Not sure what you mean by retconned. The Babylonian Talmud is from 500 (I think), the reform movement occurred in the 19th century, and the conservative movement in the 1950s…
Probably a better discussion to happen offline. I am curious as to what you think. Feel free to PM me if you want to continue this conversation.
I think “no justification” might be a bit strong.
“Abortion = murder” is an understandable stance if one believes that “humanness” begins at conception. Exactly how one arrives at that belief, and how that interacts with the rights/wellbeing of the mother is where the theology becomes debatable.
Of course then you have to handwave why all the other murder you support is actually fine…
I have not seen any funerals for pregnancy tests that were positive, and the being was subsequently lost. Life does not begin at conception. If it did, we would track every woman in real time to check if they are pregnant, and do whatever we could to ensure a birth. Though I do know some people who believe that miscarriages wind up in heaven. Pretty darn crowded up there. I am not minimizing miscarriages–they are amongst the toughest life occurrences to deal with.
I do consider abortion = murder at some point on the time continuum. Certainly at 35 weeks (which is an inexact number). Should the life of the mother take precedence at all costs? I don’t know.
I do not like abortion threads.
Pretty sure the Duggars held a funeral for a miscarriage. They’re the ones who have 19 kids though, so a fetus funeral likely isn’t even the strangest thing about them.
Exception noted. Perhaps they would not have if they were not on TV. But thanks for the correction.
True. I get a headache from the cognitive dissonance of so many “pro-life”/anti-choice folks in the US being pro-death-penalty.
and the ones that advocate no sort of financial assistance to families with small children living in poverty. The church will help them instead when the pastor gives a prayer from his corporate jet for their wellbeing.
I think many Protestants consider it murder, and murder is certainly a sin.
And accidentally killing a woman’s unborn baby is a crime, though a less serious one than murder.
But yeah nothing as black and white as “abortion is the same thing as murder and should be treated as such”.
IFYP
My own philosophy is: an abortion of convenience is “murder” while an abortion to protect the health/well-being of the mother is merely a tragedy…and neither I, nor most legislators, nor the courts are qualified to draw a line between the two.
However, this turn of the discussion has me thinking I might want to find a word other than “murder” to describe that.
Really? I have. Have attended two such funerals, actually.
Granted, both cases were well past quickening.
I just read the verses in Hebrew and disagree with your interpretation. Best to talk about this offline if you don’t mind.
From his taxpayer subsidized private jet.
And people wonder why there is so much disdain for the current abuse of America by “Christian” frauds.
Okay that’s one’s too far over the top. I’m not a particularly religious person, but I have known a number of pastors whose personal faith cannot be doubted and who walk the talk. Yes, there are mega-church pastors who are in it strictly for personal gain. Just as there are others that are in it for political power. But the majority are pastors because they truly do believe and those are good people in my experience.
I understand that’s how you feel, but churches that spend more than a pittance on the poor/needy are pretty rare. Funds generally go to buildings, to enrich the clergy, for church programs like music/youth activities, and for evangelism to bring more into the fold. If you attend church, you should ask them how much of their budget goes to the needy. I’d be surprised if it was more than a percent or 2. The “let the charities take care of the poor” crowd generally thinks their church is doing a lot more than it is.
I know you won’t believe me, so here’s a religious source:
The function of churches isn’t to funnel charity to the poor. It doesn’t bother me if they spend their funds on buildings and youth programs and clergy, so long as all those expenses seem reasonable in light of the size of the congregation.
Churches that try to restrict abortions ought to ALSO try to find funds for children of women who can’t afford a child. But I think valid ways for them to do that include their own direct charity, their also lobbying for increased government welfare payments, or by pushing their members to donate to suitable private charities.
This was (in some place, still is) St. Louis. Depending on where you went to high school, it could make or break your chances of getting hired somewhere.
This is overlaps with the point I was making. The majority of churches and their members that are vehemently anti abortion are not doing these things in any meaningful way wrt to impoverished children. I’d say there are more that would like to couple complete abortion bans with cuts to government assistance programs, and most aren’t stepping into the gap with suggestions like yours.
But … they send the youth off to some forlorn place every summer to volunteer and minster to the masses of poor people and try to convert some of them to Christianity. Why can’t that be enough?