Abortion and religion

[BigMakk]

I'm sorry if this is a repost, but I searched and couldn't find anything on this topic regarding my question.

Abortion is a very controversial topic, and it seems that religious people have the largest percentage of anti-abortionists due to the life at conception view.

Now, I've heard from Christians and Catholics that babies that die have not sinned so they go straight to heaven. So my question is if abortion is killing a baby and that baby goes to heaven anyway, why in their opinion is it so bad?

[Locke]

Those Christians who told you that? Wrong. They're the kind who think that "God couldn't punish an innocent child." Well, there's several reason why he can and must. First off, the child is not innocent. It may not have committed any sins, but it still has a sin nature. So, even though it has done nothing wrong, it is to be punished for being an heir to the human condition. Don't think that sounds fair? Jesus recieved the greatest punishment any human will have to bear; he was completely innocent and without sin, yet he took the punishment for all sins for all eternity, took it upon his shoulders. If God can punish His own son in such a way, it is easy to imagine babies recieving the same treatment.

And another thing: do you think that the only thing Christians care about is having people "get saved?" Wrong. Even if a baby was allowed to live instead of being aborted and became a vehement atheist, would it have been better for him not to live? No, because every life is sacred, no matter where it goes.

Well, I could probably say more, but I'll wait to see what you guys say.

[Dark616]

Originally Posted by Locke

Those Christians who told you that? Wrong. They're the kind who think that "God couldn't punish an innocent child." Well, there's several reason why he can and must. First off, the child is not innocent. It may not have committed any sins, but it still has a sin nature. So, even though it has done nothing wrong, it is to be punished for being an heir to the human condition. Don't think that sounds fair? Jesus recieved the greatest punishment any human will have to bear; he was completely innocent and without sin, yet he took the punishment for all sins for all eternity, took it upon his shoulders. If God can punish His own son in such a way, it is easy to imagine babies recieving the same treatment.

And another thing: do you think that the only thing Christians care about is having people "get saved?" Wrong. Even if a baby was allowed to live instead of being aborted and became a vehement atheist, would it have been better for him not to live? No, because every life is sacred, no matter where it goes.

Well, I could probably say more, but I'll wait to see what you guys say.

Are you referring to the belief of Original Sin? and Jesus was a SACRIFICE, and that is why he suffered. I agree on the grow up to be atheist part. Every life is sacred. I put abortion on level with parents who drown/smother/intentionally kill their child. both are deplorable acts of murder in my eyes.

[Atrocious]

I can't have babies so abortion isn't a topic I should really have an opinion on even though I do to defend my stand point on it.

But Christians believe in essence before existence instead of existence before essence.

[BigMakk]

Originally Posted by Locke

Those Christians who told you that? Wrong. They're the kind who think that "God couldn't punish an innocent child." Well, there's several reason why he can and must. First off, the child is not innocent. It may not have committed any sins, but it still has a sin nature. So, even though it has done nothing wrong, it is to be punished for being an heir to the human condition. Don't think that sounds fair? Jesus recieved the greatest punishment any human will have to bear; he was completely innocent and without sin, yet he took the punishment for all sins for all eternity, took it upon his shoulders. If God can punish His own son in such a way, it is easy to imagine babies recieving the same treatment.

And another thing: do you think that the only thing Christians care about is having people "get saved?" Wrong. Even if a baby was allowed to live instead of being aborted and became a vehement atheist, would it have been better for him not to live? No, because every life is sacred, no matter where it goes.

Well, I could probably say more, but I'll wait to see what you guys say.

Ok cool I understand now.

Sorry the Christians or Catholics or whoever I was talking to was in my high school, and I guess they weren't the brightest bunch in their religion (a few of them had pretty high GPA's).

I brought that abortion question out and all they could say was that God still wants them to be able to make choices. Then I asked if they could save someone (helping them get to heaven), which technically abortion was a free ride to heaven from what I gathered from them, then why is abortion bad?

Their answer: They still don't get choices (DUH that's the whole point they don't have a chance to sin so they can go to heaven).

Anyway thanks for the info but I still don't think it is fair that a baby that doesn't get choices that dies still has sin.

[Bear holding a shark]

Some Christians believe in what is called the "age of accountability", which is under 12, I think. Basically it means that anyone under 12 who hasn't accepted Christ automatically go to heaven. I dunno how I feel about this, but it may help you find in answer in some way.

[Dark616]

Originally Posted by Saline

Some Christians believe in what is called the "age of accountability", which is under 12, I think. Basically it means that anyone under 12 who hasn't accepted Christ automatically go to heaven. I dunno how I feel about this, but it may help you find in answer in some way.

twelve is a high age IMO. Although it is each individual person who has their point of accountability.

