What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Can a religious Christian believe that abortion should be legal? (1 Viewer)

timschochet

Footballguy
Spin-off from another thread discussing Catholics- I was told that it’s not possible for someone to be pro-choice and true to the Catholic faith. I don’t believe that’s true of all religious Catholics or Christians, but I’m not either myself and so I’m widening the discussion: is there a moral contradiction between being pro-choice and being a religious Christian? 

 
is there a moral contradiction between being pro-choice and being a religious Christian? 
Not at all.  (Pet peeve note: the way you asked this question in the thread title is reversed from the way you asked the question in your OP).

IMO, Christianity is totally silent on the issue of whether a fetus has any intrinsic rights that need to be respected or not.  There's nothing at all stopping a Christian from being pro-choice or an atheist from being pro-life.  Things are a little more complicated in the specific case of Catholicism because of how that particular sect handles doctrinal issues, but that's unique to that one individual branch of Christianity and not true for Christianity as a whole.

 
Spin-off from another thread discussing Catholics- I was told that it’s not possible for someone to be pro-choice and true to the Catholic faith. I don’t believe that’s true of all religious Catholics or Christians, but I’m not either myself and so I’m widening the discussion: is there a moral contradiction between being pro-choice and being a religious Christian? 
As IK pointed out there's a difference between Catholics and Christians as it pertains to this topic but either way the answer is - it depends.  I think the only interesting part of the discussion is specifically around Catholics as it's my understanding they can be excommunicated for having an abortion but not necessarily supporting abortion rights.  Also, I don't really need to point this out but nobody is perfect, everybody has things in their life they do wrong and would fall short of how a religious Christian thinks you should act. 

 
Not at all.  (Pet peeve note: the way you asked this question in the thread title is reversed from the way you asked the question in your OP).

IMO, Christianity is totally silent on the issue of whether a fetus has any intrinsic rights that need to be respected or not.  There's nothing at all stopping a Christian from being pro-choice or an atheist from being pro-life.  Things are a little more complicated in the specific case of Catholicism because of how that particular sect handles doctrinal issues, but that's unique to that one individual branch of Christianity and not true for Christianity as a whole.
I tend to agree with this but just wanted to point out that you are probably in the minority on this one - mainly because most Christians (that I know) give no distinction between fetus and baby/person.

 
I don't think many Christians believe that someone's position on the legality of abortion is a determining factor in whether they can legitimately claim to be a Christian. I really don't see this as being debatable.

What is the more debatable question is whether a Christian is sinning in their views on the legality of abortion. There's a lot in Scripture about how Christians are to be and I think when someone says "You can't be Christian and...", I think they are usually talking about whether something is a sin and not necessarily whether that fully disqualifies you from the label Christian. Personally, I think it's easily possible for a Christian to hold a wide range of views on the legality of abortion. If there is a sin in a person's views, it's not the view itself as much as it is their motivation behind that view or how they act on those views.

 
IMO, Christianity is totally silent on the issue of whether a fetus has any intrinsic rights that need to be respected or not.
I agree with this if we're getting our doctrines from the Bible. Most versions of Christianity, especially including Catholicism, have a heavy dose of extra-biblical norms.

The Roman Catholic Church is decidedly pro-life.

That said, Catholics in the United States have a long history of disagreeing with official church doctrine in a number of ways. Most American Catholics are okay with contraception, for example. Many are okay with euthanasia in some contexts. Many were ahead of the church on being okay with divorce. Many are ahead of the church on being okay with gay marriage.

The idea that you can't be a good Catholic without supporting every official church stance, including on abortion, is complete nonsense.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Smile
Reactions: Zow
I will never understand this "religious Christian" term you are intent on using.  To the question posed in the title, "yes" is the answer.  

 
Spin-off from another thread discussing Catholics- I was told that it’s not possible for someone to be pro-choice and true to the Catholic faith. I don’t believe that’s true of all religious Catholics or Christians, but I’m not either myself and so I’m widening the discussion: is there a moral contradiction between being pro-choice and being a religious Christian? 
No, but what the **** is a "religious Christian?"

 
No, but what the **** is a "religious Christian?"
Good question. I’m not sure. I suppose it’s anyone who believes that Jesus Christ is his or her Lord and savior and who attempts to live his or her life with this belief as their guide. But I’m open to other interpretations. 

 
Good question. I’m not sure. I suppose it’s anyone who believes that Jesus Christ is his or her Lord and savior and who attempts to live his or her life with this belief as their guide. But I’m open to other interpretations. 
That's a Christian.*  You are the one that used, "religious Christian."

* Christian was a derogatory term when first used.  The first century version of redneck or others that would break the rules here.  Always an interesting little factoid to me.

 
That's a Christian.*  You are the one that used, "religious Christian."

* Christian was a derogatory term when first used.  The first century version of redneck or others that would break the rules here.  Always an interesting little factoid to me.
I was trying to differentiate between those who actually believe and those who go to church, celebrate the holidays, and don’t know what they believe. 

