Celivia, I don't think that there is a secret agenda.

Most anti-choice christains have probably not considered the verses we have raised in the context of gods attitude to abortion. The theology is probably more influenced for most by songs like Jesus loves the little children http://music.barnesandnoble.com/search/mediaplayer.asp?ean=084418221820&disc=1&track=5 than an actual understanding of what the bible says. It is one of those "everybody knows" type of issues.

Add to that a couple of verses where god talks about making someone in the womb or knowing them before he made them and one about the fetus which was to become John the Baptist leaping when Mary spoke to Elizabeth.

As goodthief pointed out most christains focus more on the new testament than the old. From what I've seen the pro-life case is very indirect in the bible. It's about what people believe about the nature of god than clear teaching on the status of the fetus.

It will be interesting to see if we do get a serious response to the points we have raised.

R0bert

Celivia, you say, after finding no basis for the pro-life position in the Bible –

“I therefore cannot accept the justification of pro-life views of the religious anti-abortionists when they refer to God as their reason. Now I’m asking: So, what are their real reasons for opposing abortion?”

I am Bible-inclined, though not learned. The blood-curdling passages you found were punitive – ie God was being pointedly high-handed and doing what people are not permitted to do. This is a bad look to a Bible “outsider” but it is not a positive message about abortion.

I am a Christian. Ex-Catholic, but not anti-Catholic (as so many ex-Catholics are). Anyway, I’m not towing the Vatican line. My “real reason” for being anti-abortion is my inability to be otherwise. I would prefer to be pro-choice. The more I hear of the plight of some women at the statistical extremities, the stronger that preference. However, I am prevented by what I see as a fact, not a doctrine. The fact of the unavoidable humanity of the foetus. I would really prefer to believe that the foetus was not a human being. But, so far, the reasons supporting this idea have been very unimpressive.

I hate the idea that my pro-life position becomes so intrusive from the woman’s point-of-view. The idea of “meddling” (courtesy of Col Rouge) appals me. And, as it leads me to be accused of such things as having an “overdeveloped sense of narcissistic importance” (another unpleasantry from Col Rouge), it’s really in my interests to be pro-choice.

However, as presently advised, I believe the foetus is a human being and entitled to live. And I am yet to hear any reason that moves me to think otherwise, even though I would be happy to shift on this issue. So, my “real reason” is that I truly feel “stuck” with the humanity of the foetus: I see no way around it.

Thank you for asking so directly, as it forced me to confront my own discomfort.

Pax,

Celivia
It’s true that, “many Christians believe …” but many Christians believe many weird and wacky things that the Bible clearly does not teach (e.g. evolution). However, the strong majority of Christians have convictions that the current open practice of abortion is wrong, reflected in these clear Biblical principles.

1) The commandment not to murder, or to kill the innocent. e.g. Exodus 20:13.

2) The unborn baby (‘fetus’) in the womb is human. There are plenty of Scriptures you could quote refering to those in the womb as if they were people.

e.g. Genesis 25:21–22 states: “Rebekah conceived. And the children struggled together within her; …” characteristic of their later lives.

This view of the unborn appears consistently enough without obvious contradiction.

I’ve seen Exodus 21 argued both ways. Some say the lost child is valued less that the woman, others note that the child is valued more than just a ‘clump of cells’. The value ultimately is determined by the judge (v.22).

For Numbers 5, excuse me if I’m missing something, but I don’t read this an example of abortion practice at all. There is doubt that the woman is even pregnant. The curse for her sin is barrenness. Even if she was pregnant, it does not deny point 2) above (also see ii. below).

As for Solomon saying he would be better off if he’d never been born, that is exasperation at the futility we often see in life. A lot of us have had days like that. In fact, I feel tired and need a bit of a rest now. But Solomon was not proposing suicide. And it doesn’t contradict point 2) above.

As for the Scripture about counting a child after they reach one month old, that is a bit like the government grant that we get for new kids at about 6 months. Or like the funny argument someone had in one of the posts above about birth certificates. If I need a birth certificate to prove I am alive, I’d better dig it out from my drawer right now.