[Bear holding a shark]

Originally Posted by Dark616

twelve is a high age IMO. Although it is each individual person who has their point of accountability.

Yeah I'm not fully aware of the details of it all, I just remember hearing about this. Do you know about it?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Dark616

Are you referring to the belief of Original Sin? and Jesus was a SACRIFICE, and that is why he suffered. I agree on the grow up to be atheist part. Every life is sacred. I put abortion on level with parents who drown/smother/intentionally kill their child. both are deplorable acts of murder in my eyes.

Yeah, pretty much original sin through and through. If it were not for that, we could save ourselves by not sinning, or as is brought up by this topic, abortion.

He was a sacrifice, yes, but he still took our just punishment, thus he was punished for our sins. Without that, we would not be saved. So, though he was a sacrifice, he was punished. Sacrifice in this case a state of being, punishment being the action upon him.

Well, I am 100% certain that nearly every abortionist on Earth would as well. Why? Because, they don't see the unborn child(and yes, that is the official medical term too. Look it up) as a human. They do an awful lot to make that clear to others and themselves. My belief is that most supporters of abortionists lie to themselves, by it purposely or not, or are ignorant of the nature of a child. In fact, some abortionists will work very hard to strike down any notion that even a ball of cells could possibly be human. Well, by the time most abortions are actually carried out, they are far beyond that stage. And even if it did not occur as such(I speak mainly of the morning after pill), there is little reason to believe that a "ball of cells" is not human. But in reality, only four things differentiate this stage from any other human on Earth:

Size: If size can determine humanity, than are small people less human that tall people?
Level of development: If level of development can determine humanity, are mentally retarded people less human than others?
Degree of Dependency: If degree of dependency can determine humanity, then are children or the elderly less human that others?
Location: If location can determine humanity, that are people in other countries less human than us?

So, back to my original statement. In short, if abortionists would see abortion for what it really is-wholesale murder for the convienence of others-then they would most certainly echo your sentiment. I believe that there are plenty of well-meaning, civil, good people who support abortion. However, I also think that that's no excuse for the act they support. Regardless, the action, not the people, most especially not the mothers, should be attacked; that's just plain reprehensible.

Originally Posted by Saline

Some Christians believe in what is called the "age of accountability", which is under 12, I think. Basically it means that anyone under 12 who hasn't accepted Christ automatically go to heaven. I dunno how I feel about this, but it may help you find in answer in some way.

Complete, total, unbelievable, undeniably bull****. There is NOTHING in the Bible to lend to this view. Again, one of the contructs of Christians who aren't too in touch with reality. Tim LaHaye, Jerry B. Jenkins, the blame for this falls solely on you! These are the two behind Left Behind, the series that put the pre-Trib view of rapture into the public eye; though it's still debated even today, the greatest Biblical evidence is stacked behind post-Trib, excluding a rapture entirely. But I digress. My point is, Christians such as these are the reason why ideas such as "The Age of Responsibility" exist. Well, you know what, there actually is one: it's the moment you are concieved! That's where sin enters, at the moment you come into being. So, in short, if someone tells you that kids are exempt from ultimate judgement, give'em a good slap upside the head for me, will ya?

[Dark616]

what exactly is the post tribulation view locke?

[BigMakk]

Originally Posted by Locke

Size: If size can determine humanity, than are small people less human that tall people?
Level of development: If level of development can determine humanity, are mentally retarded people less human than others?
Degree of Dependency: If degree of dependency can determine humanity, then are children or the elderly less human that others?
Location: If location can determine humanity, that are people in other countries less human than us?

Size: no one is so small that they are still being developed in a womb.

Level of development: mental retardation is a handicap that has already developed while an embryo/fetus is still developing.

Degree of Dependency: no other "human" (if you would like me to call it that) lives off of another person, in this kind of physical extension.

Location: no other person lives in a uterus (even though they have, I don't see the fetus being a person).


Also, you are talking like these descriptions can be split apart regarding the fetus, but they are linked.

My 2 cents

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Dark616

what exactly is the post tribulation view locke?

Basically, post-Trib would state that all of the Christians will be recieved into Heaven after the Tribulation as described in Revelation. Any mention of God "delivering" or "protecting" Christians before this moment are not the Rapture, as the pre-Trib view holds, but rather, an assurance that God has not abbandoned or forsaken his followers, even in the worst of times. There really isn't a whole lot of evidence for the pre-Trib view, but it has gained a large following through, you guessed it, Left Behind. There are some arguments for pre-Trib that have some Biblical basis, I suppose(or else why would the view exist?), but they can be refuted with some in-depth study, and most pre-Tribbers don't know the very well anyway. They assume it because it's been popular as of late. One reason why the media is sending us straight to Hell....

Originally Posted by BigMakk

Size: no one is so small that they are still being developed in a womb.