 
Not at all.  (Pet peeve note: the way you asked this question in the thread title is reversed from the way you asked the question in your OP).

IMO, Christianity is totally silent on the issue of whether a fetus has any intrinsic rights that need to be respected or not.  There's nothing at all stopping a Christian from being pro-choice or an atheist from being pro-life.  Things are a little more complicated in the specific case of Catholicism because of how that particular sect handles doctrinal issues, but that's unique to that one individual branch of Christianity and not true for Christianity as a whole.
Wait, don't we have the 6th Commandment that pretty much removes all doubt on this?

 
I agree with this if we're getting our doctrines from the Bible. Most versions of Christianity, especially including Catholicism, have a heavy dose of extra-biblical norms.

The Roman Catholic Church is decidedly pro-life.

That said, Catholics in the United States have a long history of disagreeing with official church doctrine in a number of ways. Most American Catholics are okay with contraception, for example. Many are okay with euthanasia in some contexts. Many were ahead of the church on being okay with divorce. Many are ahead of the church on being okay with gay marriage.

The idea that you can't be a good Catholic without supporting every official church stance, including on abortion, is complete nonsense.
I haven't been a practicing Catholic in over 30 years and it was an a' la carte religion even back then.  Sure the talky guy who can't stop talking about the bible on Sunday made proclamations on what a good Catholic was it seemed like 90%+ just lived the way they thought was right.

 
Spin-off from another thread discussing Catholics- I was told that it’s not possible for someone to be pro-choice and true to the Catholic faith. I don’t believe that’s true of all religious Catholics or Christians, but I’m not either myself and so I’m widening the discussion: is there a moral contradiction between being pro-choice and being a religious Christian? 
You can be pro choice and a devout catholic.   For the reasons you have pointed out.   But in my opinion.  A devout catholic  doesn't go out of his or her way to fund abortions or make it easier. 

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
I agree with this if we're getting our doctrines from the Bible. Most versions of Christianity, especially including Catholicism, have a heavy dose of extra-biblical norms.

The Roman Catholic Church is decidedly pro-life.
The Orthodox Christian Church, too, has a long-held stance that abortion should only be done when the life of the mother is in jeopardy. Your term “extra-Biblical” is termed “Tradition” in Orthodoxy, which is to say that not all doctrine comes from the Bible. The history of the church (like Ecumenical Councils) combined with Scripture informs the stances the church takes.

My own opinion about the OP is that, as an Orthodox Christian, I am staunchly pro-life but I am politically aligned with libertarianism so I don’t think my personal beliefs must be law. If the will of the voters is that abortion should be legal, then I disagree with them but I’m OK with it being the law.

 
BladeRunner said:
Cool.  Then he already answered it: Thou shalt not kill.  :shrug:
Even the Pope has acknowledged exceptions, for example in the case of ectopic pregnancy, so we have to put an asterisk on God’s commandment here.  

 
timschochet said:
I was trying to differentiate between those who actually believe and those who go to church, celebrate the holidays, and don’t know what they believe. 
I got what you were trying to do.

If you are a believer, then humans are the capstone of creation, and every child is created in the image of God.  Children are a blessing, not a burden to overcome.  

Obviously, Christians believe that you should save sex for marriage, and that sex is for procreation.....the fact that it feels good is just part of the package...being irresponsible, and becoming pregnant out of wedlock, and then using abortion as a means of birth control, is seen as about as broken as you can be.

 
One of the interesting things about being pro-life and also atheist is having so many people on "your side" that you disagree with. Frustrating to see people make perfectly valid cases against abortion and then ruin it all by claiming to read God's mind or quoting ancient fiction. 

Personally I don't think we should legislate against any sins (of any religion) simply because they're sins (for that religion).

 
You made the thread about Christians because you know it doesnt work if you use Catholics.  
This is not correct. 
I found the discussion interesting and I thought I would widen it just as I wrote in the OP. There was no ulterior motive. I have no point to make here. 

 
Sure. Christians the world over believe many different things as dogma. Some believe their dogma defines the faith. You ran into one of those. I think that's pretty arrogant.

 
Lawful killings in 14th century BC?   You cant be serious. 
Serious? Yes, I guess so. I am not a student of scripture or 14th century BC history. But isn't there a reason why it is generally though to be Thou Shall Not Murder, or not Thou Shall Not Kill? Capital punishment was viewed as justified. I'm sure killings in wars was fine. Were there even abortions in that time period?

 
timschochet said:
Spin-off from another thread discussing Catholics- I was told that it’s not possible for someone to be pro-choice and true to the Catholic faith. I don’t believe that’s true of all religious Catholics or Christians, but I’m not either myself and so I’m widening the discussion: is there a moral contradiction between being pro-choice and being a religious Christian? 
edit. I remembered why I stopped coming in this forum so much. Arguing over stupid things is not productive. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure it does...because even Catholics can separate politics and government from their faith .
The Catholic Church is not very good at separating the two.  Sure individuals Catholics can separate the two, but they will not be following the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

 
no

I believe the Bible is clear on people murdering innocents - we should be 100% against it (as believers in Christianity) 

 
As a believer, I do not support abortion morally, however I believe there is an argument that could be made for it in the case of the mother’s or child’s life would be in serious danger if carried to term. I don’t like it, but if a life can be saved that way, I’ll at least hear the argument.

