Pro-Choice Christians

[guywithashovel]

Most of the Christian environments I have been in have been fairly conservative, and I've heard it said that "there are no such things as pro-choice Christians." Of course, what these people mean is that Christians who are pro-choice are fake Christians.

I'm wondering if we have any pro-choice Christians here. I'm also wondering how they reconcile their pro-choice position with their faith.

A bible passage that I often see quoted in favor of a pro-life position is Jeremiah 1:5, which says

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

[AdminAssistant]

As I'm moving farther and farther away from the Christian faith, I wouldn't really call myself a 'pro-choice Christian'. However, I can see where it could happen. All being 'pro-choice' means is wanting women to have the option for a safe abortion available to them, especially in cases of rape or incest, or when it is medically necessary to save the mother's life. It doesn't mean that you want babies to die.

[Lady_Foxfire]

It's easy: while I think that abortion is wrong and should only be used in cases where the mother would suffer significant physical or emotional harm from giving birth, I understand that not everybody shares this view, and I don't think it's fair for the government to force my beliefs on everyone else. Thus, I'm both Christian and pro-choice.

[Flyndaran]

Doesn't the bible mention that a child is only a child after the quickening that is the first time it can be felt to move?
The idea that a text from over a thousand years ago difinitively states jack squat about things only modern technology can prove or monitor is the ultimate offensive nonsense.

[Nyoibo]

If the bible can be used to justify killing millions of people throughout history then it can be used to justify aborting a few fetuses, just look harder damn it.

[smileyeagle1021]

I understand that not everybody shares this view, and I don't think it's fair for the government to force my beliefs on everyone else.

Lady Foxfire, thank you so much
It is truly quite rare to see someone who can separate their faith from their politics.

If the bible can be used to justify killing millions of people throughout history then it can be used to justify aborting a few fetuses, just look harder damn it.

Nyoibo, just tell them that any aborted fetus is one that would have turned out to be gay anyway... it saves them having to stone them later

[Fashion Lad!]

*sigh*

I hate churches. They're so judgmental of their own people. If you go by the bible, abortion is murder. But, the bible isn't the best source for anything. Great stories though. Love the stories.

But, once again I'm all for consistency on anything. Man beats up pregnant woman, she loses the child he's on trial for murder. Woman is pregnant, she doesn't want it she goes to have it aborted the law does not say anything to her actions.

At this point, the churches would be more consistent than the law.

This is a hard subject for me to speak on. I'm not religious and not a woman. The only time I would have an experience at this is if I got my girlfriend pregnant and she didn't want it. Hard for me to speak on something that's really not affecting me at this point in time.

[the_std]

But, once again I'm all for consistency on anything. Man beats up pregnant woman, she loses the child he's on trial for murder. Woman is pregnant, she doesn't want it she goes to have it aborted the law does not say anything to her actions.

At this point, the churches would be more consistent than the law.

The difference there is choice. The woman didn't choose to get beaten up and lose her baby in the first scenario, but she chose to end the pregnancy in the second scenario. That difference makes the so-called inconsistency okay. You can't be black and white about all of this stuff.

[BroomJockey]

But, once again I'm all for consistency on anything. Man beats up pregnant woman, she loses the child he's on trial for murder. Woman is pregnant, she doesn't want it she goes to have it aborted the law does not say anything to her actions.

Actually, research is your friend. It's not until fairly recently where it was a separate crime to kill a fetus at any point in its gestation in an attack on a pregnant woman (California's 1970's law being an exception), and most pro-choice people feel those laws are an attempt to undermine abortion using the thin end of the wedge, so in not too much longer you may have your consistency.

[Fashion Lad!]

The difference there is choice. The woman didn't choose to get beaten up and lose her baby in the first scenario, but she chose to end the pregnancy in the second scenario. That difference makes the so-called inconsistency okay. You can't be black and white about all of this stuff.

No, there needs to be consistency. So a woman can choose to kill a baby because she doesn't want it or doesn't feel she can handle it and it's ok? And a man should never beat up a woman (obviously) but if he does kill what a woman can kill, he goes to jail?

I think there does need to be a black and white approach to this. Determine where life begins and treat it as a life from that point.

And churches are crazy.

[Boozy]

most pro-choice people feel those laws are an attempt to undermine abortion using the thin end of the wedge.

A while ago I posted a link to a news story about a man who killed his pregnant girlfriend.

He received more time for killing the 12 week-old fetus than he did the living, breathing woman who carried it. I was outraged to discover that a judge considered the life of a woman to be less than that of a fetus.

I'm not a big "slippery slope" person, but that shit is legal precedent. And it ain't good.

[BroomJockey]

I was outraged to discover that a judge considered the life of a woman to be less than that of a fetus.

Yeah, that's the other thing people on both sides are upset about. The penalties aren't usually in line with how they'd, you know, sorta logically be.

[Fashion Lad!]

A while ago I posted a link to a news story about a man who killed his pregnant girlfriend.

He received more time for killing the 12 week-old fetus than he did the living, breathing woman who carried it. I was outraged to discover that a judge considered the life of a woman to be less than that of a fetus.

I'

That's sick. If anything he should have received the same amount of time for each. At that point, the judge had decided that that baby was alive and should have been treated as an equal to its (sounds bad for saying it like that, but I don't know if it was a boy or a girl) mother. Not greater than or less than, but equal.

I really wish people would just figure out where life begins. Is it at conception or is it at birth? But, I know that debate will be going on for a long time. Maybe churches need to shore more support to mother's who are faced with this decision and help them make the right decision, whatever that decision may be.

[AdminAssistant]

Well, here's one little kink in your argument, FashionLad. Say that I'm knocked down in an alley and raped. Rapist being an idiot doesn't wear a condom and I wind up pregnant. I didn't choose to get pregnant, and being pregnant and having to go through birth would basically kill my current career plan. Should I have to give up my life plans as a result of an action that I didn't have any say in?

I do agree that there should be consistency, and crimes against fetuses (fetii?) should not be given any more weight than those against the women carrying them. That's ridiculous.

FashionLad, I find it amusing that you're all against government-run health plans and want less government, and yet you want the government to dictate what happens to me if I get pregnant? And I think slippery slope does apply here, because if abortion is made illegal, you can bet your ass the "moral majority" will be pushing to ban the morning-after pill, and then birth control.

[Fashion Lad!]

I never spoke on in the event that someone got raped, the mother's life would be at risk or the in severe cases of child deformity. I never spoke on that.

My question is why is it OK for a woman to make the decision to kill a baby, but if someone kills her while she's pregnant it's two murders? What if she got killed on her way to the abortion clinic?

I think it's kind of strange that it's a baby when the fetus is killed accidentally or when the mother gets killed, but it's a fetus when it's up for abortion.

And as far as government goes, I want someone to tell me when life begins. Apparently it's only a baby when it's convenient and it's a fetus when it's convenient. And people tend to use "fetus" and "baby" differently. If they feel no attachment, it tends to be a fetus. If there's attachment, it's a baby.