Opinion on the Roe v. Wade Leak

[nett]

The far better and more Christian approach would be to make more adoptions unnecessary by supporting women and families more.

Require mandatory paid maternity leave of 6-9 months for all pregnant women so women can take time off to have babies
Provide universal free childcare so that women can afford to go back to work after having children if the choose to or need to
Provide universal free healthcare so that people aren't burdened with the costs of maternity care, child birth, and infant care.

Many countries can and do provide these things. And have far far fewer unwanted children as a result. The US is singularly cruel in how it treats young mothers and pregnant women compared to most other countries of comparable income. But here in the US it is more important that stockholders of companies like Amazon and Wal-Mart maximize their wealth rather than care for their employees and society.

The far more Christian approach would be to make theft and murder unnecessary by supporting thieves and criminals more. Should we decriminalize those things?

Both of you seem to be saying that the Christian approach is a government policy. Christians are not really in a position to decriminalize things or to create social programs. That's really Caesar's jurisdiction. I think the Christian approach is to love and serve those who need help, to pray for them, to care, to be like Jesus.

I do think that those of us who vote should consider voting in ways that are pro-life, both before and after birth, protecting children before and after they are born. But that is really Caesar's jurisdiction. I think the proposals Ken makes are extremely unlikely in modern America, though.

I agree, I was rather sarcastically trying to point that out

[GaryK]

Banning all abortions results in the criminalization of pregnancy and forced childbirth.

You seem to be in favor of abortion in some instances. How is that Christian?

Christians in recent centuries have had many different opinions about abortion. We can argue our case without suggesting the other's point of view isn't Christian.

I was responding to this.

Judging from the comments here, people are immediately gravitating towards punishment for women rather than helping families and children. That is a strikingly un-Christian sentiment and the opposite of a just society. If you want to reduce the numbers of unwanted children then take steps to make motherhood more affordable in this country rather than the one-way ticket to poverty that it represents for so many.

[temporal1]

nett:
I agree, I was rather sarcastically trying to point that out.

you may have been aiming for sarcasm, others aim for “artful” language that dances around uncomfortable reality. it’s a wild dance to consistently vote for abortion (and other sins) while claiming the higher moral ground, enlisting “good” reasons as justification.

there is no political mystery. oddly, politicians have made the issue of abortion (and more) crystal-clear.
i never expected to witness politicians employ such candor! they now do. so. no use claiming confusion/ignorance.

in addition to faith-based efforts, private resources,
the U.S. has a huge welfare system, generous gov education and housing budgets, and more, no morality or judgment suggested,
the results are destruction of lives, families, society at-large, the response is demand for EVERMORE. as if MORE will “fix” anything.

voting for it year after year, decades on end. without ever an apology for being so wrong. this is reality.
impossible to explain. it just is.

abortion is efficient, it’s guaranteed death of human life. guaranteed corporate profits.
it’s not complicated.

[Ken]

You seem to be in favor of abortion in some instances. How is that Christian?

Christians in recent centuries have had many different opinions about abortion. We can argue our case without suggesting the other's point of view isn't Christian.

I was responding to this.

Judging from the comments here, people are immediately gravitating towards punishment for women rather than helping families and children. That is a strikingly un-Christian sentiment and the opposite of a just society. If you want to reduce the numbers of unwanted children then take steps to make motherhood more affordable in this country rather than the one-way ticket to poverty that it represents for so many.

Abortion was a well-known practice during Old Testament and Roman times but my Bible makes no mention of abortion anywhere except for the many instances in the Old Testament where God was doing the aborting or commanding the Israelites do it to their enemies. For example, Hosea 13:16 to cite just one of dozens of examples: "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up." My Bible also ambiguous as to when life actually starts and when the soul enters the body. Is it upon conception or first breath? Or sometime in between? That has been a subject for theological debate for millennia.

As for what is the proper Christian position on abortion? My views more or less mirror the original Mennonite and Southern Baptist views on abortion before the issue became tainted with right-wing politics. Both of these denominational statements are consistent with my upstream comments about how the priority should be helping women and children rather than punishment:

Mennonite position on abortion in 1975: https://anabaptistwiki.org/mediawiki/in ... rch,_1975)
Southern Baptists position on abortion in 1971: https://www.sbc.net/resource-library/re ... bortion-2/ and 1974 https://www.sbc.net/resource-library/re ... uman-life/

[temporal1]

A. .. Old Testament where God was doing the aborting or commanding the Israelites do it to their enemies.
For example, Hosea 13:16 to cite just one of dozens of examples: "Samaria shall become desolate;
for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up."

B. .. My Bible also ambiguous as to when life actually starts and when the soul enters the body. Is it upon conception or first breath? Or sometime in between? That has been a subject for theological debate for millennia.

A. The first examples are 100% consistent about the utmost importance of worship of our 1 God,
which is the uncontested First Commandment, OT+NT, and, the 1 unforgivable sin.

Following this secularized logic, i suppose a case might be made that the most gruesome punishments should be meted out to all those who refuse to worship God - that would sure take care of any of today’s perceived over population! The unborn not spared, but not of special, for-profit focus, in order to “improve” the lifestyles of their mothers (and fathers). This “logic” a real stretch.