That said, it is not the government’s responsibility to legislate morality.

 
Biblically, there is a lot of translating/inferring to "prove" that God is against abortion, however, that doesn't mean it is wrong because we do that in a vast majority of situations.  The most common anti-abortion verse is in Jeremiah 1:5 where it says, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you."  Clearly God is against murder and the taking of an innocent life, especially by conscious decision or actions and then the logical progression is that if God calls us a person before we are even in the womb, than a fetus is a person and worthy of protection. 

God has also clearly allowed for exceptions to rules in many situations where things are less black and white.  The OT Jewish law attempted to prescribe a rule through rabbinical teaching to almost every situation.  Similar to our American rules based legal system, it gets bogged down in a lot of detail and becomes untenable at times.  In the NT, Jesus points out the impossibility of obtaining perfection (aka, righteousness) through adherence to the law and provides for grace to obtain righteousness.

In all of this, the rules are still the same, we just can relax about being perfect and be lead by love instead of black and white legalism.  But still morality is important to God and the protection of those who can't protect themselves is a part of that.  Abortion because you are just starting to get ahead in your career and don't want to disrupt that is clearly immoral Biblically.  Abortion because you are a 16 years old and don't want the disruption to your life, the stigma of being pregnant at school, the physical effects of pregnancy and the emotional struggle of giving the baby up for adoption are a little more understandable, but still Biblically immoral.  Abortion because your life is in danger during pregnancy or because it is the result of rape is where things change and I personally believe the only morally justifiable reason is due to health risk of the mother.  Even in rape I personally wouldn't do it, but I would never make a law or tell a woman she had to carry a baby that was the result of a rape.

So, in answer to the OP....it depends, but in the vast majority of situations, I'd say no.  While there isn't exactly a verse in the Bible that explicitly states a fetus has a soul and is a person, it seems to indicate that is the case.  They would therefore be subject to the same moral protection as a baby that was just born.

 
As a believer, I do not support abortion morally, however I believe there is an argument that could be made for it in the case of the mother’s or child’s life would be in serious danger if carried to term. I don’t like it, but if a life can be saved that way, I’ll at least hear the argument.

That said, it is not the government’s responsibility to legislate morality.
Aren't most, if not all of our laws based on government's interpretation of our collective morality?

 
Aren't most, if not all of our laws based on government's interpretation of our collective morality?
Yeah, I've never been fully comfortable with that statement.  All laws are based on some sort of morality.

Now to say that we can't legislate Christianity, that I can get behind.

 
Aren't most, if not all of our laws based on government's interpretation of our collective morality?
Maybe, but not all immoral things are legislated. Especially not all things immoral according to God. And Christians accept that fact. No Christian wants every lie to be illegal. Christians don't think it should be illegal to worship idols. And we certainly don't want our feelings towards others legislated.

 
A Christian obtains salvation by belief in Christ as their Savior.  Belief in a political issue has nothing to do with it.  
That dogma is not the same for catholics. In Catholic dogma a person's "works" are judged and, frankly, the ultimate barometer for salvation is whether the person dies with a mortal sin on his soul. 

 
Maybe, but not all immoral things are legislated. Especially not all things immoral according to God. And Christians accept that fact. No Christian wants every lie to be illegal. Christians don't think it should be illegal to worship idols. And we certainly don't want our feelings towards others legislated.
Or say...adultery.  

My issue has been that consistency when it comes to Christians pushing for government involvement.  Why limit to abortion and/or gay rights.  (In the case of gay marriage...the example being the clerk in Kentucky a few years ago (Kim Davis I believe).

 
Aren't most, if not all of our laws based on government's interpretation of our collective morality?
no

laws and rules and restrictions are a reflection of the elected people who pass them at the times they pass them as well as a reflection of our Constitution that guarantees certain freedoms that eclipses morals/ethics

 
I'd guess almost every person regardless of religious beliefs sees a newborn baby as deserving of protection of life

5 minutes before that birth  - why is that same person so worthless and undeserving of the right to live ?

I'll wait for a logical/reasonable answer - if anyone can submit one

 
Or say...adultery.  

My issue has been that consistency when it comes to Christians pushing for government involvement.  Why limit to abortion and/or gay rights.  (In the case of gay marriage...the example being the clerk in Kentucky a few years ago (Kim Davis I believe).
What differentiates abortion here is that pro-lifers like me don't agree that it's a victimless choice.  If somebody marries someone of the same sex, it has no effect on anyone else whatsoever.  Adultery is an issue between spouses, but doesn't directly harm anyone else.  With abortion, that's exactly the issue that the two sides (mostly) disagree on.

In other words, framing it this way is question-begging.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top