Reducing abortions

[Ken]

In fact it IS in South America. Argentina. She was taken from her mother (by the government) and placed in a holding home for abused and abandoned children. A girl my children grew up with in Brazil was working there, and got to know this girl. It was her parents who adopted her, who are also Argentine.

I was assuming Brazil. But yes. I have friends who work at similar institutions in Guatemala. Where they have orphanages where two generations of children reside under similar circumstances. And they are considered the lucky ones.

Are you suggesting it would be better to murder the "unlucky" ones?

No, but perhaps it would have been better if 13 year olds had not gotten pregnant in the first place.

[nett]

I was assuming Brazil. But yes. I have friends who work at similar institutions in Guatemala. Where they have orphanages where two generations of children reside under similar circumstances. And they are considered the lucky ones.

Are you suggesting it would be better to murder the "unlucky" ones?

No, but perhaps it would have been better if 13 year olds had not gotten pregnant in the first place.

I think we can all agree about that. but two wrongs don't make a right.

[Joy]

I don't support abortion and nowhere here on this forum have I ever stated I support abortion.

Why is it that you don't support abortion?

Because it represents failure. It is a symptom of our failure to do effective family planning and prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place. And a symptom of our failure to support women who do still get pregnant and see no hope to raise a child on their own due to things like the ruinous cost of child care, food, housing, healthcare, education, etc. etc.

I do think there are instances when it is warranted for health and safety reasons, and for egregious circumstances like rape and incest/abuse of young children. But otherwise it represents failure.

Capital punishment for the child? So what crime has the baby committed while inside the womb, that he or she be executed? Murder? Treason?

[Josh]

I was assuming Brazil. But yes. I have friends who work at similar institutions in Guatemala. Where they have orphanages where two generations of children reside under similar circumstances. And they are considered the lucky ones.

Are you suggesting it would be better to murder the "unlucky" ones?

No, but perhaps it would have been better if 13 year olds had not gotten pregnant in the first place.

Then perhaps the very broke culture there needs to be condemned instead of perpetuated.

Since we have a current trend of mass migration of that culture to the U.S., we now have that kind of nonsense going on here in the U.S. too.

[ohio jones]

Then perhaps the very broke culture there needs to be condemned instead of perpetuated.

John 3:17.

[Josh]

Then perhaps the very broke culture there needs to be condemned instead of perpetuated.

John 3:17.

I agree, but I don't think migration to America is equivalent to salvation.

[ohio jones]

I don't think migration to America is equivalent to salvation.

I'm not aware of anyone who thinks it is. It hasn't been suggested in this thread, at least, and seems rather off topic.

[HondurasKeiser]

I don't support abortion and nowhere here on this forum have I ever stated I support abortion.

Why is it that you don't support abortion?

Because it represents failure. It is a symptom of our failure to do effective family planning and prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place. And a symptom of our failure to support women who do still get pregnant and see no hope to raise a child on their own due to things like the ruinous cost of child care, food, housing, healthcare, education, etc. etc.

I do think there are instances when it is warranted for health and safety reasons, and for egregious circumstances like rape and incest/abuse of young children. But otherwise it represents failure.

I'm trying to connect the cognitive dots here so forgive me if I mischaracterize your thinking:

So abortion qua societal failure is lamentable, and inasmuch as it represents failure you don't support/like it. Nevertheless, however lamentable it may be, it is still necessary because of said societal failures. What's more, inasmuch as we have failed to create a society that obviates the need for abortion, it would be wrong to make it illegal or place overly-burdensome restrictions on it. Were we to build a proper society that fully supports women in their reproductive activities/choices, abortion could then be properly and justly restricted to instances of extreme circumstances.

Am I reading you correctly? Is it fair to say that your lack of support for abortion rests on utilitarian considerations of women and their happiness and does not appeal to anything like the "right to life" of the fetus?

[Ken]

Why is it that you don't support abortion?

Because it represents failure. It is a symptom of our failure to do effective family planning and prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place. And a symptom of our failure to support women who do still get pregnant and see no hope to raise a child on their own due to things like the ruinous cost of child care, food, housing, healthcare, education, etc. etc.

I do think there are instances when it is warranted for health and safety reasons, and for egregious circumstances like rape and incest/abuse of young children. But otherwise it represents failure.

I'm trying to connect the cognitive dots here so forgive me if I mischaracterize your thinking:

So abortion qua societal failure is lamentable, and inasmuch as it represents failure you don't support/like it. Nevertheless, however lamentable it may be, it is still necessary because of said societal failures. What's more, inasmuch as we have failed to create a society that obviates the need for abortion, it would be wrong to make it illegal or place overly-burdensome restrictions on it. Were we to build a proper society that fully supports women in their reproductive activities/choices, abortion could then be properly and justly restricted to instances of extreme circumstances.

Am I reading you correctly? Is it fair to say that your lack of support for abortion rests on utilitarian considerations of women and their happiness and does not appeal to anything like the "right to life" of the fetus?

