...
Christian Anti-Abortion Claims

“No woman wants an abortion as she wants an ice cream cone or a Porsche. She wants an abortion as an animal caught in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg.”

Frederica Mathewes-Green, an American author and speaker

“I do not believe that just because you’re opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.”

Joan D. Chittister, an American Benedictine nun, theologian, author, and speaker

“What about the rest of life? Respect for the sanctity of life, if you believe that it begins at conception, cannot end at birth.”

Thomas Friedman, an American political commentator, and author

“I cannot understand antiabortion arguments that center on the sanctity of life. As a species, we’ve fairly comprehensively demonstrated that we don’t believe in the sanctity of life. The shrugging acceptance of war, famine, epidemic, pain, and lifelong, grinding poverty show us that, whatever we tell ourselves, we’ve made only the most feeble of efforts to really treat human life as sacred.”

Caitlin Moran, an English journalist, broadcaster, and author

“Abolition of a woman’s right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State.”

Edward Abbey, an American author and essayist noted for his advocacy of environmental issues, criticism of public land policies, and anarchist political views


Introduction

Christian Anti-Abortion Claims

Christian Anti-Abortion Claims that are said to be biblical are, sadly, nothing more than lies and misinformation. If the bible says anything specific about abortion it is that in the case of a mother’s risk of death, the fetus must be sacrificed. This being the case, and like in most things, Severely uninformed Americans, must make sense of the religious gobbledygook that is offered as proof of God’s wishes.

Of course, thinking that human beings could know what God wants is a singular foundation for triumphalist narcissism. If one believes that only certain voices speak for God, it follows that human beings are subject to the whims of so-called prophets. Are we expected to surrender intellect to the machinations of modern interpretations of bronze age mythology? Especially those written on a scroll or in a book from ancient times.

The Christian anti-abortion claims are somehow transferable to non-believers is a source of power and control over the other through Christian bigotry. To argue otherwise is to force non-believers into a black hole of religious dogmatism that is not their own.

Christian Anti-Abortion Claims: Manufactured Discourse

In delving deeper into the intricate fabric of abortion discourse, the stark disparity between certain anti-abortion claims and the content of the Bible becomes increasingly apparent. Despite the Bible’s roots in an ancient world familiar with the nuances of abortion, it refrains from providing explicit guidance on the matter. This void has led some anti-abortion Christians to construct arguments grounded in selective interpretations of specific passages.

Their assertions predominantly rest on the notion that the Bible emphasizes the sanctity of life before birth. They frequently cite verses describing humans as created “in the image of God.” Additionally, they point to sacred prophets like Jeremiah and Isaiah, who were summoned from the womb, a rather childish encumbrance. Psalm 139, with its poignant portrayal of God’s intimate involvement in the womb, serves as a cornerstone of their argument. Neither presents a pro-life stance that would prevent abortion as healthcare.

A Quickening Objection to Christian Anti-Abortion Claims

On the opposing side, advocates for abortion rights find support within the pages of the Bible itself. Exodus 21 unfolds a scenario where a pregnant woman’s life is deemed more valuable than the fetus’s. Yet, attaching a fine for a miscarriage. Other biblical texts celebrate women’s autonomy over their bodies, challenging societal norms. Notable instances include the Gospel of Mark and John. In these texts, women make choices that defy conventions. The next step focuses on their actions met with commendation.

Christian Anti-Abortion Claims and SCOTUS

Following the Supreme Court’s decision on abortion, Christians from various political standpoints stand empowered to wield biblical texts asserting their politics alone align with divine will. However, the peril lies in cherry-picking evidence to fit predetermined beliefs. Claiming that the Bible explicitly condemns or approves of abortion oversimplifies the nuanced reality presented in the biblical text.

Recent news events vividly underscore the tangible repercussions of these distorted claims. Politicians, in their fervor for anti-abortion policies, tend to misrepresent biblical text. They have been known to leverage misrepresented biblical references to sway public opinion. This not only highlights the broader issue of conflating religious beliefs with public policy but also raises ethical questions about imposing such idiosyncratic views on a diverse population.

In Conclusion

The Bible’s silence on abortion calls for a more nuanced and honest approach from Christians. Crafting arguments should not involve selectively molding biblical references to fit preconceived notions. Embracing evidence-based discussions ensures a more inclusive and respectful dialogue. This stance avoids the imposition of idiosyncratic religious beliefs on a society with diverse perspectives and values.

As we navigate the complexities of modern issues, fostering an environment where differing beliefs exist. Acknowledgment of this basic fact is essential. Grounding discussions in evidence rather than distorted interpretations of ancient texts is crucial. Only through such a balanced approach can we navigate the intersection of religion and public discourse with integrity. Moreover, this will demonstrate respect for the diverse tapestry of perspectives that shape our society.

By Politics-as-Usual

Roger is a retired Professor of language and literacy. Over the past 15 years since his retirement, Roger has kept busy with reading, writing, and creating landscape photographs. In this time of National crisis, as Fascist ideas and policies are being introduced to the American people and ignored by the Mainstream Press, he decided to stand up and be counted as a Progressive American with some ideas that should be shared with as many people who care to read and/or participate in discusssions of these issues. He doesn't ask anyone to agree with his point of view, but if entering the conversation he demands civility. No conspiracy theories, no wild accusations, no threats, no disrespect will be tolerated. Roger monitors all comments and email communication. That is the only rule for entering the conversation. One may persuade, argue for a different point of view, or toss out something that has not been discussed so long as the tone remains part of a civil discussion. Only then can we find common ground and meaningful democratic change.

Leave a Reply