(continued)

A lot of other Bible quotes have been raised above, (and on some interesting links, thanks Robert). But rather than focusing at individual phrases, it is important to read them in their i. proper context, ii. cultural context, and iii. context of wider Biblical themes.

i. In Genesis 38:24, when Judah said of his daughter-in-law, Tamar, pregnant from prostitution, ‘bring her out and burn her,’ this was Judah speaking, not God. By reading further you see that Judah recognises he was more in the wrong than Tamar.

ii. Biblical cultures were more family or society oriented than us individualistic westerners. Therefore they more easily understood it when the judgment of God came upon the whole society for general sin or the descendants of the one person who sinned. This idea is expressed by the widow in 1 Kings 17:18 “Have you come to punish my sins by killing my son?”

iii. Judgement, death, as well as forgiveness, and new life, are strong themes in the Bible. From the day dot, God warned Adam that the judgement for sin was death. Adam sinned, therefore he died. But God granted him (and us) grace to continue to propagate the human race before he died. All of us have sinned, and we are all going to die and face judgement.

Some of the terrible judgements God has handed out to people are highlighted by the Old Testament Scriptures in some of the posts above. In them we learn about the harsh realities of life, sin and death. God himself is not aloof from this pain of judgement and death. God himself (Jesus) died the worst death imaginable, willingly taking a criminal’s death (though totally innocent). Christians have found forgiveness in this story.

Ultimately, life and death belong in the hands of God. And he commands us not to take the life of another

Goodthief,

The problem with regarding an early fetus as a human person, and not just human tissue, is that it is in conflict with other moral judgments that pass unchallenged and which make it clear that we think it is the mind that determines human status. Thus we have no problems with pulling the plug on a brain dead "patient", and would have no problems even if medical technology could keep the heart beating indefinitely. We would extend human rights to ET or Commander Data if they actually existed, even though they would have no human DNA. We would regard the murder of an identical twin just as seriously as any other murder, even though the victim's DNA lives on in the brother or sister. We can disagree about precisely when a fetus has enough of a brain that it should be given the benefit of the doubt, but it is unreasonable to think this happens before the end of the first trimester. In fact the majority view among early Christians, as we know from the writings of St. Augustine and others and from early manuals for priests, was that early abortion was still wrong (for other reasons) but not tantamount to murder until well into the second trimester.

We now know that considerable quality control takes place after conception, with the vast majority of zygotes never ending up as live babies, even if there is no deliberate interference. There is a deafening silence on this from the anti-abortion people, even though all would admit that we have a positive duty to save human lives. If something were killing more than half of all puppies or kittens there would be a massive outcry, with demands for a huge research program. The truth is that anti-abortion people don't want grossly abnormal babies any more than anyone else.

A zygote may be capable, given the right conditions, of growing a brain that will support a mind, but so, most likely, will countless millions of your own cells, given that cloning has been shown to work in a wide variety of other mammals.

yvonne, oh there is a pro-abortionist crowd and your right they don't give a fig about women. They are women who are using abortion to dominate womans sexual politic thinking. They are about diminishing the womans self esteem and want to perpetuate the woman as victim. I wouldn't call them feminist but, they hide within that circle keeping the politic on full boil. Their whole design is to gain influence, especially through sexual disharmony, their greatest victory to date is that seemingly unwritten rule that it is wrong for women to be critical of anything done under the umbrella of feminism or female leadership. My supervisor(female)tells me that they aren't so much man haters as they are woman haters. (We are good friends and we discuss what I'm posting on OLO.) To make her point she told me about a newly hired woman whom she had to let go. The thought that one must be religious to be pro-life is probably more a reflection of anti-religious sentiment on the part of such thinkers.
Not all men are parentally motivated and not all women exhibit maternal instincts. Personally I don't think that crew ought to be influencing family practise. Do you?
Being the material or source from which new life is derived is an awesome responsibility for any couple and should involve forethought, not the laissez-faire approach advocated by pro-abortionist and some feminist who are only motivated by the politic of abortion. The loss of a life for them is just the means to an end. (sick pun not intended)
There are exceptions to every rule but, we mustn't allow the exceptions to become the rule. Healthy, educated, childless, employed twenty-something women as according to the profile offered by http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/ are not the exception but, are the rule when it comes to Australia's some 80,000 plus yearly abortions. Women and men should be free to be critical of this trend in the use of abortion with out being labelled anti-choice or religious nut jobs by the pro-abortionist. Pro-choice is about developing choice not restricting the choice to abortion.