First of all, I disagree with the idea that life begins at conception. I don’t think that idea is supported biblically. And it certainly isn’t supported biologically. Biologically speaking, life is actually a continual cycle with no actual beginning. And, if you go up to any of the official Mennonite or Baptist position statements on abortion from the 1970s you will not actually find that idea expressed. Previously it was mainly a Catholic idea. Here are all the Southern Baptist official statements on abortion over time. https://www.johnstonsarchive.net/baptist/sbcabres.html You will not find the Baptists mentioning the notion that life begins at conception until 1981. Which was about the point that abortion became highly politicized as part of right-wing politics. And there was a political alliance between conservative Catholics and Evangelicals formed for political purposes as part of the “Reagan Revolution” and “Moral Majority”. The previous 8 Southern Baptist statements on abortion do not mention conception at all. Which seems a curious omission if it is a universal moral truth of some sort.

So I am just not in agreement with the extreme position that human life magically begins at the moment of conception and that it is murder to kill a fertilized embryo the instant that it has 46 chromosomes, but that human sperm and eggs with 23 chromosomes are not living or not human. Biologically speaking, both sperm and eggs are also living human life forms. So at what point does an embryo become a person? I don’t know the answer and I don’t think anyone else does. I tend to think it is at the point when it is capable for self-awareness and viability. The new Texas law specifies that it is the point when the fetus has a heartbeat. The Supreme Court previously came up with the trimester criteria. I tend not to think that a 6 week old fetus that has gills, a tail, is the size of a pea, and has no meaningful brain or internal organs is really self-aware and has a soul. Previous Christian doctrine was that the soul enters the body upon first breath rather than conception. I don’t pretend to know the answer. So I would most certainly err on the side of caution and would not want to see any abortions at all happen within my own family or sphere of influence. And I would advise anyone I know not to get an abortion. But I’m also not arrogant enough to think that I can make that moral or ethical determination for others.

There are many medical reasons why an early abortion might be medically necessary. And something like 20-50% of pregnancies are naturally aborted through miscarriages. And even late term abortions are sometimes necessary if the fetus is unviable, or to save the life of the mother. So given all the moral and medical ambiguities around pregnancy and abortion, I really don’t think this is an appropriate area to address with criminal law which is a very blunt and brutal instrument. When other countries have outlawed abortion that result has been utterly brutal and cruel. For example, there are many poor women sitting in prison in El Salvador for things like miscarriages that the police believed were self-induced. And so they were prosecuted by aggressive prosecutors and being poor, they lacked the ability to present an adequate defense. There are even women in the US who are sitting in jail for having miscarriages. I see no useful point in that.

So I don’t think it is inconsistent at all to be personally opposed to abortion on principal, but also think it is not an appropriate area for criminal law to be involved. There are a lot of things that I’m personally opposed to for a wide variety of moral and ethical reasons but I recognize we live in a so-called free society and other people’s opinions may differ. I don’t think it is the role of the state to regulate every aspect of life through criminal law.

[HondurasKeiser]

First of all, I disagree with the idea that life begins at conception. I don’t think that idea is supported biblically. And it certainly isn’t supported biologically. Biologically speaking, life is actually a continual cycle with no actual beginning. And, if you go up to any of the official Mennonite or Baptist position statements on abortion from the 1970s you will not actually find that idea expressed.

The Assembly 75 Statement
Because we believe the Bible teaches that persons are created in God's image, that human life is a gift from God to be held in high esteem, and that God's interest in individuals begins before their birth with His desire that they develop into knowledge of and faith in Him:

We believe that--

1. Abortion violates the biblical principles of the sanctity and value of human life.

2. In the light of the spiritual and ethical erosion in our society we need to accept our responsibility to recognize and protect the sanctity of human life.

3. While we do not legislate morality for society we should work toward making counsel concerning alternatives available to each person who seeks an abortion.

4. In those rare situations when very difficult decisions must be made about the life of the mother or unborn child, Christians should prayerfully seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit with a group of believers committed to discerning the Lord's leading.

5. The Scriptures teach us not to look with punitive judgment on those who differ but to be sensitive toward their situation and surround them with care and compassion.

I should say that I agree with the Mennonite Church statement on abortion from 1975. While it makes no definitive statements about "when life begins" or "at what point a fetus becomes a person or is invested with a soul" it nevertheless leans into the conviction that life, prior to birth, is precious, a gift and ought to be protected. That is it say that it opposes the idea of abortion-on-demand (though not abortion in extreme circumstances) and does so on grounds that the fetus is something special deserving of life...even if it has gills.

I tend to think it is at the point when it is capable for self-awareness and viability.

When would you say that occurs?

From the Commentary section of the link you provided:

Prior to these court decisions abortion was illegal in both countries[Canada & the U.S.]; a position that would have been affirmed by the Mennonite Church.