How do you feel about abortion?

[JosephM]

How do you feel about abortion and Why?

Should it be legal or illegal except for special circumstances?

What does the religion you identify with say about it?

Here is an  essay article taken from ProgressiveChristianity.org on the issue

[PaulS]

Good topic Joseph and I'm almost sure no two opinions will be the same!

I support abortion and think that women should have total say over whether they carry a baby full term or not.  I am sympathetic to fathers-to-be that might not get a say in the decision, however for me that's just how it works and so be it (which happens to align with Australian law as no court will restrain a woman from having an abortion even if it is against the will of the father).  

I would encourage many more options other than just abortion if possible (single mother support, adoption process, financial assistance for struggling parents to be etc) but I still think the choice should be there.

In my home state here, abortion upon request is completely legal up to 20 weeks.  After that an abortion is only legal if a baby is likely to suffer severe medical problems.

I accept that an unborn baby may be considered a person, but I believe the decision to abort or proceed must sit with the mother.  I think this is a very personal decision and so I wouldn't criticise a mother who chose to abort.  Similarly, I wouldn't like a woman to feel that the only choice is abortion so that she may feel pressured to abort rather than carry the baby if there were other practicable options.  I think that is something we don't do very well in society - support mothers who otherwise feel they need to abort because of the lack of such support and assistance.

I identify with Christianity but do not belong to any denomination or specific variety of such, but I think largely Christianity is against abortion unfortunately.  I am sure others can quote a number of bible verses used to support the case against abortion (event though the bible does not specifically mention abortion at all), but i don't agree with that line of thought and I don't accept that religious thought some 2000 years old is necessarily correct in all its teachings (or like this article prompts, has turned its mind to a time much different to its own).

This article is excellent food for thought concerning where the world is headed population-wise and how population control is likely to be a necessity in order to maintain any sort of quality of life on this planet with its finite resources.  Sure, contraception is the best option and more efficient and cost-effective than abortion after the fact, but it is not always reliable and we all know of many instances where it either hasn't worked or 'the moment' has simply led people to proceed without such.  It is pretty easy to imagine a 'full' world where rules are made that may say no more than one child (or none at all) and when those rules are broken action is enforced (forced terminations).  I don't have any answers here but I can imagine it becoming a necessity unless addressed now.  But I guess we all have our heads in the sand a bit and have an attitude that it isn't really going to happen to us so we'll let somebody else solve the problem later.

[Burl]

The article is simply propaganda and fear porn.  Anytime some one tells me the human race will come to an end unless . . . . . I think of Lamarck and his faulty extrapolations.  

Abortion is an extremely nuanced topic and touches on economics, religion, law, philosophy, ethics, sociology, science &c.  Only a politician is shallow enough to make it purely a question of legality.

My personal opinion is that we need to make all medicines, including contraceptives and abortifacients, over the counter and simply make abortion an irrelevant question.

The Christian position has varied over time.  In the early days of Christianity abortion was decried as was the Roman method of infanticide by exposure.  Some ethicists are calling for a return to infanticide, which is ghastly.  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2012/03/after_birth_abortion_the_pro_choice_case_for_infanticide_.html

[thormas]

1 hour ago, PaulS said:

Good topic Joseph and I'm almost sure no two opinions will be the same!

I support abortion and think that women should have total say over whether they carry a baby full term or not.  I am sympathetic to fathers-to-be that might not get a say in the decision, however for me that's just how it works and so be it (which happens to align with Australian law as no court will restrain a woman from having an abortion even if it is against the will of the father).  

I agree with much of what Paul has written. 

I believe that a fetus will become a human person and I am against abortion (the action) but as a Christian I do not believe we can or should or have the right to judge the person (who could possibly know the particular circumstances faced by any woman having to consider this option). I can only begin to imagine the fear and anguish that some women must face when considering this action. And as a citizen of the USA, I do not believe we are or were created a Christian nation and one set of religious values cannot be imposed on all others. So I support a woman's right to choose, and agree that other options should be available as Paul mentioned (including as Burl mentioned, birth control and abortifacients). 

I know there is 'help' available for women facing such as a decision, but I have never thought that individual Christians, who are sometimes the most vehemently against abortion, or Christian leaders and institutions have truly put their money where their mouths are. It seems they should build mansions and offer complete no-cost services and support to those women (especially women of little or no means - the least among us) who abide by 'their faith,' do not have an abortion and bring their babies to term. 

Edited June 14, 2017 by thormas

[romansh]

I will never have one. [/tongue cheek]

Overall not terribly in favour of them, but then bringing an unwanted child into this world is not doing anyone any favours. Essentially it is complicated. I ultimately would side with, it is mother's choice (free or not). Forcing my choice on to another person ultimately will not lead to the sort of world I would want. Some might argue abortion forces a choice on the unborn, but there the unborn is barely sentient. We force choices upon the unconsummated all the time and for the clear majority it is not a problem.

 

[FireDragon76]

My church has a nuanced position, despite the fact our conservative peers tend to say we are "pro-abortion".    We don't really approve of it in general, for starters, but we aren't known for being overly judgmental.  It's left up to the individual a great deal to decide what he or she should do in controversial matters, with the pastor and the religious community there to accompany them in that task.  Our ethics is like that in alot of ways.  We give guidelines more than rules.

Some of us are pro-choice, others are pro-life.  My pastor leans towards a more Catholic pro-life position but even he recognizes it is an area of ethical complexity and we should avoid trying to minimize that.  That's more or less what I believe about the matter, too.

Edited July 14, 2017 by FireDragon76

[Jack of Spades]

I think it comes down to whether a fetus is considered a human or not. The most convincing argument I have heard so far is the "reverse death - argument", which means that the logic medical science defines a death of a human individual, can be in reverse used to define when a human is born. I don't think religious dogmas - such as when human gets a soul - should be arguments for or against it's legality. I think legislation should be based on secular arguments.

 

Abortion is a difficult topic because the stakes are so high. It's not like gay-marriage etc. where the right call is quite simple to make. Pregnancy is also a rather unique phenomenon so I can't really use any other comparable cases for support of any position.

 

I usually consider "pro-life" movement people to be hypocrites who are driven by other motives than what their claimed motives say. This is because of the massive inconsistencies in their positions. In my experience, large ideological inconsistencies are always a sign of ulterior motives hidden behind a facade. For example, these people have so far not presented any ideas for efforts to save all the zygotes that fail to attach to uterus. If conception is the beginning of a human life, then failing to attach to a uterus would be the overwhelmingly most common cause of human death and there would be an urgent demand to start efforts to save all those poor zygotes. Due to the massive amounts of deaths, this would be a far more urgent cause than stopping abortions would be. Since the pro-life movement doesn't care about this at all, I think their real motives are anti-sexual and political, rather than actually caring about unborn zygotes and fetuses.