been heavily cutting programs that provide birth control. The radical religious right has a strong influence in America.In addition to the availablilty issues, there's also the knowledge-level issue if we're talking about a young pregnancy, and the shock issue if we're talking about a rape.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Jack - you completely dodged what she said. Carrying a child to term is more than an inconvenience. It is dangerous to the mother's health - childbirth not only carries health complications up through giving birth, but also gives the woman higher risk factors for a wide variety of health conditions for the rest of her life. And caring for a child is more than an "inconvenience" - it involves the dedication of a good portion of your entire life, your entire earnings of the course of your entire life. And if the womam isn't willing to do this? You've brought a suffering child into the world, and made a woman suffer in the world, instead of making no change to the world.Please stop trying to distort patently obvious facets of reality with your false term "inconvenience". An inconvenience is leaving your keys in your car. You can't get much more of the opposite of "inconvenience" than this. If you consider devoting your entire life to something merely an "inconvenience", I'd love to hire you, you'd make a great employee In short, you're arguing for something with questionable (and, for 1st trimester, very very limited) moral value, versus something of clear and heavy negative moral value (not addressing the other issues I've raised - such as the "when they do it anyway..." case). What kind of weighting is this?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

First off, it's not a personal decision. It's a decision to terminate the life of another human being. Individuals do not have the right to make that decision. Secondly, I fail to see how you can consider an abortion a better result for the child than being born and living their life.

---

I don't think you've thought this through to its conclusion. Let's take it a step further - birth control. "It's a decision to prevent the life of another human being. Individuals do not have the right to make that decision. Secondly, I fail to see how you can consider birth control a better result for the child than being born and living their life."Clearly, the issue is the moral value of what exists in the *present*, otherwise, you can take this argument to any ridiculous extreme.BTW, the vast majority of 3rd trimester abortions (which are very rare) are due to significant health concerns. Do you support banning them, even when there is a severe risk to the mother's health? If so, I'm sure you'll find that those who have lost a relative to health problems in childbirth *strongly* disagree with you. If you have a mother of a few young children who is likely to die in childbirth, what do you think the children would think of the ban that causes their mother's death?The myth of the casual 3rd-trimester abortion is an obscene distortion of reality. Noone carries a child for 6-9 months and then just decides "Nah.". It's preposterous.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."