Should we play God??
or, stop playing God?? God is a jealous God.

B. Scriptures are clear about when distinct human life begins. Before conception. Psalm 139:13
Right or wrong, for practical secular purposes (human law) recognizing life at conception maybe the best possible practical compromise. For non-believers, for earthly gov purposes, accepting God’s will and design BEFORE conception may be too much for them. However, Truth is Truth.

RvW was partly based on very bad timing.
At that time, major advances in medical science, including real-time, real-life medical photography were emergng.
These advances, QUICKLY NORMALIZED in the public arena, are taken for granted, and ignored when it comes to RvW.

However, based on the indisputable science itself, no one in their right mind can deny life begins at conception. Nothing but life could possibly cause the remarkable, spectacular explosion of life that begins at conception and does not end until natural or unnatural death.

Any child with access to a library, TV, smartphone, internet, can view these miracles thru medical photography.
It’s not a secret. No guessing required.

In history, humans on all continents recognized, human life results from humans. Only humans, no other thing.
No marvels of contemporary science required. God has allowed scientific insights as never before. Praise God.

The new science, alone, is sufficient reason for RvW to be revisited by SCOTUS. [Slam dunk for a revisit.]
Only BIG money could have delayed this. This is what has been done. Big profiteers protecting their interests, not batting an eye at the devastation wrought on mothers+infants, fathers, families, churches, society.

If BIG profits were not central, this topic would be: CRICKETS. They wouldn’t care. i-am-convinced.
This is not about the merciful hearts of corporations for (whatever) women+children involved. That’s ABSURD.
But it SELLS. It SELLS. $$$$

Stop buying what they’re selling. Stop selling what they’re selling. They won’t bother to stop+thank you.

[JimFoxvog]

However, based on the indisputable science itself, no one in their right mind can deny life begins at conception. Nothing but life could possibly cause the remarkable, spectacular explosion of life that begins at conception and does not end until natural or unnatural death.

Before or after Roe v. Wade, few denied the fertilized egg was a new human organism. Of course, it's alive. The egg and sperm were also living and of the human species. The question, rather, is when the new organism should be viewed as a person with rights. The Old Testament, it seems to me, sometimes leans more toward life being with breath, and sometimes with blood. I don't know, but would urge erroring on the side of protecting a helpless human life. But it seems unjustified to be so sure as some are when the scripture is NOT clear.

[temporal1]

However, based on the indisputable science itself, no one in their right mind can deny life begins at conception. Nothing but life could possibly cause the remarkable, spectacular explosion of life that begins at conception and does not end until natural or unnatural death.

Before or after Roe v. Wade, few denied the fertilized egg was a new human organism.
Of course, it's alive. The egg and sperm were also living and of the human species.

The question, rather, is when the new organism should be viewed as a person with rights.
The Old Testament, it seems to me, sometimes leans more toward life being with breath, and sometimes with blood.
I don't know, but would urge erroring on the side of protecting a helpless human life.

But it seems unjustified to be so sure as some are when the scripture is NOT clear.

You must exist in a very different world than i, my understanding has been, MANY noisy, if not the majority, a very noisy minority, has refused to acknowledge human life at conception - many questioning it up until birth. “a blob of cells,” etc. This has been hotly debated, over decades.

Questions of rights for the unborn, in my experience, have only emerged more recently, after years of frustration and millions of unnatural, premeditated, for-profit deaths. i don’t know the timeline. But, RvW has certainly validated questions.

Scriptural words about “breath” are amazing, they resonate. They add to Truth about God’s plans+designs, i don’t see what words could be more clear than those in Psalm 139:13. What more can be said? What more needs to be said? If Christians are to believe God created heaven+earth, Psalm 139:13 is a generous supporting bonus about human life, clarifying, not at all in question or conflict.

i believe you are correct to err on the side of helpless human life - (at any stage or age, unborn or born).
you are free to disagree on scriptural clarity.

i believe the words in Psalms deeply touch many grateful believers. they are glimpses of God’s wonder.
to me, that’s a marvel of scriptures, scriptures are NOT complete, they are given to us as “enough,”
we are not ready to bear Full Light. John 16:12

maybe these words in Psalms about when human life begins will reach you in that clarifying way one day.
the Holy Spirit determines timing.

Thomas’ doubting spirit lives in most of us, no matter how unwanted.

[Falco Underhill]

Let's not forget Luke 1:41-44

41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

Not a "fetus" in the womb, a "babe in the womb."

[temporal1]

Let's not forget Luke 1:41-44

41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

Not a "fetus" in the womb, a "babe" in the womb.

God bless you.

What havoc has resulted following RvW! Of epic proportions. Biblical proportions!
If this were fiction, it would be rejected as “too far gone.”

[Falco Underhill]

Let's not forget Luke 1:41-44

41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

Not a "fetus" in the womb, a "babe" in the womb.

God bless you.

What havoc has resulted following RvW! Of epic proportions. Biblical proportions!
If this were fiction, it would be rejected as “too far gone.”

At this point in the story Elizabeth was six months pregnant with John but Jesus had just been conceived. This should provide us with some food for thought!