Level of development: mental retardation is a handicap that has already developed while an embryo/fetus is still developing.

Degree of Dependency: no other "human" (if you would like me to call it that) lives off of another person, in this kind of physical extension.

Location: no other person lives in a uterus (even though they have, I don't see the fetus being a person).


Also, you are talking like these descriptions can be split apart regarding the fetus, but they are linked.

My 2 cents

Your points can be boiled down to one point: the degree to which these four factors are expressed makes the unborn baby not human. The degree may be different, but the degree is irrelevant! The fact is that there is nothing else that makes these unborn babies any different than anyone else, and EVERYONE is separated in these factors by different degrees. If the degree matters, the the definition of a human becomes arbitrary, because it becomes a subjective factor!

Other than that, a couple of objections. In the second point, you say that metal retardation is decided at conception because of the genes. True. But what about metal impairment. Smoke inhalation victims, stroke victims, even a sharp blow to the head can all cause several metal impairment. Even though their brain did develop fully, their brain operates at a lower level, often because it becomes physically damaged to that end. In other words, they suffer the same end, yet through different means. There are many, many ways to achieve that end. So, if we consider those with decreased metal capacity "less developed" under the "degree matters" logic, they are less human. And even then, this whole topic becomes irrelevant. Why? Because the level of development is influenced by far more than simple metal retardation. A 2 year old is less developed than a 20 yeard old, correct? So, the only thing that makes a unborn baby any less human is the extreme degree of these factors. As I've previously stated, if we allow this to determine what makes a human, then we can define anything as "extreme!" When we start to decide what is human and what is not based on subjective standards(a contradiction in and of itself), then we risk a very shaky moral ground, and not just by Christian standards. The Nazi reigme was famous for its eugenics and for defining humans as they wished. I'm not saying that this "degree matters" philosphy is tantamount to mass murder, but it is the logical end when we consider who is defining this standard! To put the trust of such a responsibility in the hands of any fallible man(i.e. any man, period) would be sheer folly!

[BigMakk]

[Locke]

Wait....are you agreeing with me, or merely my assesment of your point, despite it's potential and logical end?

[BigMakk]

:applaud: lol

It's a good reply, I applaud, and I just don't care much about the controversy of abortion. Just controversy of religion ;P

[argondey]

You all may have your own veiw, and thats okay, but as an atheist myself, i dont believe that there is some heaven that god is going to just whisk the righteous off to, now that doesnt mean i refute any afterward existance, but thats another story, anyway i believe that it is possible that a baby who has been aborted...just stops existing, and again i dont claim to know what happens when we die, but imagine, just imagine if your parents had claimed you an accident, if they had thrown your life away, heaven or hell aside, thats a horrible thing, i believe that people have no right to murder their children born or unborn, in my mind there is only one reason to abort a childbirth, and one reason alone, this reason is rape. If a victim of a rape becomes pregnant as a result of that rape it can be traumatizing. The victim can hate the child, or be always distant, and thus i believe that in case of a rape the victim should get a second chance, but for the pathetic punks who go around having sex and then commiting the only form of legal homocide, i believe they dont deserve to get a redo, second chance, or undo button. They should have to live with the consequences of their actions. This is all i have to say, please if you are religous dont argue for the sake of flaming an atheist. Also, if you disagree with my opinion, you have that right, as i have the opinion to express it.

[Dark616]

Originally Posted by argondey

You all may have your own veiw, and thats okay, but as an atheist myself, i dont believe that there is some heaven that god is going to just whisk the righteous off to, now that doesnt mean i refute any afterward existance, but thats another story, anyway i believe that it is possible that a baby who has been aborted...just stops existing, and again i dont claim to know what happens when we die, but imagine, just imagine if your parents had claimed you an accident, if they had thrown your life away, heaven or hell aside, thats a horrible thing, i believe that people have no right to murder their children born or unborn, in my mind there is only one reason to abort a childbirth, and one reason alone, this reason is rape. If a victim of a rape becomes pregnant as a result of that rape it can be traumatizing. The victim can hate the child, or be always distant, and thus i believe that in case of a rape the victim should get a second chance, but for the pathetic punks who go around having sex and then commiting the only form of legal homocide, i believe they dont deserve to get a redo, second chance, or undo button. They should have to live with the consequences of their actions. This is all i have to say, please if you are religous dont argue for the sake of flaming an atheist. Also, if you disagree with my opinion, you have that right, as i have the opinion to express it.

that is a good, reasonable, and rational, thought.If you do all your posts that way you will be respected. +rep. I don't agree with atheism, but I respect your right to believe it. I agree that abortion is just murder renamed, and murder of a baby no less. how is it that people who smother their 2 week old baby to death are despised, but the people who have the baby's brain scrambled by a doctor are a normal being in society?