Welcome to Gaia! ::

Hmm..

You know how some Pro-Life people tend to hinge their beliefs about abortion on their religion? (Usually christian-ish in nature.) When they bring it up in the various debates and all that, usually we push it aside and say that religion bears no weight on law and etc, but what if we humored them and had a discussion about how the Bible can be interpreted based on what it says about pregnancy/souls/and whatnot? I doubt Christian Pro-lifers would be pleased to have their whole belief system to be swept aside as irrelevant, when indeed religion does influence a LOT of people's moral codes, ethics, what-have-you.

In theory, if the Bible doesn't demonize or advocate abortion either way, and this can be pointed out, perhaps it would show those people that no, their God doesn't frown upon it and they can relax a little and be a little more open minded. If you ask me, God could have possibly even given natural lee-way to acknowledge the need for termination at times in the way that the whole process works.

I've heard at one point or another of watching the abortion debate threads that the Bible doesn't acknowledge the fetus having a soul until the "quickening", or late in the pregnancy when the fetus starts to unconsciously kick. Deep down, that makes sense to me, and I want to see the part of the Bible that spells this out, too, if anyone can find it.

Based on that, here's my theory:
-Pregnancy= the body creating a bodily "shell" for God to later fill with a soul, when it's been around long enough to be considered stable (i.e. the 'quickening')
-Prior to the quickening, the fetus is only a beginning framework, living tissues growing to form the physical appearance the parents' DNA dictates.
-Terminations at this point have no bearing on the universe, either accidental or voluntary. Souls will find other bodies to fill, or God will not have created a new one yet anyway.
-So many accidental terminations or failures for the embryo to embed itself into the lining of the uterus happen at this point that it would be highly inefficient and wasteful to give embryos souls at this point.
-What all-knowing and loving God would design his universe to waste souls like that?
-Nature seems to work towards the side of efficiency for the most part, doesn't it?

So..Comments, thoughts? I'm trying to hunt through the bible for references and all that, so any help with that would be great. I've got my little kiddy version of the Bible..never bothered to get another one so..yeah.

Oh..and there's no index! xd I have my work cut out for me.

For the Christian Pro-Choicers here..does this make any sense at all? Is it realistic enough? Critique!

Not only is abortion not entirely mentioned in the bible, that is directly, neither is homosexuality.

You just have to realize, that they are not actually following the bible to it's p's & q's, they just pick out what they want and twist it so that it fits their ideology.
Same thing with FLDS'S and extremist Muslims.
Just different books.

Trite, actually MALE homosexuality is mentioned in Leviticus. "Thou shall not lie with a man as you lie with a woman". Of course, they DO pick and choose. How many of them eat shellfish or pork? Both also banned by Leviticus.


Oh, try a JPS Bible for the Old Testament. They at least TELL you when they're partially guessing at meaning.

Hmm... I agree with Oni. Religion is irrelevant to this discussion, anyway. But if you wanted to bring it up, anyway:

Why Abortion Is Biblical by pro-choice born-again Christian (I know...) Brian Elroy McKinley.

Also... let's see if I can find it... http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/abortion.html

Yeah! I knew I'd find it eventually!

See also: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/birth_control.html
Birth control is kinda frowned upon, but not abortion? Odd.



And isn't that technically bisexuality, anyway? Gay men don't (typically) lie with women at all!

Heh, perhaps so.

I never use the Bible except in debates solely about religion or to counter the religious arguments of others

Thanks for the links guys! This is more for like..one-on-one discussions than for debating though(even though one-on-one discussions with anyone pro-life tend to turn out debate-ey). I gave up on debating a loooong time ago..especially here on gaia. xp

Hon, that part's in Hebrew. There's not the same homonyms in Hebrew as in English.

Of course, there's also speculation that this is just banning homosexual intercourse, in the sense of a**l sex, but not other homosexual activities. I found a site once, dunno what it is anymore, that listed a bunch of different interpretations for the verse.

When talking about what actually is in the bible, it is important to actually have read the entire "book". I don't think a lot of people have actually read the (protestant) Bible cover to cover. And, there's a lot of people who are fooled that "the bible doesn't even mention homosexuality", and other things. (by the way, it not only speaks out against homosexuality, but it speaks out a little against lesbianism in the book of Revelation).

On top of people's typical confusion is that the same Bible will contradict itself, or say one thing and say another in the same Book. But Christians and non-christians alike will pick and choose a verse to suit their interpretation of the moment.. the religious tolerance website is a good place to read up on this fact.

Another thing to consider is the context of the information- like Rose Rose pointed out. That would mean having to delve in the historical context for what the information really meant at that time. It doesn't have much to do with the modern christian culture now, but it carries academic weight.

There's a difference between the popular christian culture and what the bible is talking about..

Anyway, when we can accurately pinpoint bible verses and differentiate between the christian culture, then we can allow the other side a generous assumption and then break *that* down fairly.

(For me personally, since I was previously involved with Christianity the "job" was easy for me to do, but it was rife with anger/frustration due to feeling totally duped in this system. Anyway~ my personal opinion on the poll question is that while you *could* technically use the bible to support the pro-choice side.. I have overwhelmingly seen a sexist point of view in the Bible as a whole. I see that a literal interpretation of this Bible has led many christians to believe that pro-life is the "godly" viewpoint in the first place, whether or not their argument is valid or not. So I voted "no".)